WORKSHOP AGENDA - Hampton Roads Agenda.pdf · C. FY 2016 Budget Amendments D. FY 2015-2018 TIP Revision – RSTP and CMAQ Transfer Request: Suffolk E. HRTPO 2016 Legislative Agenda

HRTPO Board Meeting │ November 19, 2015 │ Agenda

Hampton Roads Transportation Planning Organization

Board Meeting – November 19, 2015 The Regional Board Room, 723 Woodlake Drive, Chesapeake, Virginia

10:30 am 1. Call to Order

2. Resolution of Appreciation 3. Approval of Agenda 4. Executive Director Report

WORKSHOP AGENDA

10:35 am 5. Commonwealth Transportation Board Member Update: John Malbon, CTB 6. Virginia Department of Transportation Update 7. Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation Update 8. Military Liaisons Updates 9. Hampton Roads Transportation Accountability Commission Update: Kevin Page, HRTAC 10. HRTPO Legislative Ad-hoc Committee Report: Robert Crum, HRTPO 11. Passenger Rail and Public Transportation Updates: Jennifer Mitchell, DRPT 12. Hampton Roads Crossing Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) Update: Scott

Smizik, VDOT 13. Hampton Roads Bridge Tunnel (HRBT) Concept Scenarios: Robert Case, HRTPO

MEETING AGENDA

11:45 am 14. Public Comment Period (limit 3 minutes per individual) 15. Submitted Public Comments 16. Transcribed Public Comments from Previous HRTPO Meeting 17. Approval of Consent Items

A. Minutes B. HRTPO Financial Statement C. FY 2016 Budget Amendments D. FY 2015-2018 TIP Revision – RSTP and CMAQ Transfer Request: Suffolk E. HRTPO 2016 Legislative Agenda – HRTPO Board Resolution 2015-11 F. HRTPO Public Participation Plan and HRTPO Title VI/LEP Plan G. Hampton Roads 2040 LRTP: Candidate Project Evaluation Title VI/EJ Methodology H. Economic Assessment of Tolls on Freight Transportation in the Hampton Roads Region I. FTAC Resolution: Equitable Toll Assessments on the Regional Freight Industry J. 2015 CMAQ/RSTP Project Selection Process – Recommended Projects and Allocations

18. HRTPO Board Three-Month Tentative Schedule 19. Correspondence of Interest 20. Minutes of HRTPO Committee Meetings 21. For Your Information

A. Hampton Roads Transportation Fund: Monthly Financial Report B. National Highway System Modifications – Virginia C. U.S. DOT TIGER Grant Awards D. 2040 LRTP Revised Forecasted Revenues and Schedule

22. Old/New Business 12:00 pm Adjournment


ITEM #1: CALL TO ORDER The meeting is scheduled to be called to order by the chair at 10:30 a.m. ITEM #2: RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION A Resolution of Appreciation will be presented to Mr. James Spore, Virginia Beach City Manager and HRTPO Non-Voting Member, for his years of service to the Hampton Roads Transportation Planning Organization. ITEM #3: APPROVAL OF AGENDA Members are provided an opportunity to add or delete items from the agenda. Any item for which a member desires consideration by the HRTPO Board should be submitted at this time for consideration under “Old/New Business”. ITEM #4: EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR REPORT The Hampton Roads Transportation Planning Organization Executive Director will provide a report to the HRTPO Board. Attachment 4

The Regional Building 723 Woodlake Drive Chesapeake, Virginia 23320 757.420.8300 Fax 757.523.4881

November 10, 2015 MEMORANDUM #2015-146 TO: HRPDC/HRTPO Board Members FROM: Robert Crum, Executive Director RE: Executive Director’s Report A brief summary of ongoing work activities is presented below for review by the HRPDC/HRTPO Board members. A working 2040 LRTP Draft Fiscally-Constrained List of Projects was developed and presented to the HRTPO Board at its May 2015 Annual Retreat Meeting. In July 2015, HRTPO staff was informed by VDOT, the original revenue forecast from December 2013 was being revised to reflect the funding mechanisms described in House Bill 1887 including: State of Good Repair, High-Priority Projects Program, and the District Grants Program. The HRTPO staff received the revised revenue forecast from VDOT on October 30, 2015. Using the revised revenue forecast, HRTPO staff plans to work with the TTAC to develop a new draft 2040 fiscally-constrained list of projects. The revised forecasted revenues and schedule for the 2040 LRTP are provided below:

Clyde A. Haulman, Chair Ella P. Ward, Vice-Chair

Linda T. Johnson, Chair George Wallace, Vice-Chair

Attachment 4

The HRPDC Executive Director is coordinating a meeting of local governments and school districts within Virginia’s Urban Crescent to discuss the need for increased state support for public education (K-12) funding. Reductions in state funding for public education have caused challenges for local governments who are significantly limited in their ability to raise revenue as they struggle with reductions in local revenues in a challenging economic climate. The urban crescent meeting will occur on December 11, 2015 from 10:00 a.m. to 11:45 a.m. at University of Mary Washington, Stafford County located at 121 University Boulevard in Fredericksburg. The first HRPDC/HRTPO Legislative Forum will be held on December 16 at 10:00 a.m. at the Chesapeake Conference Center. At this meeting, members of the HRPDC and HRTPO Boards will present their regional legislative priorities to the Hampton Roads General Assembly members and the Region’s federal delegation. All HRPDC and HRTPO Board members are asked to attend this legislative forum. The Regional Chief Administrative Officers (CAO) Committee held its monthly meeting on November 4, 2015. Agenda items included review of a proposed Groundwater Withdrawal Conservation Incentive Program, discussion of challenges experienced by rural jurisdictions in their efforts to secure transportation funding, and a review of regional interest items. The Executive Director continues to work with the Region’s CAOs and community partners on the future direction of the HRPDC coastal resiliency planning program. As part of this effort, each jurisdiction has been asked to appoint a Deputy CAO to serve on the HRPDC’s Coastal Resiliency Committee. In jurisdictions where a Deputy CAO is not available to serve this role, jurisdictions are asked to appoint the highest available staff person to serve on Attachment 4

this Committee. To ensure coordination in this effort, the Executive Director recently provided correspondence to Old Dominion University (ODU) providing information on the future direction of the HRPDC coastal resiliency effort. The Executive Director and HRTPO staff continue to coordinate efforts on a daily basis with the HRTAC Executive Director regarding the HRTPO Long Range Transportation Plan process and the plan of finance for the Region’s priority transportation projects. HRTPO/HRPDC staff continue to provide support to the HRTAC in the areas of financial management, human resources, web site management and general administrative support. The HRPDC Executive Director continues to chair a committee consisting of VAPDC Executive Directors to provide input on proposals for the GO Virginia program. The Executive Director attended meetings of the following jurisdictions and community groups to provide presentations on the work of the HRPDC and HRTPO.

• Isle of Wight County Board of Supervisors – October 15 • Hampton Roads Public Transportation Alliance – October 27 • Williamsburg City Council – November 9, 2015

The HRTPO staff attended and participated in the 2015 Governor’s Transportation Conference held in Virginia Beach. The HRTPO staff provided presentations for two sessions. HRTPO Deputy Executive Director Dr. Camelia Ravanbakht participated in a panel entitled HRTAC Now, and discussed the HRTPO’s prioritization process for regional transportation projects. HRTPO Principal Planner Dale Stith participated in a breakout session entitled Connect Hampton Roads – Evolution of Mobility in Hampton Roads. Ms. Stith presented information on the Hampton Roads LRTP planning process and the HRTPO’s public transportation planning efforts. The HRPDC staff participated in a Core Data Work Group Kick Off meeting on October 22, 2015 to discuss opportunities to develop a regionally coordinated data base for the Region’s homeless populations. The HRPDC staff coordinated with Opportunity, Inc. to host a meeting of the Organization’s Chief Local Elected Officials on October 21, 2015. The HRPDC staff continues to summarize the public input received through the Envision Hampton Roads process. Staff is in the process of developing a draft description of regional priorities based on the input received through this process. The HRPDC staff is working to provide assistance to the Town of Windsor for a possible community survey. The Executive Director has participated in initial meetings with various community partners to discuss the potential for a regional broadband initiative.

Attachment 4

The Executive Director will participate in the second monthly regional roundtable on November 13, 2015. This effort was initiated by the Executive Director and other regional partners to promote the exchange of information among regional agencies in the community. The HRPDC staff is working in collaboration with ODU and the Region’s Geographic Information System (GIS) managers to develop a regional GIS program that will facilitate information sharing among the Region’s jurisdictions. HRTPO/HRPDC staffs have developed maps which graphically illustrate journey to work data for the Region’s jurisdictions. This information will be distributed to HRPDC/HRTPO Board members. The HRPDC staff attended and participated in the Rising Seas Summit in Boston during the first week of November. HRPDC Senior Regional Planner, Mr. Ben McFarlane, participated in three panel discussions. The first panel was a workshop for journalists writing about climate change. The second was a plenary session focused on how different regions have engaged stakeholders, and the final was focused on vulnerability analyses. Mr. McFarlane’s presentations focused on the role the HRPDC plays in providing technical assistance to localities and how we coordinate with various organizations and levels of government on planning for sea level rise.

Attachment 4


ITEM #5: COMMONWEALTH TRANSPORTATION BOARD MEMBER UPDATE: John Malbon, CTB

The Commonwealth Transportation Board member is invited to address the HRTPO Board. ITEM #6: VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION UPDATE The Virginia Department of Transportation representative is invited to address the HRTPO Board. ITEM #7: VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF RAIL AND PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION UPDATE The Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation representative is invited to address the HRTPO Board. ITEM #8: MILITARY LIAISONS UPDATES Military liaisons are invited to address the HRTPO Board. ITEM #9: HAMPTON ROADS TRANSPORTATION ACCOUNTABILITY COMMISSION UPDATE:

Kevin Page, HRTAC The Hampton Roads Transportation Accountability Commission Executive Director is invited to address the HRTPO Board.


ITEM #10: HRTPO LEGISLATIVE AD-HOC COMMITTEE REPORT: Robert Crum, HRTPO SUMMARY:

The HRTPO Legislative Ad-hoc Committee met on September 25, 2015 and reconvened on October 27, 2015 to discuss legislative priorities of the HRTPO and to develop a draft 2016 Legislative Agenda (Attachment 10-A) for HRTPO Board consideration and submission to the Hampton Roads Caucus of the General Assembly and the Hampton Roads Congressional Delegation. HRTPO Board comments and suggestions from the October 2015 meeting were considered during the October Legislative Ad-Hoc Committee meeting. Mr. Robert Crum, Executive Director, will brief the HRTPO Board on this item. BACKGROUND:

After considerable discussion, the members of the HRTPO Legislative Ad-Hoc Committee suggested that the previously included item on the Draft 2016 Legislative Agenda concerning transit funding be removed in lieu of discussing the topic at the upcoming Rail and Public Transportation Task Force (R&PTTF) meeting. It was deemed that the issue of transit funding was worthy of additional research and study to best determine an actionable item for the 2017 General Assembly session. The HRTPO Legislative Ad-Hoc Committee recommendations (background information is attached) are as follows:

State: • Pursuit of federal/state funding for Tier II EIS for higher–speed passenger rail between

Hampton Roads and Richmond. • Pursuit of federal/state funding for the widening of I-64 between Hampton Roads and

Richmond. • Pursuit of funding for Trains 2 and 3 to Norfolk. • Support HRTAC efforts to revise its enabling legislation to improve both operational and

governance efficiencies (Attachment 10-C). • Amendment of HB1402 (Highway maintenance: payments to City of Richmond for

moving-lanes converted to bicycle lanes) to include any local government.

Federal: • Support Congressional approval for a long-term surface transportation funding

authorization act. • Support Congressional approval for the Marketplace Fairness Act (MFA). • Support Congressional recognition of regions that increase local taxes to bridge the gap

between federal transportation funding and regional transportation infrastructure needs by providing bonus funding to these metropolitan regions.

Attachment 10-A: 2016 HRTPO Legislative Agenda Resolution 2015-11 Attachment 10-B: 2016 HRTPO Legislative Agenda – Background Information Attachment 10-C: HRTAC 2015-2016 Draft Legislative Agenda RECOMMENDED ACTION (Action to be taken under Meeting Agenda Item 17-E):

Approve the resolution.

HAMPTON ROADS TRANSPORTATION PLANNING ORGANIZATION BOARD RESOLUTION 2015-11

A RESOLUTION OF THE HAMPTON ROADS TRANSPORTATION PLANNING ORGANIZATION ENDORSING THE HRTPO 2016 LEGISLATIVE AGENDA.

WHEREAS, the Hampton Roads Transportation Planning Organization (HRTPO), designated by the Governor of the Commonwealth of Virginia in accordance with Section 134, Title 23, United States Code (23 USC 134) and applicable federal and state regulations, is the policy body responsible for the urban transportation planning and programming process of the Hampton Roads metropolitan planning area;

WHEREAS, the Hampton Roads metropolitan planning area includes the cities of Chesapeake, Hampton, Newport News, Norfolk, Poquoson, Portsmouth, Suffolk, Virginia Beach, and Williamsburg; the counties of Isle of Wight, James City, and York; and a portion of Gloucester County;

WHEREAS, the HRTPO Board is comprised primarily of local elected officials and General Assembly members, representatives from the regional transit authorities as well as from state agencies such as the Virginia Department of Transportation, Department of Rail and Public Transportation, Virginia Port Authority, and Virginia Department of Aviation, and federal agencies such as the Federal Highway Administration, Federal Transit Administration, and Federal Aviation Administration;

WHEREAS, upon approval, this resolution will be transmitted to local governments, the Hampton Roads Caucus of the General Assembly, and the Hampton Roads Congressional Delegation.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Hampton Roads Transportation Planning Organization hereby endorses the following HRTPO 2016 Legislative Agenda: State:

• Pursuit of federal/state funding for Tier II EIS for higher–speed passenger rail between Hampton Roads and Richmond.

• Pursuit of federal/state funding for the widening of I-64 between Hampton Roads and Richmond.

• Supports HRTAC efforts to revise its enabling legislation to improve both operational and governance efficiencies.

• Pursuit of funding for Trains 2 & 3 to Norfolk. • Amendment of HB 1402 (Highway maintenance: payments to City of Richmond for moving-

lanes converted to bicycle lanes) to include any local government.

Attachment 10-A

Federal:

• Support Congressional approval for a long-term surface transportation funding authorization act.

• Support Congressional approval for the Marketplace Fairness Act (MFA). • Support Congressional recognition of regions that increase local taxes to bridge the gap

between federal transportation funding and regional transportation infrastructure needs by providing bonus funding to these metropolitan regions.

APPROVED and ADOPTED by the Hampton Roads Transportation Planning Organization Board at its meeting on the 19th day of November, 2015.

Linda T. Johnson

Chair Hampton Roads Transportation

Planning Organization

Robert A. Crum Jr. Executive Director/Secretary

Hampton Roads Transportation

Planning Organization

Attachment 10-A

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

Below is background information on the legislative priorities of the HRTPO 2016 Legislative Agenda:

• The HRTPO supports pursuit of federal/state funding by the Commonwealth of Virginia for preparation of a Tier II Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the continuation and expansion of intercity and higher-speed passenger rail service from Richmond to Hampton Roads. The estimated cost for the Tier II EIS is $25 million.

o Background: This project provides a higher-speed passenger rail link from Hampton Roads to the proposed Southeast High-speed Rail Corridor and existing Amtrak Northeast Corridor via Richmond Main Street Station. A TIER I EIS Record of Decision (ROD) was issued and became effective on December 7, 2012. A TIER II analysis would include site specific planning and detailed evaluations of the selected alternative; determine capital improvements for tracks, structures, station locations, routing within existing right-of-way, and bypasses. Upon completion of the study and permitting process, construction could proceed. The TIER II EIS for the Richmond to D.C. project is funded through a $55 million cooperative agreement between the Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation (DRPT) and the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA). The Raleigh to Richmond Southeast High Speed Rail Corridor project TIER II EIS is funded with $3,845,250 DRPT, $3,129,750 NCDOT, and $4,000,000 FRA monies for a total of $10,975,000.

• The HRTPO supports pursuit of federal/state funding for the widening of I-64 between the Hampton Roads Region and the Richmond Region.

o According to the Governor, the I-64 Corridor between the Peninsula and Richmond is one of the two high priority corridors in the State. This is a critical transportation corridor between Hampton Roads and Richmond for the movement of people and goods. Segment I of this corridor from Jefferson to Lee Hall/Yorktown is currently under construction. The I-64 Peninsula Segments 1-3 from Jefferson to Route 199 West of Williamsburg (21 miles) is one of the three HB2 applications (#1 ranking) submitted by HRTPO. The Richmond Regional TPO has submitted, as an HB2 project, the segment between I-295 and Bottoms Bridge, about 5 miles (#6 ranking). The middle section from Bottoms Bridge to Route 199 West in Williamsburg (more than 30 miles) is not funded and no HB2 application has been submitted thus far. The Richmond Regional Transportation Planning Organization (RRTPO) and the Hampton Roads Transportation Planning Organization are collaborating to address the gap in the I-64 corridor.

Attachment 10-B

• The HRTPO supports the pursuit of funding for trains 2 and 3 from Norfolk to

Washington D.C.

o Background: DRPT's Rail Division supports both freight and passenger rail initiatives in Virginia through funding and advocacy for railroad network improvements. Improvements are implemented through four grant programs, with funds from other sources, such as the federal government, leveraged when possible. Passenger Rail funding includes operation of intercity passenger rail services. Currently, there is one daily round trip from Norfolk to Washington D.C. and the Northeast Corridor (Route 50). The addition of Train 2 from Norfolk to Washington D.C. is in the DRPT’s FY 2016-2021 Six-Year Improvement Program (SYIP). State funding has been allocated for operating costs ($2 million FY-20, $2.06 million FY-21) for train two; capital equipment contribution for the second train of ($4 million FY-16, $8 million FY-17, and $7 million FY-18); and capacity and speed improvement for a two train extension to Norfolk of ($12 million FY-16, $32.8 million FY-17, $42.1 million FY-18, and $20.1 million FY-19).

• The HRTPO supports amending the enabling legislation for HB 1402 (Highway maintenance: payments to City of Richmond for moving-lanes converted to bicycle lanes) to include any local government.

o Background: The current enabling legislation for HB 1402 provides that cities and towns that receive highway maintenance payments from the Commonwealth based on moving-lane-miles of highway will not have such payments reduced if moving-lane-miles of highway are converted to transit-only lanes and allows the City of Richmond to convert 20 moving-lanes to bicycle lanes and not lose its maintenance payment. The bill also directed the Secretary of Transportation to report by December 1, 2015, on an appropriate maintenance formula for bicycle lanes. The appropriate formula recommendations or allocation for the maintenance of bicycle-only lanes has not been released.

• Supports HRTAC efforts to revise its enabling legislation to improve both operational

and governance efficiencies.

o Background: The HRTPO supports the Hampton Roads Transportation Accountability Commission (HRTAC) 2016 Legislative Agenda. The items in the HRTAC 2016 Legislative Agenda include revisions to the current enabling legislation. The items listed in the draft agenda (attached) are as follows:

Transfer of HRTF Monies to HRTAC - Expanded Use of HRTF Monies for Administrative Expenses Commission Member “Designees” Continuity in Representation of Counties System-Wide Financing Approach

Attachment 10-B

• The HRTPO supports Congressional approval for a long-term surface

transportation funding authorization act.

o Background: Federal transportation funding is being maintained through the use of short term extensions to the Moving ahead for progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP 21). The Highway Trust Fund is becoming insolvent and is no longer a viable option as the major source of funding for maintaining and building our national transportation infrastructure. Short-term authorization extensions do not provide the dependable funding stream necessary for making significant improvements to a regional transportation system. Hampton Roads is a region of national importance and a significant economic engine for Virginia that relies on a robust and reliable transportation system. Building and operating an intermodal transportation system that provides reliable and safe mobility for individuals, as well as the efficient movement of goods and delivery of services, requires a dependable, stable, and long-term source of funding.

• The HRTPO supports Congressional approval of the Marketplace Fairness Act (MFA)

and that the revenues from the passage of the act are allocated in accordance with HB 2313.

o Background: To date, Congress has not passed the Marketplace Fairness Act which triggered an increase from 3.5 percent to 5.1 percent in Virginia’s wholesale gas tax on January 1, 2015. Revenues from the passage of the MFA would accrue to the Transportation Trust Fund and be allocated by existing formula, in addition to providing funding to support local transportation. This is not a new tax since consumers are required under existing state law to pay sales and use taxes on the goods they purchase. Online sellers are not required to collect taxes the same as local businesses which puts the local businesses at a disadvantage. Consumers can be audited and penalized for failing to pay sales and use tax, but states are often not able to enforce the requirement. The MFA allows states to collect sales and use taxes through the Streamlined Sales and Use Tax Agreement (SSUTA) or with the adoption of minimum simplification requirements.

• The HRTPO requests that the U.S. Congress reward regions that increase local taxes to begin bridging the gap between federal transportation funding and transportation infrastructure needs by providing bonus funding to these metropolitan regions.

o Background: The Hampton Roads Planning District (PD23) has generated additional revenues, primarily through HB 2313 legislation (HRTF), which were approved by the General Assembly in 2013. The revenues raised are solely for new construction projects on new or existing highways, bridges, and tunnels in the localities comprising Planning District 23. Priority is given to projects that provide the greatest reduction in congestion for the greatest number of citizens. The additional revenues raised at the regional level are substantial and worthy of recognition and consideration during the Federal transportation funding allocation process.

Attachment 10-B

HAMPTON ROADS TRANSPORTATION ACCOUNTABILITY COMMISSION

2015-2016 DRAFT LEGISLATIVE AGENDA

Attachment 10-C

http://hrtac.org/

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Revisions to Enabling Legislation:.................................................................................................................. 1

A. Transfer of HRTF Monies to HRTAC .................................................................................................. 1

B. Expanded Use of HRTF Monies for Administrative Expenses ................................................. 2

C. Commission Member “Designees” ...................................................................................................... 3

D. Continuity in Representation of Counties ....................................................................................... 5

E. System-Wide Financing Approach ..................................................................................................... 7

Attachment 10-C

REVISIONS TO ENABLING LEGISLATION: A. TRANSFER OF HRTF MONIES TO HRTAC

OVERVIEW:

Section 33.2-2600 of the enabling legislation of the Hampton Roads Transportation Accountability Commission (the “Commission” or “HRTAC”) currently contemplates that revenues dedicated to the Hampton Roads Transportation Fund (the “HRTF”) will be paid to the state treasury and credited to the HRTF, which is established on the books of the Comptroller. The statute is silent regarding how monies deposited in the HRTF subsequently will be transferred to the Commission for use in accordance with the enabling legislation.

In contrast, the enabling legislation of the Commission’s counterpart, the Northern Virginia Transportation Authority (the “NVTA”), clarifies that monies deposited in the corresponding Northern Virginia Transportation Authority Fund will be distributed by the state directly to the NVTA. The Commission desires similar clarity in its enabling legislation which, among other things, will benefit the Commission in its bond validation and bond issuance activities.

EXISTING STATUTORY LANGUAGE:

§ 33.2-2600 - “The amounts dedicated to the Fund shall be deposited monthly by the Comptroller into the Fund.”

SAMPLE REVISIONS:

§ 33.2-2600 - “The amounts dedicated to the Fund shall be deposited monthly by the Comptroller into the Fund and thereafter distributed to the Commission as soon as practicable for use in accordance with this Chapter. If the Commission determines that such moneys distributed to it exceed the amount required to meet the current needs and demands to fund transportation projects pursuant to this chapter, the Commission may invest such excess moneys in accordance with applicable law.”

Attachment 10-C

REVISIONS TO ENABLING LEGISLATION: B. EXPANDED USE OF HRTF MONIES FOR ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES

OVERVIEW:

The Commission’s enabling legislation is ambiguous regarding the use of HRTF monies for administrative expenses. There is language that places the burden of administrative expenses on the member jurisdictions unless funds are provided from other sources. The architects of the Commission’s enabling legislation indicated that they intended the HRTF to constitute an “other source”, and made a provisional clarification through the current biennial budget. The Commission desires a more long-term solution through amendments to the applicable statutes.


§ 33.2-2600 –“The moneys deposited in the Fund shall be used solely for new construction projects on new or existing highways, bridges, and tunnels in the localities comprising Planning District 23 as approved by the Hampton Roads Transportation Accountability Commission.”

§ 33.2-2605(B) - “The administrative expenses of the Commission, as provided in an annual budget adopted by the Commission, to the extent funds for such expenses are not provided from other sources, shall be allocated among the component counties and cities on the basis of the relative population, as determined pursuant to § 33.2-2604. Such budget shall be limited solely to the administrative expenses of the Commission and shall not include any funds for construction or acquisition of transportation facilities or the performance of any transportation service.”

SAMPLE REVISIONS:

§ 33.2-2600 –“The moneys deposited in the Fund shall be used solely for new construction projects on new or existing highways, bridges, and tunnels in the localities comprising Planning District 23 as approved by the Hampton Roads Transportation Accountability Commission and for such other purposes as are specified in subsection B of § 33.2-2605.”

§ 33.2-2605(B) - “The administrative and operating expenses of the Commission, as provided in an annual budget adopted by the Commission, to the extent funds for such expenses are not provided from other sources, shall be allocated among the component counties and cities on the basis of the relative population, as determined pursuant to §33.2-2604 paid from the Fund. Such budget shall be limited solely to the administrative and operating expenses of the Commission and shall not include any funds for construction or acquisition of transportation facilities or the performance of any transportation service.”

Attachment 10-C

http://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/33.2-2604/

REVISIONS TO ENABLING LEGISLATION: C. COMMISSION MEMBER “DESIGNEES”1

OVERVIEW:

The Commission’s enabling legislation currently prohibits voting members from appointing designees to represent them at Commission meetings. Due to the Commission’s complex voting structure (including population requirements), the inability of members who are chief elected officers of counties and cities to attend meetings due to emergencies or other personal matters often leaves the Commission unable to take timely action, and/or leaves the counties and cities of those members unrepresented, on important matters.

Below are two options that would allow members representing cities and counties to appoint “designees” to attend Commission meetings on their behalf. Option 1 requires the designee to be an elected official of the applicable city or county, only allows the Commission member to appoint a designee in an emergency or personal matter, and limits the frequency of appointment. Under Option 2, the designee still must be another elected official, but there is no limit on the reason for appointing, or the number of times a member may appoint, a designee. Option 2 is similar to the approach used in the NVTA enabling legislation.


§ 33.2-2602(1) - “The Commission shall consist of 23 members as follows:

1. The chief elected officer of the governing body of each of the 14 counties and cities embraced by the Commission;”

SAMPLE REVISIONS:

Option 1: Permitting “designees” in case of an emergency or personal matter


1. The chief elected officer of the governing body of each of the 14 counties and cities embraced by the Commission;

Members who are also chief elected officers and who are unable to attend a Commission meeting due to an emergency or personal matter may appoint a designee to attend the meeting and act on his or her behalf, provided (i) on or before the day of the meeting, the member notifies the chairman of the Commission that he or she is unable to attend the meeting and of the identity of his or her designee, (ii) the appointment of a designee by such member shall be limited each calendar year to two Commission meetings or 25 percent of the

1 Additional amendments may be necessary if there are changes related to county representation under Section 33.2-2602.

Attachment 10-C

Commission’s meetings, whichever is fewer, and (iii) the designee is also a current elected official serving on the same governing body as the appointing member.”

Option 2 – Permitting “designees” generally


1. The chief elected officer of the governing body of each of the 14 counties and cities embraced by the Commission or, in the discretion of that chief elected officer, his or her duly appointed designee, who shall be another current elected official serving that governing body (a person shall constitute a duly appointed designee only if the chief elected officer of the governing body gives, and does not revoke, written notice of the appointment to the chairman of the Commission);”

Attachment 10-C

REVISIONS TO ENABLING LEGISLATION: D. CONTINUITY IN REPRESENTATION OF COUNTIES2

OVERVIEW:

Section 33.2-2602 of the Commission’s enabling legislation outlines the membership of the Commission, which includes, among others, representatives from the 14 counties and cities embraced by the Commission. The statute currently contemplates that the “chief elected officer of the governing body” will represent each jurisdiction, which means the respective Mayors represent each city and the respective Chairs of the Boards of Supervisors represent each county. While Mayors serve multi-year terms, Chairs of the Boards of Supervisors generally serve much shorter (often 1-year) terms. This disparity makes it difficult for counties to have continuity in representation that is similar to that of the cities.

The Commission proposes that while Mayors continue to represent their member cities, member counties may appoint any elected member of its Board of Supervisors to serve as its representative to the Commission.


§ 33.2-2602 – “The Commission shall consist of 23 members as follows:

1. The chief elected officer of the governing body of each of the 14 counties and cities embraced by the Commission;”

§ 33.2-2604 - “A majority of the Commission, which majority shall include at least a majority of the chief elected officers of the counties and cities embraced by the Commission, shall constitute a quorum. Decisions of the Commission shall require a quorum and shall be in accordance with voting procedures established by the Commission. In all cases, decisions of the Commission shall require the affirmative vote of two-thirds of the members of the Commission present and voting, and two-thirds of the chief elected officers of the counties and cities embraced by Planning District 23 who are present and voting and whose counties and cities include at least two-thirds of the population embraced by the Commission; however, no motion to fund a specific facility or service shall fail because of this population criterion if such facility or service is not located or to be located or provided or to be provided within the county or city whose chief elected officer's sole negative vote caused the facility or service to fail to meet the population criterion. . . .”

SAMPLE REVISIONS:

§ 33.2-2602 – “The Commission shall consist of 23 members as follows:

2 Additional amendments may be necessary if there are changes related to use of designees under § 33.2-2602(1).

Attachment 10-C

1. The chief elected officer of the governing body of each of the 14 counties and 10 cities embraced by the Commission;

2. A current elected official of each of the 4 counties embraced by the Commission, provided that such official (a) serves on the governing body of the county, and (b) has been appointed by resolution of that governing body to serve as the county’s member on the Commission;”

§ 33.2-2604 - “A majority of the Commission, which majority shall include at least a majority of the chief elected officers of and elected officials who, pursuant to § 33.2-2602, represent the counties and cities embraced by the Commission shall constitute a quorum. Decisions of the Commission shall require a quorum and shall be in accordance with voting procedures established by the Commission. In all cases, decisions of the Commission shall require the affirmative vote of two-thirds of the members of the Commission present and voting, and two-thirds of the chief elected officers of and elected officials who, pursuant to § 33.2-2602, represent the counties and cities embraced by Planning District 23 who are present and voting and whose counties and cities include at least two-thirds of the population embraced by the Commission; however, no motion to fund a specific facility or service shall fail because of this population criterion if such facility or service is not located or to be located or provided or to be provided within the county or city whose appointed elected official’s or chief elected officer's sole negative vote caused the facility or service to fail to meet the population criterion. . . .”

Attachment 10-C

REVISIONS TO ENABLING LEGISLATION: E. SYSTEM-WIDE FINANCING APPROACH

OVERVIEW:

Section 33.2-2607 of the enabling legislation of HRTAC should be revised to clarify that HRTAC may utilize a system-wide financing approach whereby HRTAC could fix and adjust the amount of tolls on any facilities within the network of highways, bridges and tunnels in Planning District 23 so that, together with other HRTAC-controlled revenues, they yield an amount that will cover costs of financing a variety of projects that improve overall traffic flow through the network. HRTAC’s consultants have advised that such a system-wide approach may be vital to financing all contemplated projects within a reasonable timeframe.


§ 33.2-2607 – “Notwithstanding any contrary provision of this title and in accordance with all applicable federal statutes and requirements, the Commission shall control and operate and may impose and collect tolls in amounts established by the Commission for the use of any new or improved highway, bridge, or tunnel, to increase capacity on such facility or to address congestion within Planning District 23, constructed by the Commission (i) with federal, state, or local funds, (ii) solely with revenues of the Commission, or (iii) with revenues under the control of the Commission. The amount of any such toll may be varied from facility to facility, by lane, by congestion levels, by day of the week, by time of day, by type or size of vehicle, by number of axles, or by any similar combination thereof or any other factor the Commission may deem proper, and a reduced rate may be established for commuters as defined by the Commission. All such tolls shall be used for programs and projects that are reasonably related to or benefit the users of the new or improved highway, bridge, or tunnel, including, but not limited to, for the debt service and other costs of bonds whose proceeds are used for construction or improvement of such highway, bridge, or tunnel.

Any tolls imposed by the Commission shall be collected by an electronic toll system that, to the extent possible, shall not impede the traffic flow of the facility or prohibit a toll facility from retaining means of nonautomated toll collection in some lanes of the facility. For all facilities tolled by the Commission, there shall be signs erected prior to the point of toll collection that clearly state how the majority of the toll revenue is being spent by the Commission to benefit the users of the facility.”

SAMPLE REVISIONS:

§ 33.2-2607 – “Notwithstanding any contrary provision of this title and in accordance with all applicable federal statutes and requirements, the Commission shall control and operate and may impose and collect tolls in amounts established by the Commission for the use of any new or improved highway, bridge, or tunnel, to preserve, manage or increase capacity on such facility or to address congestion within Planning District 23, constructed or improved by the Commission (i) with federal, state, or local funds, (ii) solely with revenues of the Commission,

Attachment 10-C

or (iii) with revenues under the control of the Commission. The amount of any such toll may be varied from facility to facility, by lane, by congestion levels, by day of the week, by time of day, by type or size of vehicle, by number of axles, or by any similar combination thereof or any other factor the Commission may deem proper, and a reduced rate may be established for commuters as defined by the Commission. All such tolls shall be used for programs and projects that are reasonably related to or benefit the users of the new or improved highway, bridge, or and tunnel, facilities, or network of facilities, within Planning District 23, including, but not limited to, for the debt service and other costs of bonds whose proceeds are used for construction or improvement of such highway, bridge or and tunnel facilities.

Any tolls imposed by the Commission shall be collected by an electronic toll system that, to the extent possible, shall not impede the traffic flow of the facility or prohibit a toll facility from retaining means of nonautomated toll collection in some lanes of the facility. For all facilities tolled by the Commission, there shall be signs erected prior to the point of toll collection that clearly state how the majority of the toll revenue is being spent by the Commission to benefit the users of the facility facilities constructed or improved by the Commission.”

Attachment 10-C


ITEM #11: PASSENGER RAIL AND PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION UPDATES: Jennifer Mitchell, DRPT

SUMMARY:

The Department of Rail and Public Transportation’s rail program includes projects around the Commonwealth that will enhance capacity and increase fluidity for both passenger and freight rail. One high profile initiative for the agency is the DC2RVA project, which will bring us one step closer to connecting the Northeast and Southeast corridors and to providing the Commonwealth with higher speed passenger rail. DRPT is also currently examining its rail programs to better align its projects to its priorities, and is planning to update the state rail plan beginning in 2016. Ms. Jennifer Mitchell, Director, will brief the HRTPO Board on this item. BACKGROUND:

During the September 2015 HRTPO Board meeting, Mayor Paul Fraim requested a briefing by DRPT staff for the October HRTPO Board meeting regarding the status of Trains 2 and 3 for the Norfolk line. He also requested clarification on how HB2 may impact DRPT funding.


ITEM #12: HAMPTON ROADS CROSSING STUDY (HRCS) SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT (SEIS) UPDATE: Scott Smizik, VDOT

SUMMARY:

The Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT), in coordination with the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), has initiated the preparation of a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) for the Hampton Roads Crossing Study. The SEIS will re-evaluate the findings of the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) and the Record of Decision (ROD) that were approved by the FHWA in 2001. Mr. Scott Smizik, Project Manager, Environmental Division, VDOT, will brief the HRTPO Board on this item. BACKGROUND:

The Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) from the original HRCS-FEIS was Candidate Build Alternative (CBA) 9. This option is one of three alternatives retained in the Final EIS being re-examined along with any other alternatives identified in the SEIS scoping which commenced in July 2015. CBA-9 was approved by the Commonwealth Transportation Board (March 2001) and the HRTPO (July 1997 and June 2013). The purpose of the original HRCS was to relieve congestion at the I-64 HRBT in a manner that improves accessibility, transit, emergency evacuation, and military and goods movement along the primary transportation corridors in the Hampton Roads region, including the I-64, I-664, I-564, and Route 164 corridors. The HRCS-SEIS will address the following needs:

• Accommodate travel demand – capacity is inadequate on the study area alignments, contributing to congestion at the HRBT.

• Improve transit access – the lack of transit access across the Hampton Roads waterway. • Increase regional accessibility – limited number of water crossings and inadequate

highway capacity and severe congestion decrease accessibility. • Address geometric deficiencies – insufficient vertical and horizontal clearance at the HRBT

contribute to congestion. • Enhance emergency evacuation capability – increase capacity for emergency evacuation,

particularly at the HRBT. • Improve strategic military connectivity – congestion impedes military movement

missions. • Increase access to port facilities – inadequate access to interstate highway travel in the

study area impacts regional commerce.

Attached is the draft Purpose and Need Statement from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) to prepare a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement on the Hampton Roads Crossing Study. Attachment 12

PURPOSE AND NEED STATEMENT

Prepared in support of the Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

VDOT Project #: 0064-965-081, P101

UPC#: 106724

October 28, 2015

Attachment 12

Hampton Roads Crossing Study SEIS Purpose and Need Statement

October 28, 2015 i

CONTENTS

1. PURPOSE AND NEED ...................................................................................................................1

1.1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................ 1

1.2 HISTORY OF THE STUDY ............................................................................................................... 1

1.3 STUDY AREA AND EXISTING ROADWAYS .................................................................................... 2

1.4 NEEDS: EXISTING CONDITIONS .................................................................................................... 3

1.4.1 Overview ................................................................................................................................. 3

1.4.2 Accommodate Travel Demand ............................................................................................... 3

1.4.3 Improve Transit Access ........................................................................................................... 5

1.4.4 Increase Regional Accessibility .............................................................................................. 5

1.4.5 Address Geometric Deficiencies .......................................................................................... 10

1.4.6 Enhance Emergency Evacuation Capability ......................................................................... 10

1.4.7 Improve Strategic Military Connectivity .............................................................................. 12

1.4.8 Increase Access to Port Facilities ......................................................................................... 14

1.5 NEEDS: FUTURE CONDITIONS .................................................................................................... 15

1.5.1 Overview ............................................................................................................................... 15

1.5.2 Accommodate Travel Demand ............................................................................................. 15

1.5.3 Improve Transit Access ......................................................................................................... 16

1.5.4 Increase Regional Accessibility ............................................................................................ 16

1.5.5 Address Geometric Deficiencies .......................................................................................... 17

1.5.6 Enhance Emergency Evacuation Capability ......................................................................... 17

1.5.7 Improve Strategic Military Connectivity .............................................................................. 17

1.5.8 Increase Access to Port Facilities ......................................................................................... 17

2. PURPOSE AND NEED SUMMARY ............................................................................................... 18

List of Tables

TABLE 1-1: EXISTING (2015) TRAFFIC VOLUMES ........................................................................................................... 5 TABLE 1-2: METRO AREA EXPRESS BUS TRANSIT SERVICE ON STUDY AREA INTERSTATES ........................................... 6 TABLE 1-3: EXISTING (2015) VEHICLES PER HOUR PER LANE ON STUDY ROUTES ........................................................ 7 TABLE 1-4: TOTAL CRASHES AND AVERAGE CRASH RATES IN THE STUDY AREA AND VDOT HAMPTON ROADS DISTRICT .......................................................................................................... 11 TABLE 1-5: PRELIMINARY FUTURE (2040) TRAFFIC VOLUMES .................................................................................... 16

Attachment 12


ii October 28, 2015

APPENDIX A: FIGURES

FIGURE 1: HRCS STUDY AREA ........................................................................... A-ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. FIGURE 2A: I-64 STUDY AREA............................................................................ A-ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. FIGURE 2B: I-64 STUDY AREA ............................................................................ A-ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. FIGURE 2C: I-64 STUDY AREA ............................................................................ A-ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. FIGURE 3A: I-564 STUDY AREA.......................................................................... A-ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. FIGURE 3B: I-564 STUDY AREA .......................................................................... A-ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. FIGURE 3C: I-564 STUDY AREA .......................................................................... A-ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. FIGURE 4: 164 STUDY AREA .............................................................................. A-ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. FIGURE 5A: I-664 STUDY AREA.......................................................................... A-ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. FIGURE 5B: I-664 STUDY AREA .......................................................................... A-ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. FIGURE 5C: I-664 STUDY AREA .......................................................................... A-ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. FIGURE 5D: I-64 STUDY AREA ............................................................................ A-ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. FIGURE 6: HAMPTON ROADS MAJOR PORTS.................................................... A-ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. FIGURE 7: I-564 INTERMODAL CONNECTOR PROJECT...................................... A-ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.

Attachment 12

October 28, 2015 1

Purpose and Need Statement

1. PURPOSE AND NEED

1.1 INTRODUCTION

The Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT), in cooperation with the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), is preparing a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) for the Hampton Roads Crossing Study (HRCS) located in the cities of Chesapeake, Hampton, Newport News, Norfolk, Portsmouth, and Suffolk, Virginia. The SEIS re-evaluates the findings of the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) and Record of Decision (ROD) that were approved by FHWA in 2001. The purpose for the proposed action from the 2001 HRCS FEIS was to develop and analyze intermodal alternatives that can work together to improve accessibility, mobility, and goods movement in the Hampton Roads metropolitan area to help relieve the congestion that occurs at the existing Interstate 64 (I-64) Hampton Roads Bridge Tunnel (HRBT).

The following sections describe the history of the HRCS leading to the development of the HRCS SEIS, the study area and transportation services, and existing and future transportation needs in the study area. Figures referred to in text are included in Appendix A.

1.2 HISTORY OF THE STUDY

Improvements to the HRBT have been under study for several years. The following presents a brief history of the origins of the current study and actions leading to the commencement of the HRCS SEIS:

• 1992: The Virginia General Assembly passed Joint Resolution 132 directing VDOT to conduct a study of congestion at the HRBT. The Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act allocated demonstration funds for “highway projects demonstrating innovative techniques of highway construction and finance”, including the I-64 Hampton Roads crossing. The study concluded that short-term measures would not solve congestion at the HRBT and that a long-term, large-scale solution would be required.

• 1997: The I-64 Crossing Major Investment Study was completed resulting in the following milestones: establishment of purpose and need, consideration of alternatives, selection of the locally preferred alternative by the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), and endorsement of the locally preferred alternative by the Commonwealth Transportation Board (CTB).

• 1999: In October, the HRCS Draft EIS (DEIS) was issued. • 2000: In July, the Commonwealth Transportation Board (CTB) selected a location for the

Hampton Roads Crossing Study. • 2001: The HRCS FEIS and ROD were issued. These documents identified Candidate Build

Alternative (CBA) 9 as the preferred alternative. CBA-9 included improvements to the I-664/Monitor Merrimac Memorial Bridge-Tunnel (MMMBT), the construction of a new east-west bridge tunnel connecting the MMMBT with -564 in Norfolk (locally referred to as “Patriots Crossing”), and a north-south bridge connecting “Patriots Crossing” to Route 164 (locally referred to as the “Craney Island Connector”.

• 2003: In November, FHWA/VDOT completed a NEPA Re-evaluation of the HRCS FEIS. The Re-evaluation analyzed implementing a portion of the preferred alternative, based on an un-solicited public-private partnership proposal. The data included in the Re-evaluation documented that there did not appear to be any changes to the project or the surrounding environment that resulted in significant environmental impacts not already evaluated in the FEIS.

Attachment 12


2 October 28, 2015

• 2011: FHWA/VDOT completed an Environmental Assessment (EA)/Re-evaluation of the HRCS EIS covering the segments that make up “Patriots Crossing”.

• 2011: FHWA/VDOT initiated an EIS for the I-64 HRBT corridor. • 2012: In December, FHWA issued a Draft EIS for the I-64 HRBT corridor. • 2013: In February; VDOT followed up on its 2011 submittal of the EA/Re-evaluation for the

HRCS FEIS and submitted a revised document and a request for a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI). FHWA did not take action on VDOT’s request because the project was not funded for construction in the Hampton Roads Transportation Organization’s (HRTPO) constrained long range plan (CLRP).

• 2015: In July, FHWA and VDOT initiated the HRCS SEIS. • 2015: In August, FHWA rescinded its Notice of Intent (NOI) to prepare the HRBT EIS. Public

and agency comments and concerns regarding the magnitude of potential environmental impacts from the build alternatives proposed in the DEIS led to FHWA’s decision to rescind the NOI. The build alternatives would have resulted in severe impacts to a variety of environmental resources, including communities and neighborhoods, historic properties, parks, and natural resources. A preferred alternative was not identified by the HRBT EIS study, and the study was not advanced further.

1.3 STUDY AREA AND EXISTING ROADWAYS

“Hampton Roads” is the name of the water body that is located at the confluence of the James River, the Elizabeth River, the Nansemond River and the Chesapeake Bay. It also is the locally adopted name for the metropolitan region. The Hampton Roads water body divides the region into two sections: the “Southside” which includes the cities of Chesapeake, Norfolk, Portsmouth, Suffolk, and Virginia Beach, and the “Peninsula” including the Cities of Hampton, Newport News, and Poquoson.

Three alternatives retained for analysis in the 2001 FEIS were used to establish the study area shown in Figure 1. Therefore, it is generally bound by I-664 on the west, I-64 on the north and east, and I-564 and Route 164 on the south.

I-64

The portion of I-64 in the study area extends from 1.7 miles west of the I-664 interchange in Hampton to the I-564 interchange in Norfolk, a distance of approximately 14 miles, including the 3.5-mile long HRBT (Figures 2A to 2C).

I-564

I-564 is the primary access between Naval Station Norfolk (NAVSTA Norfolk), Naval Support Activity Hampton Roads (NSA Hampton Roads), and the Norfolk International Terminals (NIT) on the west and I-64 on the east, a distance of approximately 3 miles east (Figures 3A to 3C).

Route 164

The HRCS SEIS study area has been expanded beyond the limits of the alternatives defined in the 2001 FEIS. This new study area extends east-west along Route 164 approximately 3.4 miles from Virginia International Gateway Boulevard to I-664 (Figure 4).

I-664

The study area includes the entire 20.8-mile length of I-664 (Figures 5A to 5D). I-664 originates at the I-64 interchange in Hampton on the Peninsula, continues south through Newport News, crosses

Attachment 12


October 28, 2015 3

Hampton Roads through the MMMBT, continues primarily south through the cities of Suffolk and Chesapeake, and ends at the I-264 interchange in Chesapeake

1.4 NEEDS: EXISTING CONDITIONS 1.4.1 Overview

I-64 and I-664 and their bridge-tunnels are critical links in the regional transportation network of the Hampton Roads region. The region has extensive bodies of water that narrow transportation choice. When congestion is severe or incidents occur at the HRBT, traffic diverts to the only two other crossings of the Hampton Roads waterway: the MMMBT or the James River Bridge that are already severely congested at peak travel times.

I-64, I-664, I-564, and Route 164 study alignments serve multiple transportation purposes including commuter, freight movements, military mobility, tourism, and emergency evacuation. However, traffic capacity is inadequate at peak travel times on all these corridors, leading to reduced speeds and long and unpredictable travel times and congestion. These factors impact regional transportation accessibility as described below.

1.4.2 Accommodate Travel Demand

Travel demand on I-64, I-564, I-664, and Route 164 is generated by various modes including commuters, freight movements, military, and tourism. Recent population estimates indicate 1,677,338 persons live in the Hampton Roads area1 of which 835,342 are in the civilian labor force in the region2. The Hampton Roads interstate network provides a vital regional link for commuters traveling to and from large regional employers and institutions, such as:

• U.S. military installations: More than 20 military installations are located in the greater Hampton Roads area (see Section 1.3.6). These military installations are major employers with 150,000 personnel that contribute to travel demand in the Hampton Roads region.

• The Port of Virginia: Located in Hampton Roads, the port is the largest coal exporter in the US, shipping more than 51 million tons of coal in 2013. The Port of Virginia ranks third highest among East Coast ports in the volume of cargo handled in 2013 and in East Coast Market Share3. The Port of Virginia generates primarily truck traffic using the HRCS study alignments. The majority of other cargo is shipped via rail along a primary route extending from the Newport News Marine Terminal along the Peninsula to points northwest, and Southside routes heading west from NIT, Portsmouth Marine Terminal, and Virginia International Gateway terminal through Suffolk to points further west (Figure 6). No rail water crossings over Hampton Roads waterway currently exist. Factors considered in the decision to use trucks versus rail include the time sensitivity of cargo, availability of and proximity to intermodal rail facilities, efficiency/accessibility of highway networks, cargo weight and volume, and fuel cost4.

• Newport News Shipbuilding: This shipyard, which is accessed via I-664 and I-64, is the nation's sole-industrial designer, builder, and re-fueler of nuclear-powered aircraft carriers located at the mouth of the James River in the City of Newport News. It is one of only two shipyards in the US capable of designing and building nuclear-powered submarines.

1 US Census Bureau. 2013. American Factfinder. Retrieved from http://factfinder.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml. 2 Virginia Economic Development Partnership. 2015. Community Profile: Hampton Roads. Retrieved from http://virginiascan.yesvirginia.org/communityprofiles/MapSearch.aspx?type=VIRTUALVIRGINIAREGION. 3 HRTPO. 2014. The State of Transportation in Hampton Roads 2014. T14-06. Retrieved from http://hrtpo.org/uploads/docs/State%20of%20Transportation%202014%20Final%20Report.pdf. 4 Port of Virginia. July 30, 2015 letter.

Attachment 12

http://factfinder.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml


4 October 28, 2015

• Sentara Health Care: Located in Norfolk, Sentara has 20,000 employees, making it the second-largest employer in the Hampton Roads metropolitan area5. Sentara health care facilities are located throughout the region and accessed by all major roads in the area.

• Bank of America: Located in Norfolk, the bank has an estimated 3,600 employees6. • Old Dominion University: Located in Norfolk, the university has 4,000 employees7 and

approximately 25,000 students. • Naval Medical Center: Located in Portsmouth, the hospital with 5,400 employees8 is accessed

by Route 164.

Major tourism in the region centers on the beach fronts, historic sites and museums, and regional city centers. Other major destinations for travelers through Hampton Roads are the Eastern Shore via the Chesapeake Bay Bridge-Tunnel; and the Outer Banks of North Carolina via I-64 and I-664 to Route 168 in the City of Chesapeake. Much of the tourist-related traffic is seasonal and related to the beaches, resulting in summertime peaks in traffic volumes that are higher than typical weekday peaks. Virginia Beach alone hosts nearly six million overnight visitors annually9.

I-64, I-564, and I-664 and Route 164 provide for other general travel for business and personal purposes between and within the cities of Hampton Roads, including shopping, recreation, and entertainment. Regional shopping destinations near the study area include: McArthur Center in downtown Norfolk; Peninsula Town Center in Hampton; City Center at Oyster Point and Patrick Henry Mall in Newport News; High Street in Portsmouth; Greenbrier Mall in Chesapeake; and Town Center, Pembroke and Lynnhaven Malls in Virginia Beach. Recreation on the water is a major activity in the region, including boating and fishing, particularly near the HRBT and MMMBT. Major regional entertainment venues include Townpoint Park and Scope in Norfolk, the Coliseum in Hampton, NTelos Wireless Pavilion in Portsmouth, and events at the Virginia Beach oceanfront.

Linking most of the urbanized region, the study area alignments are also a pipeline for the transport of goods of all kinds including industrial supplies, building materials, foodstuffs, and business and personal consumables. Interstates 64, 564, 664, and Route 164 serve as routes for the transfer and delivery of local and regional freight movements across Hampton Roads. They also are a key link in transporting international freight to and from the region’s shipping ports. For example, the Port of Virginia in the Hampton Roads Harbor handled over 18 million short tons of cargo during the first 11 months of Fiscal Year 2015 and is expected to finish the year handling more than 1.4 million containers10.

Travel demand from these sources within the study area have resulted in 2015 traffic volumes on the study alignments as shown in Table 1-1. Higher travel demand exists on I-64 in the study area because it has more direct connections to regional destinations; I-64 is the only interstate into and out of the Hampton Roads region.

5 Hampton Roads Economic Development Alliance. 2015. Hampton Roads -Major Employers. Retrieved from http://colleges.startclass.com/l/4402/Old-Dominion-University. 6 Hampton Roads Economic Development Alliance. 2015. Hampton Roads -Major Employers. Retrieved from http://colleges.startclass.com/l/4402/Old-Dominion-University. 7 Hampton Roads Economic Development Alliance. 2015. Hampton Roads -Major Employers. Retrieved from http://colleges.startclass.com/l/4402/Old-Dominion-University. 8 Hampton Roads Economic Development Alliance. 2015. Hampton Roads -Major Employers. Retrieved from http://colleges.startclass.com/l/4402/Old-Dominion-University. 9 City of Virginia Beach. 2015. Key Industries: Tourism. Retrieved from http://www.yesvirginiabeach.com/key-industries/tourism. 10 Port of Virginia. July 30, 2015 letter.

Attachment 12


October 28, 2015 5

Table 1-1: Existing (2015) Traffic Volumes

Roadway Average Annual Daily

Traffic

Average Weekday Daily

Traffic

Eastbound AM (PM) Peak

Hour

Westbound AM (PM) Peak Hour

Average Annual

Daily Traffic Percent Trucks

HRBT (I-64) 86,400 89,200 3,375 (3,105) 3,070 (3,025) 3% MMMBT

(I-664) 61,000 64,300 2,080 (3,195) 3,060 (2,550) 6%

I-5641 37,000 45,000 TBD TBD 1% VA 1641 45,000 50,800 TBD TBD 5%

12014 data

1.4.3 Improve Transit Access

Hampton Roads Transit (HRT) is the major provider of public transportation throughout Hampton Roads. In the study area, HRT express bus service that travels through both the HRBT and MMMBT is called the ‘Metro Area Express’ (MAX). Table 1-2 lists the MAX routes within the study area. MAX across the HRBT and MMMBT is the only public transit option that connects the Peninsula with the Southside.

The railway network in Hampton Roads provides transit mobility. Transit rail in the Hampton Roads is provided via Amtrak, which has a station in Newport News and in Norfolk, and the Norfolk light rail transit called “The Tide”. Amtrak provides daily trips out of Norfolk to Petersburg and destinations north and from Newport News Station to Richmond where further connections may be made. These lines are part of the Northeast Regional Service provided by Amtrak extending from Newport News to Boston. The Tide is a light rail system operated by HRT and is within the confines of the City of Norfolk, with expectations that it will grow into a regional light rail system. Extensions toward NAVSTA Norfolk and Virginia Beach are currently being studied.

In 2011, the Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation (DRPT) in cooperation with others identified transit needs in Hampton Roads from a regional perspective11. Their report identifies the need for planning, building and maintaining an integrated, high-speed/high-capacity transit system that would help relieve traffic congestion and connect activity centers throughout Hampton Roads. The plan calls for additional crossings over the Hampton Roads Harbor. Therefore there is a need to improve accessibility to transit connections across the Hampton Roads Harbor.

1.4.4 Increase Regional Accessibility

Regional transportation accessibility centers on people and places, that is, getting people and goods to destinations in high demand. It is enhanced by increasing the speed one can travel to reach a destination and the subsequent reduction in travel time. Moreover, for transportation to be accessible, it needs to be reliable so that people and goods arrive as planned.

11 HRT/WATA/DRPT. 2011. Hampton Roads Regional Transit Vision Plan: Final Report. Retrieved from http://www.drpt.virginia.gov/media/1332/final_report_03-17-11.pdf

Attachment 12


6 October 28, 2015

Table 1-2: Metro Area Express Bus Transit Service on Study Area Interstates

Route Number City Connection Route Termini Study Area Overlap

918/919 Virginia Beach – Norfolk

Silver Leaf Park & Ride to Lafayette River

Annex Uses I-564

922 Chesapeake – Norfolk Greenbrier Mall to Naval Station Norfolk Uses I-564

961 Norfolk – Newport News

Downtown Norfolk to Newport News Transit

Center

Uses I-64, HRBT, and I-664

965 Newport News - Norfolk

Patrick Henry Mall to Naval Station Norfolk

Uses I-64, HRBT, and I-564

967 Norfolk – Newport News

Military Highway Light Rail Station to Newport

News Transit Center

Uses I-664 and MMMBT

Source: HRT (2015)12

Increase Capacity

Inadequate capacity leads to congestion which has an adverse effect on travel time and travel reliability. Traffic volumes on sections of I-64, I-664, I-564 and Route 164 routinely exceed capacity during peak periods. The generally accepted capacity, or throughput, of a single freeway lane is 2,200 vehicles per hour; however, potential throughput is reduced when considering factors such as narrow lanes, lack of shoulders, and high truck volumes (Table 1-1). Due to constricted horizontal and vertical clearances, tunnels provide less capacity than do landside roadways. HRTPO estimated the volume of vehicles crossing the Hampton Roads Harbor via the HRBT, MMMBT, and James River Bridge increased 74 percent from 1990 to 2013. Most of this growth can be attributed to the MMMBT construction in 199213

Table 1-3 presents the traffic throughput at key points of the study area. Maximum throughput at both the HRBT and MMMBT is estimated at 1,600 vehicles per hour per lane. Along I-564, up to 4,500 vehicles per hour are estimated to travel between the I-64 interchange and Admiral Taussig Boulevard. On Route 164 between I-664 and the Virginia International Gateway Boulevard interchange, [insert data] vehicles per hour per lane are estimated.

12 Hampton Roads Transit. System Maps. Retrieved from http://gohrt.com/route/. 13 HRTPO. 2014. Hampton Roads Congestion Management Process: System Performance and Mitigation Report. Report T14-2. Retrieved from http://www.hrtpo.org/uploads/docs/CMP%20Report%20Final%20Version.pdf.

Attachment 12


October 28, 2015 7

Table 1-3: Existing (2015) Vehicles per Hour per Lane on Study Routes

Route Lane Vehicles per Hour Per Lane

TBD TBD TBD

TBD TBD TBD

TBD TBD TBD

Additional issues affect capacity at the bridge-tunnels in the study area. At the HRBT, lane drops and merges in close proximity to the tunnels contribute to bottleneck conditions and substantial traffic backups in both directions. Along I-564, inadequate capacity occurs during peak travel hours that can back traffic up to I-64 in the morning. Currently, I-564 ends by transitioning to east-west oriented Admiral Taussig Boulevard which serves the Navy bases, naval shipyard, and the NIT. Admiral Taussig Boulevard also has inadequate capacity at peak morning travel hours, causing traffic to back up on northbound I-564. The I-564 Intermodal Connector project currently in the design phase will address these issues, in part, by providing the port, NAVSTA Norfolk Docks, and Navy Gates 1, 2, 3A and 5 direct access to I-564 via a new alignment and interchange (“Air Terminal Interchange”) (Figure 7). Navy Gate 6 would also be relocated.

On the portion of Route 164 included in the study area, inadequate capacity can occur at Towne Point Road, College Road, and before the I-664 interchange during peak evening travel times.

The existing bridge-tunnels also do not provide sufficient capacity to allow for efficient maintenance of traffic during inspection, routine maintenance, or construction activities. Most routine maintenance would result in shoulder closures within the limits of operations or single lane closures within limits of operations or on isolated weekends. In some cases during maintenance or construction at the HRBT or MMMBT, travel lanes may need to be closed altogether, requiring two-way traffic in a single tunnel tube and reducing capacity to one lane in each direction for an extended period of time without a viable detour. These activities result in substantial periodic congestion and delays beyond the congestion experienced during normal operation.

Relieve Congestion

When travel demand exceeds capacity, congestion occurs. Congestion can be described as a condition characterized by unstable traffic flow, reduced travel speeds, stop-and-go movements, travel delays, and queuing. Congestion within the study area occurs in two forms: 1) on a regular basis at the same general location which is caused by inadequate capacity to accommodate traffic volumes; and 2) on an irregular basis at varying times and locations. Causes of irregular congestion include weather events, crashes that obstruct the roadway, or other incidents that temporarily reduce capacity. Because peak traffic severely exceeds existing capacity and there are only three crossings connecting the Peninsula to the Southside (HRBT, MMMBT, and the James River Bridge), irregular incidents during peak travel times can cause prolonged traffic jams that essentially bring the I-64 and I-664 corridors to a standstill, which in turn has a domino effect on traffic on intersecting roadways. For example, at the HRBT, a recent study by the Transportation Research Institute at Old Dominion University14 found 28 percent of the total delays are incident-induced, and the incident duration of the worst vehicle accidents extended

14 Cetin, Mecit, F. Habtemichael, and K. Anuar. In Draft. Investigation of Sources of Congestion at the Hampton Roads Bridge Tunnel. Virginia Center for Innovative Transportation Research. Virginia Department of Transportation: Richmond.

Attachment 12


8 October 28, 2015

over an hour. The time to clear traffic extends beyond the duration of the incidents, but has not been quantified.

At the HRBT westbound tunnel, traffic must be stopped in both directions to allow over-height trucks to turn around (averaging six times a day in 201515). A recent Virginia law (Code of Virginia 46.2-1110) allows drivers of such trucks to divert to a parking area to wait until peak travel times are passed in lieu of stopping traffic in both directions to turn around and to avoid a fine. Factors contributing to nonrecurring congestion at bridge-tunnels in general include the abrupt transition from daylight to dark lighting conditions in the tunnel, limited line-of-sight caused by tunnel structures, low overhead clearance, and the grades going down into and coming up out of the tunnels. These factors lead to fluctuations in travel speeds and disruptions in the traffic stream16. In the Hampton Roads area, narrow lanes and a lack of shoulders also contribute to congestion at the tunnels.

Sources of congestion at the HRBT have been studied numerous times. Most recently, the study by the Transportation Research Institute at Old Dominion University17 found that in the eastbound direction, the bottleneck is commonly observed at the tunnel entrance and inside the tunnel. In the westbound direction, it is generally at three locations: the tunnel entrance, inside the tunnel, and at the West Ocean View interchange ramp. The study concludes the HRBT corridor experiences a significant level of congestion and delays, costing the traveling public approximately 1.13 million vehicle-hours or $33.2 million annually in lost productivity, vehicle operation cost, and lost fuel (based on 2013 data). Of the total delay, the study identifies 72% is due to high volume while the rest (28%) is incident-induced. Over-height trucks contribute the most to incident-induced delays. Stopping the traffic to process over-height trucks cost $2.58 million annually whereas all crashes in 2013 cost $2.56 million annually. Disabled vehicles also contribute significantly to the incident-induced delays costing $2.2 million18.

In the most recent assessment of regional congestion by HRTPO19, the HRBT segment of I-64 is ranked as the most congested freeway in the region. Nearly the entire I-64 roadway in the study limits is ranked among the most highly recurring congested roadways in the Hampton Roads region, particularly in the afternoon peak period. The section of I-564 from Admiral Taussig Boulevard to Terminal Boulevard has high recurring congestion at that time, which may be partly relieved by the I-564 Intermodal Connector project. The sections of southbound I-664 on the Peninsula from Terminal Avenue to the MMMBT, on the Southside southbound from Route 164 to Pughsville Road, and in both directions from Bowers Hill to I-264 also have severe recurring congestion during the afternoon peak travel period.

The HRTPO study indicates the sections of interstate in the HRCS study area with the highest total delay per mile in the morning peak period in 2013 included eastbound I-64 from Armistead to Mallory Street interchanges in Hampton with up to 194.5 total hours of delay per mile (Figure 2A). The northbound section of I-564 from Admiral Taussig Boulevard to Terminal Boulevard interchange in Norfolk also has substantial travel times with up to 89.6 total hours of delay per mile (Figure 3A). In the

15 Ballesteros, Stephanie. 2015. Change to Law Could Ease HRBT Congestion. Wavy News. June 29, 2015. Retrieved from http://wavy.com/2015/06/29/new-law-to-go-into-effect-to-ease-commute-on-hrbt/. 16 FHWA. No Date. Traffic Bottlenecks. Retrieved from http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/bn/lbr.htm#g6; HRTPO. 2014. Hampton Roads Congestion Management Process: System Performance and Mitigation Report. Report T14-2. Retrieved from http://www.hrtpo.org/uploads/docs/CMP%20Report%20Final%20Version.pdf; Smiley, A. and R. Dewar. 2010. Road Users. Chapter 2 in Traffic Engineering Handbook, 6th ed. W. Kraft, W. Homburger, and J. Pline, eds. Institute of Transportation Engineers: Washington, DC. 17 Cetin, Mecit, F. Habtemichael, and K. Anuar. 2015. Investigation of Sources of Congestion at the Hampton Roads Bridge Tunnel. Virginia Center for Innovative Transportation Research. Virginia Department of Transportation: Richmond. 18 Cetin, Mecit, F. Habtemichael, and K. Anuar.2015. Investigation of Sources of Congestion at the Hampton Roads Bridge Tunnel. Virginia Center for Innovative Transportation Research. Virginia Department of Transportation: Richmond. 19 HRTPO. 2014. Hampton Roads Congestion Management Process: System Performance and Mitigation Report. Report T14-2. Retrieved from http://www.hrtpo.org/uploads/docs/CMP%20Report%20Final%20Version.pdf

Attachment 12

http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/bn/lbr.htm#g6

http://www.hrtpo.org/uploads/docs/CMP%20Report%20Final%20Version.pdf


October 28, 2015 9

afternoon/evening, the highest total delay per mile on I-64 extended westbound from Granby Street to Ocean View Avenue in Norfolk with up to 257.7 total hours of delay per mile (Figure 2C). In the evening, I-64 eastbound from Rip Rap Road to Mallory Street in Hampton has up to 214.0 total hours of delay per mile (Figure 2A). Sections of I-664 are in the top regional rankings for segments with the highest total delay per mile in the evening peak period, including southbound from Chestnut Avenue to Terminal Avenue in Hampton with up to 148.4 total hours of delay per mile20 (Figure 5A). The severe congestion causing such high delay hours per mile translate into person-hour delay for travelers.

Queue lengths are another indicator of the accessibility of transportation in the region. Queue lengths approaching the HRBT typically extend 3 to 5 miles long (depending on direction and time of day), which is another indicator of declining transportation accessibility. At the MMMBT, queue lengths typically extend from 2 to 3 miles southbound and northbound at peak travel times. On I-564 at the Gate 3A interchange, traffic queued to enter Gate 3A at NAVSTA Norfolk can extend along northbound I-564 to I-64. The chokepoint causes recurring congestion to spill back to upstream locations, thereby reducing throughput at those locations as well. Additionally, because transit buses travel along with all other vehicles, the queuing and delays also impact transit services.

In summary, severe recurring congestion occurs at the HRBT and along I-64 in the study area. If irregular incidents occur during peak travel times, the I-64 corridor can experience prolonged traffic jams that disrupt the traffic stream, essentially shutting down mobility in the corridor. Drivers wishing to avoid the HRBT may divert to the only other alternative crossings that connect the Southside to the Peninsula, which are the MMMBT and the James River Bridge. Moreover, both the MMMBT and James River Bridge crossings also experience severe congestion during the same peak travel times as at the HRBT21 and do not serve as an effective alternative. In severe incidents, gridlock occurs at all the major crossings connecting the Southside to the Peninsula.

Increase Travel Reliability

Travel “reliability” is defined as how steady travel times are over the course of time, as measured generally from day to day. As traffic flows approach and exceed capacity and travel speeds decrease, travel times through the corridors become unpredictable. The higher traffic densities result in vehicles being more closely spaced, increasing the interaction among vehicles and distractions to drivers. The flow becomes unstable and abrupt stop-and-go traffic movements occur, a condition commonly experienced by local commuters and visitors to the region. Because of the unstable nature of the traffic flow, the exact onset, severity, and frequency of the congested conditions can be difficult to predict and the actual travel time may vary considerably from the average from one day to the next, especially when crashes or breakdowns result in lane restrictions or closures. Such incidents result in nonrecurring congestion, which compounds normal expected congestion and increases the unreliability of travel times in the corridor.

The same roadways in the study area with the highest total delay per mile discussed above also rank as having the most unreliable travel times in comparison to free-flow traffic conditions for the study routes, particularly at the HRBT22. Drivers wishing to avoid the highly unreliable travel times at the HRBT are limited to accessing the Peninsula or Southside at the few other crossings available (i.e., MMMBT and James River Bridge); however, these crossings also have unpredictable travel conditions at the same peak travel times as the HRBT. As described above, during irregular, severe traffic

20 HRTPO. 2014. Hampton Roads Congestion Management Process: System Performance and Mitigation Report. Report T14-2. Retrieved from http://www.hrtpo.org/uploads/docs/CMP%20Report%20Final%20Version.pdf 21 HRTPO. 2014. Hampton Roads Congestion Management Process: System Performance and Mitigation Report. Report T14-2. Retrieved from http://www.hrtpo.org/uploads/docs/CMP%20Report%20Final%20Version.pdf 22 HRTPO. 2014. Hampton Roads Congestion Management Process: System Performance and Mitigation Report. Report T14-2. Retrieved from http://www.hrtpo.org/uploads/docs/CMP%20Report%20Final%20Version.pdf

Attachment 12


10 October 28, 2015

incidents, travel delay could extend for several hours at all the major Hampton Roads waterway crossings.

1.4.5 Address Geometric Deficiencies

Geometrically deficient components on I-64 and at the HRBT include inadequate shoulder width and substandard vertical tunnel clearance, both of which contribute to recurring congestion. These elements fail to meet current VDOT interstate design standards, the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets23, and AASHTO’s Guide Specifications for Bridges Vulnerable to Coastal Storms24. Vertical tunnel clearance in the existing westbound HRBT tunnel is 13’-6”, below the 14’-6” vertical clearance standard for interstates. An average of 80 to 90 westbound over-height trucks per month must be stopped and inspected on the HRBT, causing disruption to traffic flow. Vertical clearance at the MMMBT is 14’-6” in both directions. Over-height vehicles are usually not an issue at the eastbound HRBT or at the MMMBT because any vehicles taller than 14’6” would require a permit to travel on interstate and state roadways and would be unable to pass under most bridges. At the HRBT, the vertical clearance above the water on the approach bridges does not meet AASHTO standards. Accordingly, during a storm, water could overtop the bridge structures. All of these deficiencies contribute to congestion at the HRBT when traffic volumes are high or severe weather events occur.

Incident response and management is difficult due to limited space in the tunnels and on the tunnel approach bridges and the lack of viable detour options to maintain traffic flow. Table 1-4 compares the total number of crashes and average crash rate per 100 million vehicle miles traveled for the study area alignments and the VDOT Hampton Roads District. Average crash rates on I-64 in the study area are substantially higher than the 2013 VDOT average crash rate for Hampton Roads District interstates. On I-64, the eastbound crashes were concentrated where the number of lanes reduce from three to two. The most westbound crashes on I-64 occur near Bayville Street and the westbound tunnel portal. On I-664, the crashes were generally concentrated on the approaches to the northbound and southbound bridge-tunnels. Crashes in both directions on I-564 are concentrated near I-64. Along Route 164 eastbound crashes occurred primarily near the Portsmouth port east of the HRCS study area. Many crashes on westbound Route 164 occurred near I-664. The majority of reported crashes in the study area were rear-end collisions, which are indicative of congested stop-and-go conditions.

1.4.6 Enhance Emergency Evacuation Capability

As a coastal metropolitan area, the Hampton Roads region is highly susceptible to hurricanes and nor’easter storms that combine high winds with storm surge and torrential rains to cause flooding. In the event of an emergency, designated evacuation routes in the Hampton Roads region include I-64, I-664, I-264, US Route 13, US Route 17, US Route 60, US 58, US Route 460 and Route 10. The Chesapeake Bay Bridge-Tunnel is not a designated evacuation route and will shut down under certain severe weather conditions. Among these routes, I-64 is the only route where the lane reversal infrastructure is set up for emergency purposes. According to the 2013 Virginia Hurricane Evacuation Guide25, residents south of I-264 are directed to use I-64/I-264; I-664 North, US 17 North; Route 58 West; Route 10 West; and Route 460 West for hurricane evacuation. Norfolk and Virginia Beach residents located north of I-264

23 AASHTO. 2011. A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets. Retrieved from https://bookstore.transportation.org/collection_detail.aspx?ID=110. 24 AASHTO. 2008. Guide Specifications for Bridges Vulnerable to Coastal Storms. Retrieved from https://bookstore.transportation.org/collection_detail.aspx?ID=84 25 VDOT. 2013. Virginia Hurricane Evacuation Guide. Retrieved from https://www.uscg.mil/d5/docs/HurricaneEvacuation%20Guide%202013.pdf

Attachment 12


October 28, 2015 11

Table 1-4: Total Crashes and Average Crash Rates in the Study Area and VDOT Hampton Roads District26

Roadway From To Direction 2012-2014 Total Crashes

Average Crash Rate1

Statewide Interstates

n/a n/a n/a 16,1392 67.562

VDOT Hampton Roads District Interstates3

n/a n/a n/a 3,7812 812

VDOT Hampton Roads District

Primary Roads4

n/a n/a n/a 2,0302 952

I-64 I-664 I-564 Eastbound 930 152

I-64 I-664 I-564 Westbound 800 135

I-564 I-64 Admiral Taussig Boulevard

Northbound 71 n/a

I-564 I-64 Admiral Taussig Boulevard

Southbound 65 n/a

I-664 I-64 I-264 Northbound 588 71

I-664 I-64 I-264 Southbound 531 71

Route 164 I-664 US 58 Eastbound 73 22

Route 164 I-664 US 58 Westbound 55 16 1Average crash rate per 100 million vehicle miles traveled. 22013 data only27. 3I-64, I-95, I-264, I-464, I-564, I-664

are directed to use I-64 and the HRBT in the event of a hurricane evacuation. As noted above, the HRBT’s design puts it in a position to be overtopped by water during extreme storm events. The tunnels are equipped with storm doors which can be shut to prevent flooding. While this would preserve the tunnel structure, it would close off a vital route for evacuees and/or emergency personnel. Theoretically, the call for an evacuation would occur sufficiently in advance of a storm event to allow the population to leave the area, even if routes are cut off. However, given the unpredictable nature

26 Virginia Department of Transportation. 2013. 2013 Summary of Crash Data: Interstate, Primary and Secondary System under Jurisdiction of Virginia Department of Transportation. 27 Virginia Department of Motor Vehicles. 2013. Crash Facts. Retrieved from http://www.dmv.state.va.us/safety/crash_data/crash_facts/crash_facts_13.pdf

Attachment 12


12 October 28, 2015

and path of some storm events, the call to evacuate sufficiently in advance of a storm event to allow the population to safely leave the area is not always possible.

In April 2010, the United States Department of Transportation (USDOT) prepared a Report entitled "Highway Evacuations in Selected Metropolitan Areas: Assessment of Impediments28." This report focuses on the highway system's ability to safely evacuate large numbers of people from 26 metropolitan areas that are high-threat, high-density areas. The Hampton Roads area, identified in this report as Virginia Beach, Norfolk and Newport News, was the 31st most congested area in the country and 35th most densely populated. It identifies five top highway impediments to effective large-scale, mass evacuations. Among these impediments are water crossings. There are a limited number of crossings that can handle the large volume of traffic that would have to evacuate from the area in case of an emergency. There are a limited number of water crossings in the Hampton Roads region, hampering the ability to effectively evacuate the population. These crossings are known bottlenecks during daily traffic and are expected to be more so during evacuations. Although each crossing has measures in place to ensure they are not blocked by flooding or other events during evacuations, the HRBT bridges have substandard vertical clearance above the water and may be overtopped in heavy storms. Another impediment to evacuation is that the Hampton Roads region is low lying, and US 17, US 460, and US 58 are prone to flooding, further exacerbating evacuation conditions even after evacuees make it past the available water crossings.

1.4.7 Improve Strategic Military Connectivity

I-64, I-564, I-664, and Route 164 provide for the movement of military personnel and equipment within the region. These roadways are part of the Strategic Highway Network (STRAHNET), which is designated by FHWA in coordination with the US Department of Defense (DoD). STRAHNET is the minimum network of highways that are important to the United States' strategic defense policy. The STRAHNET provides access, continuity, and emergency capabilities to important military installations and ports. Military installations in the Hampton Roads region include:

• NAVSTA Norfolk • NSA Hampton Roads • Norfolk Naval Shipyard • Joint Forces Staff College • Lafayette River Annex • Camp Elmore • Portsmouth Naval Hospital • St. Juliens Creek Annex • US Coast Guard Station near Craney Island • Craney Island US Naval Supply Center • Joint Expeditionary Base Little Creek – Fort Story • Naval Air Station Oceana • Dam Neck Naval Base • Virginia National Guard Camp Pendleton • Naval Auxiliary Field Fentress • Langley Air Force Base • NASA Langley Research Center • Fort Eustis

28 USDOT. 2010. Highway Evacuations in Selected Metropolitan Areas: Assessment of Impediments. Retrieved from http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/eto_tim_pse/reports/2010_cong_evac_study/index.htm

Attachment 12


October 28, 2015 13

• Camp Peary • Yorktown Naval Weapons Station • Naval Supply Center Cheatham Annex

Currently, the only access to the Navy installations from I-564 is via the Gate 3A interchange and via the I-564 terminus where it transitions to Admiral Taussig Boulevard. I-564 currently terminates at Admiral Taussig Boulevard that continues northwest toward the NAVSTA Norfolk Docks. The NAVSTA Norfolk Docks are currently only accessed via local roads northwest of the I-564 terminus. However, several projects are underway to improve their access. As mentioned above, the I-564 Intermodal Connector project will provide the NAVSTA Norfolk Docks, and Navy Gates 1, 2, 3A and 5 direct access to I-564 via a new alignment and interchange (“Air Terminal Interchange”), and relocating Navy Gate 6.

US Navy comments on previous studies involving the HRCS and HRBT indicate military missions and operations in Hampton Roads have substantially changed since the 2001 HRCS FEIS as security is a greater need today. Major realignment of missions affecting the distribution of Navy personnel and logistics have occurred as well29. The US Navy considers the severe congestion at the HRBT, on I-564, and other study routes as impairing the Navy mission and mobility.

Approximately 150,000 military and civilian personnel are located at military installations in the Hampton Roads region. In its 2011 Hampton Roads Military Transportation Needs Study, HRTPO reported that transportation congestion on the HRBT may hinder the ability to maintain or bring additional military personnel to the region, increases travel times between military installations during business hours, and detracts from mission performance effectiveness and efficiency30. Congestion on other STRAHNET roadways, including I-664, I-564, and Route 164, coupled with the limited number of major crossings over Hampton Roads also impede military mobility.

The majority of military personnel live off base and face a daily commute throughout the region. Additionally, daily occupational duties require travel in between any number of the military installations found throughout Hampton Roads and other installations in Virginia and the District of Columbia. Efficient military operations require a sufficient transportation network so that cargo and personnel can be moved as quickly and as safely as possible.

In addition, the Ports for National Defense (PND) Program identifies and assesses the adequacy and responsiveness of defense-important infrastructure at ports that support DoD deployments. The PND Program has identified the Port of Virginia as one of the designated strategic seaports on the east coast; specifically, the NIT, Newport News and Portsmouth Marine terminals31. STRAHNET roadways into these terminals are severely congested at peak travel times, adversely affecting military mobility.

Military mobility is currently impeded by insufficient local transportation infrastructure in the study area. In 2009, the HRTPO was notified by the military that congestion and delays at bridges and tunnels hurt mission performance effectiveness and efficiency. In fiscal year 2013, the Navy’s total direct economic impact to the Hampton Roads region was $9.1 billion32. Based on the role and the presence of the military in the region, previous studies recommend giving priority to transportation projects that improve severe congestion on the roadways serving the military33.

29US Department of the Navy. 2012. Letter to VDOT. May 11, 2012. 30 HRTPO. 2011. Hampton Roads Military Transportation Needs Study: Highway Network Analysis, HRTPO T11-4. Retrieved from http://hrtpo.org/uploads/docs/Military%20Transportation%20Needs%20-%20Highway%20Network%20Analysis%20Final%20Report.pdf. 31 HRTPO. 2011. Hampton Roads Military Transportation Needs Study: Highway Network Analysis, HRTPO T11-4. Retrieved from http://hrtpo.org/uploads/docs/Military%20Transportation%20Needs%20-%20Highway%20Network%20Analysis%20Final%20Report.pdf. 32 Department of the Navy, Navy Region Mid-Atlantic Public Affairs Office. 2015. Navy Releases New Economic Impact Report for Hampton Roads area. 33 HRTPO. 2012. Hampton Roads Military Transportation Needs Study: Military Commuter Survey. HRTPO T12-11. Retrieved from http://hrtpo.org/page/technical-reports/.

Attachment 12


14 October 28, 2015

1.4.8 Increase Access to Port Facilities

The Port of Virginia is a hub port. Close to 30 international shipping lines offer direct service to and from Virginia, with connections to 200 plus countries around the world. The port has approval to dredge its harbor channels to 55 feet, the only port on the east coast to do so34. Recently the Port of Virginia in cooperation with the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) launched a three-year feasibility study for the deepening of the federal navigation channel that passes through Hampton Roads Harbor and the Elizabeth River35. The Port is able to serve the largest cargo vessels in the world because of its naturally deep harbor and no overhead restrictions.

Figure 6 shows the state-owned and major privately held ports in the Hampton Roads area. In the study area, the Port of Virginia moves freight through Hampton Roads at the NIT, Newport News Marine Terminal, and leases the Virginia International Gateway (formerly APM) Terminals facility in Portsmouth. It also manages the Port of Richmond and the Virginia Inland Port facility at Front Royal. In addition, a new marine terminal at Craney Island is expected to be operational in the late 2020’s/early 2030s36. The Virginia Port Authority also owns the Newport News Marine Terminal that handles break bulk cargo (i.e. individually loaded cargo) and the Portsmouth Marine Terminal. Major privately-held terminals in the region include Lambert’s Point Docks and Elizabeth River Terminals.

I-564 terminates at Admiral Taussig Boulevard that continues northwest toward the northern NIT. The north portion of NIT is currently only accessed via local roads northwest of the I-564 terminus; however, several projects are underway to improve its access. As mentioned above, the I-564 Intermodal Connector project will provide the port direct access to I-564 via a new alignment and interchange (“Air Terminal Interchange”). Another improvement under construction includes the Hampton Boulevard Grade Separation project that would eliminate conflicts at the at-grade railroad at Hampton Boulevard by going under the railroad.

During Fiscal Year 2015, the majority of containers passing through the port were transported by truck (64 percent), followed in frequency by rail (32 percent) and barge (4 percent)37. Approximately 17,000 freight trucks enter and exit Hampton Roads each weekday38. In 2015, traffic studies for the HRCS SEIS documented freight traffic comprises 3 percent of daily traffic at the HRBT and 6 percent of daily traffic at the MMMBT. HRTPO estimates 10 percent of all regional truck travel entered or exited the Port of Virginia terminals in the Hampton Roads region39. These freight trucks are not only impacted by regional congestion but contribute to it as well. Roadway congestion on the study routes adds to the operating costs of companies and shippers, impacting the economic competitiveness of the Port of Virginia and therefore Hampton Roads and the State of Virginia.

Predictably, the majority of truck delay both during the day and at peak travel times occurs on the interstates throughout the region, particularly at bridges and tunnels40. In 2015, approximately 2,600 trucks crossed between the Peninsula and the Southside daily via the HRBT and 3,700 via the MMMBT. Efficiency of truck travel through the HRBT and MMMBT is particularly hampered by congestion on these routes.

34 Port of Virginia. 2015. Letter to VDOT July 30, 2015. 35 Port of Virginia. 2015. In Drive to Deeper, Wider, Safer – US Army Corps, Port of Virginia Sign Cost-Sharing Agreement. June 15, 2015. Retrieved from http://www.portofvirginia.com/category/newsroom/. 36 Port of Virginia. 2015. Letter to VDOT July 30, 2015. 37Port of Virginia. 2015. Letter to VDOT July 30, 2015. 38 HRTPO. 2014. The State of Transportation in Hampton Roads 2014. T14-06. Retrieved from http://hrtpo.org/uploads/docs/State%20of%20Transportation%202014%20Final%20Report.pdf. 39 HRTPO. 2014. The State of Transportation in Hampton Roads 2014. T14-06. Retrieved from http://hrtpo.org/uploads/docs/State%20of%20Transportation%202014%20Final%20Report.pdf. 40 HRTPO. 2012. Hampton Roads Regional Freight Study, 2012 Update. HRTPO T12-12. Retrieved from http://www.hrtpo.org/page/technical-reports/

Attachment 12


October 28, 2015 15

Freight volumes are on a growth trend, as between 2013 and 2014, a 1.2 percent increase in general cargo tons occurred. Even more recently in Fiscal Year 2015, total cargo tonnage in Port of Virginia terminals in the area is up 7.0 percent from 201441. As discussed above, the primary method to move freight from the Port of Virginia is by truck, therefore, along with an increase in tonnage coming through the port is an increase in truck traffic and congestion42, although the percentage of freight in the port moved by rail has been increasing and is expected to continue to increase43. With the regional importance and location of the Port of Virginia, freight rail runs through almost every city in Hampton Roads. Two main freight rail corridors serve the Hampton Roads region, primarily on the Peninsula and the Southside. One corridor originates at the Newport News Marine Terminal and extends northwest up the Peninsula to Richmond. The other consists of feeder rails from the NIT, Portsmouth Marine Terminal, and Virginia International Gateway terminal (among other smaller terminals) leading west, joining either the Norfolk Southern Railroad heading northwest out of Suffolk along US 460 toward the Petersburg/Richmond area, or joining the CSX railroad heading west-southwest out of Suffolk. No rail water crossings over Hampton Roads waterway currently exist.

The NIT is particularly affected by congestion within the port facility itself, and because it is not yet directly linked to an interstate. The I-564 Intermodal Connector project and associated Air Terminal Interchange currently in progress will partially address this need for direct access to an interstate. However, truck traffic from the port will still have to contend with the same issues that freight traffic from the other ports have to deal with once they access the area interstates.

1.5 NEEDS: FUTURE CONDITIONS

1.5.1 Overview

There is a growing demand for capacity and accessibility on the roadways of Hampton Roads due to population and employment growth. Based on the most recent data, population along the study area alignments (I-64, I-564, I-664, Route 164) is anticipated to grow approximately 24 percent from about 104,000 in 2009 to 129,000 in 2040. The number of employed residents living adjacent to the study alignments is expected to increase nearly 27 percent from approximately 45,400 in 2009 to 57,500 in 204044. As this growth in the Hampton Roads region continues into the future, travel demand also will increase and the congested conditions described in Section 1.4.4 will intensify. Federal law (23 USC 109) suggests that interstate projects should accommodate the types and volumes of traffic anticipated for a 20-year period following approval of the plans, specifications, and estimates for the improvement. Thus, the design year has been established as 2040 for this study. Travel forecasting has been conducted to predict future traffic volumes and to identify associated transportation infrastructure needs. Table 1-5 shows the 2040 forecasted volumes on I-64, I-564, I-664, and Route 164 within the study area.

1.5.2 Accommodate Travel Demand

The population of Hampton Roads region is expected to increase from 1.7 million in 2010 to 2.04 million by 204045. Between 2015 and 2040, traffic volumes under the No Build conditions are forecasted to grow as shown in Table 1-5. Average annual daily traffic (AADT) at the HRBT is expected to increase 30 percent). Similarly, AADT is expected to increase 71 percent at the MMMBT, [insert data] percent on I-564, and [insert data] percent on Route 164 in the study area. 41 Port of Virginia. 2015. Letter to VDOT July 30, 2015. 42 HRTPO. 2012. Traffic Impact of an Inland Port in Hampton Roads. Retrieved from http://www.hrtpo.org/uploads/docs/Inland%20Port%20Facility%20Final%20Report.pdf. 43 HRTPO. 2014. The State of Transportation in Hampton Roads 2014. T14-06. Retrieved from http://hrtpo.org/uploads/docs/State%20of%20Transportation%202014%20Final%20Report.pdf. 44 HRTPO. 2013. 2009 to 2040 Traffic Analysis Zones and Socioeconomic Forecasts. Retrieved from http://www.hrtpo.org/page/travel-models-and-forecasts/ . 45 HRTPO. 2013. Hampton Roads 2040 Socioeconomic Forecast. Retrieved from http://www.hrtpo.org/page/travel-models-and-forecasts/ .

Attachment 12


16 October 28, 2015

Table 1-5: Preliminary Future (2040) No Build Traffic Volumes

Roadway Average Annual Daily Traffic

Volume

Eastbound (Southbound)

Westbound (Northbound)

AM PM AM PM I-64 (HRBT) 112,500 3,900 4,125 4,200 3,600

I-664 (MMMBT) 104,400 2,750 5,275 4,925 3.600 I-564 TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD

Route 164 TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD

1.5.3 Improve Transit Access

With the expected increase in population and travel demand, mass transit across the Hampton Roads waterway will become even more important in mitigating congestion and travel delay. Existing transit, however, would contend with even more congestion than experienced today. The 2011 Hampton Roads Transit Vision Plan46 foresees the need for multimodal transit by 2025, and beyond that, provides greater mobility options through an integrated high-capacity transit system. Transit modes needed include light rail, commuter rail, enhanced bus, bus rapid transit, and high speed ferry. The plan states regional transit corridors to connect activity centers throughout the Hampton Roads Region are needed, as are improving transit to underserved areas, and implementing travel demand management strategies to address congestion. Additional transit crossings of Hampton Roads Harbor are also identified as a need in this plan.

1.5.4 Increase Regional Accessibility

With existing deficient capacity throughout the study area and no viable detour routes at the HRBT or MMMBT, the ability to consistently maintain traffic flow will become increasingly difficult at these bridge-tunnels and along the study routes, based on 2040 forecasted traffic volumes.

With future increases in travel demand and traffic volumes, it will be more difficult to access regional and local travel destinations in the Hampton Roads area due to increasing congestion, travel time, and travel unreliability. Exceedance of capacity during peak periods will become progressively worse as illustrated in Table 1-5, particularly at the HRBT. Periods of recurring and nonrecurring congestion will become longer at the HRBT, as will the queues resulting from that congestion. Likewise, average travel speeds will decline further, resulting in longer and less reliable travel times. The ability to provide efficient transit services also will be further diminished.

On southbound I-664 toward the MMMBT north portal, increased traffic volumes merging from Terminal Avenue shortly before the tunnel portal would increase congestion. At I-564, the northbound queuing to exit via the Gate 3A interchange would progressively extend congestion toward the I-64 interchange. With completion of the new Port of Virginia at Craney Island, traffic volume, congestion, and travel unreliability will increase substantially on Route 164. Additionally, over time, the continued aging of the tunnel, bridge, and road infrastructure on the study routes will result in greater maintenance needs, increasing the frequency of periodic congestion. All of the above factors would continue to impair regional accessibility in the study area for the foreseeable future.

46 HRT/WATA/DRPT. 2011. Hampton Roads Regional Transit Vision Plan: Final Report. Retrieved from http://www.drpt.virginia.gov/media/1332/final_report_03-17-11.pdf.

Attachment 12


October 28, 2015 17

1.5.5 Address Geometric Deficiencies

There are no currently programmed comprehensive improvements to alleviate existing geometric deficiencies along I-64 or the substandard tunnel height of the HRBT westbound tunnel in the study limits. The existing bottlenecks caused by reduction in the number of lanes at the HRBT and MMMBT will become progressively worse due to substantially increased future traffic volumes, leading to even more severe congestion. Similarly, the height restriction of the HRBT westbound tunnel will continue to restrict and impede movements of vehicles that are taller than those limits. The substandard dimensions of shoulders along I-64 will continue to contribute to less efficient movement of traffic. While ongoing maintenance will be conducted as needed to preserve the structural integrity of existing facilities, the service life of these facilities cannot be extended indefinitely without more extensive rehabilitation or reconstruction. At I-564, design for the I-564 Intermodal Connector and new Air Terminal Interchange currently underway will provide modern up to date standards for that portion of I-564.

1.5.6 Enhance Emergency Evacuation Capability

The population of Hampton Roads is expected to increase from 1.7 million in 2010 to 2.04 million by 204047, an increase of 22 percent, resulting in the potential evacuation of higher volumes of people using designated evacuation routes during hurricanes and other emergency events. As described in the 2014 in-season hurricane preparedness review for Hampton Roads, future road networks should include considerations for improving the capacity and options for evacuating citizens from the region48. If the transportation network capacity does not accommodate the growth in population, the timely and efficient evacuation of the population will continue to be hampered.

1.5.7 Improve Strategic Military Connectivity

With growing traffic volumes that exceed capacity, future military mobility and connectivity will increasingly decline in the study area. This will substantially decrease access for commuters who work at the military installations in the study area. It will slow military travel between installations, and impact the efficient and timely movement of cargo and personnel during military operations, including at PND ports in the Hampton Roads area. Future needs include providing adequate capacity and reduced travel time and increased reliability for STRAHNET study routes.

1.5.8 Increase Access to Port Facilities

By 2040, trucks are expected to remain the primary mode of freight transportation in the region49. According to the FHWA Freight Analysis Framework, the overall tonnage of domestic goods that will be moved into, within, and out of Hampton Roads by truck is expected to increase 65 percent between 2010 and 204050. With freight volumes expected to substantially grow, trucks will further contribute to and be impacted by roadway congestion in the future51.

As the majority of cargo freight is moved via trucks, forecasted increases in traffic volumes with attendant increases in travel times and decreasing travel reliability on the study area interstates would decrease the efficient movement of goods and impede commerce in Hampton Roads. The Port of

47 HRTPO. 2013. Hampton Roads 2040 Socioeconomic Forecast. Retrieved from http://www.hrtpo.org/page/travel-models-and-forecasts/ . 48 Virginia Department of Emergency Management. 2014. In-Season Review of Hurricane Preparedness for Hampton Roads: Report to Governor Terence R. McAuliffe. Retrieved from http://www.vaemergency.gov/webfm_send/1022/GovernorsInSeasonReview-3SEPT2014Master.pdf. 49 HRTPO. 2014. The State of Transportation in Hampton Roads 2014. T14-06. Retrieved from http://hrtpo.org/uploads/docs/State%20of%20Transportation%202014%20Final%20Report.pdf 50 HRTPO. 2013. Existing and Future Truck Delay in Hampton Roads; Preparation for Project Prioritization. HRTPO T13-08. Retrieved from http://www.hrtpo.org/page/technical-reports/ 51 HRTPO. 2012. Traffic Impact of an Inland Port in Hampton Roads. Retrieved from http://www.hrtpo.org/uploads/docs/Inland%20Port%20Facility%20Final%20Report.pdf.

Attachment 12


18 October 28, 2015

Virginia has been positioning itself to be the dominant east coast port when the Panama Canal expansion (Panamax) is operational, likely in 2016. The Panamax project would double the capacity of the Panama Canal by 2016 and allow larger vessels through the canal. Port of Virginia is currently the only east coast port that is fully ready for the Panamax expansion because it has the appropriate channel depths for the deeper draft container ships and state-of-the art marine terminals52. As mentioned in Section 1.4.2 Travel Demand, the decision to ship freight from area ports by truck versus rail is constrained by factors that do not always provide the flexibility to readily shift modes, such as in response to increasing congestion on the study routes. A key factor in making the decision of which mode to ship is the reliability of water crossings in Hampton Roads53.

The transportation network will need to address increased truck traffic from the Port of Virginia expansion while addressing congestion and the need to improve travel time and reliability. Moreover, the unrestricted vessel air draft (i.e., no overhead obstructions) and cargo ship access to harbor anchorages would need to continue in the future.

2. PURPOSE AND NEED SUMMARY

The purpose of the HRCS is relieve congestion at the I-64 HRBT in a manner that improves accessibility, transit, emergency evacuation, and military and goods movement along the primary transportation corridors in the Hampton Roads region, including the I-64, I-664, I-564, and Route 164 corridors. The HRCS will address the following needs (in the order of presentation in the Purpose and Need section):

• Accommodate travel demand – capacity is inadequate on the study area alignments, contributing to congestion at the HRBT;

• Improve transit access – the lack of transit access across the Hampton Roads waterway; • Increase regional accessibility – limited number of water crossings and inadequate highway

capacity and severe congestion decrease accessibility; • Address geometric deficiencies – insufficient vertical and horizontal clearance at the HRBT

contribute to congestion; • Enhance emergency evacuation capability – increase capacity for emergency evacuation,

particularly at the HRBT; • Improve strategic military connectivity – congestion impedes military movement missions; and, • Increase access to port facilities – inadequate access to interstate highway travel in the study

area impacts regional commerce.

52 Port of Virginia. 2013. VPA 2040 Master Plan: Executive Summary. Retrieved from http://www.portofvirginia.com/pdfs/about/vpamasterplan052113.pdf 53 HRTPO. 2012. Traffic Impact of an Inland Port in Hampton Roads. Retrieved from http://www.hrtpo.org/uploads/docs/Inland%20Port%20Facility%20Final%20Report.pdf.

Attachment 12


ITEM #13: HAMPTON ROADS BRIDGE TUNNEL (HRBT) CONCEPT SCENARIOS: Robert Case, HRTPO

SUMMARY:

In conjunction with the current preparation of the Hampton Roads Crossing Study (HRCS) Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS), and in response to discussions at the October 2015 HRTPO Board meeting, HRTPO staff has prepared an analysis of traffic volumes, capacities, and improvements at the Hampton Roads Bridge Tunnel (HRBT). Dr. Robert Case, Principal Transportation Engineer, will brief the HRTPO Board on this item. BACKGROUND:

According to the SEIS website (www.hamptonroadscrossingstudy.org ), the current work being conducted by VDOT and FHWA on the SEIS will include “revisiting the three alternatives retained for analysis in the FEIS. They include:

• Improvements to the I-64 Hampton Roads Bridge Tunnel (HRBT) corridor from I-664 in Hampton to I-564 in Norfolk;

• Improvements to the I-64 HRBT corridor plus a new four-lane connection from the future I-564 Intermodal Connector in Norfolk to Route 164 in Portsmouth; and,

• [Third Crossing] improvements to the I-664 corridor from I-64 in Hampton to Bowers Hill including a new four-lane connection between I-664 and the future I-564 Intermodal Connector [Patriots Crossing] and a new connection along Craney Island to Route 164 in Portsmouth.

Additional and modified alternatives could also be considered, in addition to a No Build Alternative.” It is assumed that any proposed improvements to the HRBT corridor will be confined largely or entirely to existing right of way. HRTPO staff developed the HRBT concept scenarios to meet the existing right of way constraints.


ITEM #14: PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD Members of the public are invited to address the HRTPO Board. Each speaker is limited to three minutes. ITEM #15: SUBMITTED PUBLIC COMMENTS There was one submitted public comment. Any written public comments received after the preparation of this agenda will be distributed as a handout at the meeting. Attachment 15 ITEM #16: TRANSCRIBED PUBLIC COMMENTS FROM PREVIOUS HRTPO MEETING The transcribed public comments from the October 15, 2015 HRTPO Board meeting are attached. Attachment 16

1

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ HRTPO Public Comment ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ RE: Virginia Beach Survey Name: Frank Papcin Date: November 10, 2015 Subject: Virginia Beach Survey Public Comment Input (Via E-Mail) My name is Frank Papcin and I often make comments that I believe are true it's important to me that I'm right. I found out that the statement I made about 6.5 Million dollars for a survey came from the taxpayers of Virginia Beach. I was wrong and wish to apologize--no excuses--I was wrong. Thank you for your patience.

Attachment 15

Transcribed Public Comments from the October 15, 2015 HRTPO Board Meeting

One person requested to address the HRTPO Board at the October 15, 2015 Meeting. Chair Johnson asked her to limit her comments to three minutes.

Ms. Dianna Howard VBTP, VBTA, and TLP Hello. My name is Dianna Howard and I am the Vice-Chair of the Virginia Beach Tea Party. I’m on the Board of the Virginia Beach Taxpayer Alliance and I'm the Legislative Chair of the Tidewater Libertarian Party. I also spent 20 years in the military, half of it here in Hampton Roads, did two tours of duty at NOB and one at Dam Neck. After that, I spent ten years in Chesapeake dispatching truck drivers and a year in Newport News. So I'm well aware of the traffic and the problems in Hampton Roads. So you would think the organizations I'm associated with would not have been for raising taxes for Hampton Roads for transportation, but we actually were for the raising of the sales tax for that. Speaking of that, the Hampton Roads Transportation Fund is supposed to be used for roads, bridges, and tunnels. Somebody over here asked if you had any idea where you were going to ask for this transit funding. Attachment 10 in your handout here says you are supporting using the Hampton Roads Transportation Fund for transit. No. Roads, bridges and tunnels. Transit uses roads, and the most important thing about roads is if we can't move services and goods to market, we lose businesses and jobs. You raised our taxes for roads, bridges and tunnels. That is what we expect you to spend the money on. You're sitting here concerned about that, and the other thing is you want to have the chief elected officer have somebody else be in their place. If this is supposed to be a government closest to the people, the chief elected officer, our mayor, should not be replaced by somebody else. It's supposed to be – we can vote him out if we don't like what he's doing here. Now, in Virginia Beach, if he put another councilman here there, we could vote them out because we all vote for the city council and our mayor. Other cities do not do that. Norfolk does not do that. If Mayor Fraim had somebody else on city council come here, they couldn't vote that person out. The other thing is it sidesteps a conflict of interest. If there's something to vote on and that mayor says, oh, I have an interest in that, I have stock in that or whatever, send somebody else there, that side steps that. As far as the city, the county supervisors, I don't know what to do about you guys. I didn't even know about you switching around like that, and I'm out of time. Unbelievable. Thank you, ma'am.

Attachment 16


ITEM #17: APPROVAL OF CONSENT ITEMS A. MINUTES

Minutes of the HRTPO Board meeting held on October 15, 2015 are attached. Attachment 17-A RECOMMENDED ACTION:

Approve the minutes.

HRTPO Board Meeting Summary Minutes – October 15, 2015 – Page 1 Prepared by K. Grauberger

Hampton Roads Transportation Planning Organization (TPO) Board Summary Minutes of October 15, 2015

The Hampton Roads TPO Board Meeting was called to order at 10:40 a.m. in the Regional Board Room, 723 Woodlake Drive, Chesapeake, Virginia, with the following in attendance: HRTPO Voting Members in Attendance: McKinley Price, Chair (NN) Linda T. Johnson, Vice-Chair (SU) Alan P. Krasnoff (CH) Ella Ward (Alternate, CH) Barry Cheatham (FR) George Wallace (HA) Mary Jones (JC) Paul D. Fraim (NO) Kenneth I. Wright (PO) Herbert Green (Alternate, PQ) Barry Porter (SH)

William D. Sessoms (VB) Clyde Haulman (WM) Thomas Shepperd (YK) Delegate Chris Stolle (GA) Senator Frank Wagner (GA)* Delegate David Yancey (GA) William E. Harrell (HRT) James Utterback (VDOT) Cathie France (Alternate, VPA) Jamie Jackson (Alternate, WATA)

HRTPO Nonvoting Members in Attendance: Wanda Barnard-Bailey (Alternate, CH) Randy Martin (FR) Sanford B. Wanner (GL) Brian DeProfio (Alternate, HA) Anne Seward (IW) Bryan Hill (JC) James Bourey (NN) Marcus Jones (NO) Lydia Pettis Patton (PO)

J. Randall Wheeler (PQ) Michael Johnson (SH) Patrick Roberts (SU) James K. Spore (VB)* Marvin Collins (WM) Neil Morgan (YK) Greg Edwards (CTAC) Arthur Moye (FTAC) Captain Robert Geis (U.S. Navy)

HRTPO Executive Director: Robert A. Crum, Jr.

CTB Participant: John Malbon Other Participants: Grindly Johnson (Commonwealth of Virginia) Amber Randolph (Willcox & Savage, PC) HRTPO Voting Members Absent: John C. Meyer (GL) Dee Dee Darden (IW) W. Eugene Hunt (PQ) Jennifer Mitchell (DRPT)

Senator Mamie Locke (GA) John Reinhart (VPA) William C. Porter, Jr. (WATA)

Attachment 17-A


HRTPO Nonvoting Members Absent: James E. Baker (CH) Mary Bunting (HA) Jeffrey Breeden (FAA) Irene Rico (FHWA) Ivan Rucker (FHWA) Tony Cho (FTA)

Terry Garcia-Crews (FTA) Col. William Galbraith (Langley-Eustis) Wayne Shank (NAA) Ken Spirito (PAC) Randall P. Burdette (VDOA)

HRTPO Staff: Camelia Ravanbakht Rob Case Kathlene Grauberger Michael Kimbrel John Mihaly

Brian Miller Kendall Miller Keith Nichols Joe Paulus Dale Stith

*Late arrival or early departure Others Recorded Attending: Chris Snead (HA); Jamie Oliver (IW); Britta Ayers, Bryan Stilley, Jerri Wilson (NN); Thelma Drake, Bryan Pennington, Jeff Raliski (NO); Bob Baldwin, Sherri Neil (PO); Leroy Bennett, Eric Nielson (SU); Angela Bezik, Bob Matthias (VB); Senator John Cosgrove (Senate of Virginia); Michael King, Rhonda Murray (U.S. Navy); Karen McPherson (McPherson Consulting); Jeff Florin (VPA); Dennis Heuer (RK&K); Bert Ramsay (Lane Construction); Jay Evans (Cambridge Systematics); Chuck Eastman (Michael Baker International); Mark Geduldig-Yatrofsky (Porsmouthcitywatch.org); Scott Lovell (WSP/Parson Brinckerhoff); Will Christopher (HRPTA); Ellis W. James (Sierra Club and NEC Observer); Frank Papcin (CTAC); Dianna Howard (VBTP, VBTA, TLP); Tony Gibson, Dawn Odom, Eric Stringfield (VDOT); Kevin Page (HRTAC); Cathy Aiello (Aiello Enterprises); Kelli Arledge, Jennifer Coleman, Nancy Collins, Andrea Gayer, Randy Keaton, Mike Long, Joe Turner, Chris Vaigneur (HRPDC Staff) Election of HRTPO Board Officers Mayor Paul Fraim, HRTPO Nominating Committee Chair, reported the HRTPO Board Bylaws state that the HRTPO Board election of officers is to take place during the first meeting after October 1st of each year. He stated the HRTPO Nominating Committee recommends Mayors Linda Johnson and George Wallace for the positions of HRTPO Chair and Vice-Chair with HRTPO Executive Director Robert Crum as Secretary. Mayor Fraim Moved to approve the nominations of Mayors Linda Johnson and George Wallace as HRTPO Chair and Vice-Chair, and Mr. Robert Crum as Secretary; seconded by Mayor McKinley Price. The Motion Carried.

Attachment 17-A


Approval of Agenda Chair Linda Johnson asked for any additions or deletions to the agenda. Hearing none, Mayor Price Moved to approve the agenda as written; seconded by Mr. Herbert Green. The Motion Carried. Executive Director Report Mr. Robert Crum, HRTPO Executive Director, reported that HRTPO staff submitted three House Bill (HB) 2 applications, which were approved and endorsed by the HRTPO Board last month. He stated the HRTPO Legislative Agenda briefing will occur later in the agenda and will include both state and federal legislative priorities. He noted the December HRPDC and HRTPO Board meetings will be cancelled; however, in their place will be a Legislative Forum composed of HRPDC and HRTPO members, the Hampton Roads General Assembly Delegation, and the Hampton Roads Congressional Delegation. The purpose of this first ever regional legislative forum is to have HRPDC and HRTPO members present the region’s legislative priorities and engage the Delegations in conversation before the start of the General Assembly session. He noted that a Save-the-Date email will be transmitted to all Board members in the coming week. Employee Recognition Mr. Robert Crum, HRTPO Executive Director, recognized the following employees for their outstanding service to the HRTPO and reaching milestone anniversaries during the past year: Kendall Miller, Public Involvement and Title VI Administrator – 5 year employee Kathlene Grauberger, Senior Administrative Assistant – 10 year employee Brian Miller, Senior Web and Graphics Designer – 15 year employee

Workshop Agenda Commonwealth Transportation Board Member (CTB) Comments and Updates Mr. John Malbon, CTB Member, reported that the CTB postponed its monthly meeting until later this month after the Governor’s Transportation Conference. Virginia Department of Transportation Mr. James Utterback of VDOT reported the State received 321 HB2 applications totaling approximately $7 billion with 45 of those applications from Hampton Roads. He stated VDOT plans to have its Fall public meeting on the Six-Year Improvement Program (SYIP) on November 10, 2015 from 4:30 p.m. – 6:30 p.m. in the Regional Building Boardroom. The meeting will be presented as a Town Hall meeting.

Attachment 17-A


Mr. Utterback indicated construction should begin next month with regards to Segment I of the I-64 Peninsula Widening project. Segment II of the project should be awarded for construction sometime in December. Lastly, he noted that VDOT has almost completed the paving rehabilitation on Southside I-64 and I-264. Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation There was no representative from the Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation in attendance. However, Mr. Robert Crum, HRTPO Executive Director reported that Ms. Jennifer Mitchell, DRPT Director, will be briefing the HRTPO Board in November regarding the Richmond to Hampton Roads Tier II EIS and Norfolk Trains 2 and 3. Military Liaisons Comments and Updates Captain Robert Geis of the U.S. Navy expressed his appreciation for VDOT’s work on the pavement rehabilitation on I-64 and I-264. Lt. Col. David Norton of Langley-Eustis had no comments. Hampton Roads Transportation Accountability Commission (HRTAC) Update Mr. Kevin Page, HRTAC Executive Director, expressed his appreciation to the HRTPO for its House Bill 2 applications. He stated the HRTAC agenda for today’s meeting includes approval consideration for the amended HRTAC bylaws and thanked Mayor Fraim and the HRTAC Bylaws Committee for their efforts. He noted that HRTAC is moving forward with its FY15 budget amendments, FY16 Budget, and the hiring of Bond Counsel. He invited the HRTPO Board members to the Governor’s Transportation Conference on October 29, 2015 for the “HRTAC Now” Breakout Session. HRTPO Legislative Ad-hoc Committee Report Dr. Camelia Ravanbakht, HRTPO Deputy Executive Director, reported the HRTPO Legislative Ad-hoc Committee met on September 25, 2015 to discuss legislative priorities for the draft 2016 Legislative Agenda for HRTPO Board consideration and submission to the Hampton Roads Caucus of the General Assembly and the Hampton Roads Congressional Delegation. Dr. Ravanbakht reviewed the following state level legislative priorities:


• Identification of a dedicated source of funding for public transportation for the Hampton Roads region.

Attachment 17-A


• Amendment of HRTAC enabling legislation to allow the use of HRTF monies for HRTAC staff and administration expenses.

• Amendment of HRTAC enabling legislation to allow the CEO of a locality to designate another member of the council or board of supervisors to cast votes for the CEO on behalf of the locality at HRTAC meetings in the event of an emergency that prevents the CEO of a locality from attending an HRTAC meeting.

• Pursuit of federal/state funding for Trains 2 and 3 to Norfolk.

• Amendment of HB 1402 (Highway maintenance: payments to City of Richmond for moving-lanes converted to bicycle lanes) to include any local government.

(Mr. Jim Spore arrives) Mr. Robert Crum, HRTPO Executive Director reviewed the three following Federal legislative priorities:


• Support Congressional approval for the Marketplace Fairness Act (MFA).

• Support Congressional recognition of regions that increased local taxes to bridge the gap between federal transportation funding and regional transportation infrastructure needs by providing bonus funding to these metropolitan regions.

Mayor Paul Fraim asked if a decision today by the HRTPO would impact any future decisions regarding the HRTAC enabling legislation, noting that the Bond Counsels interviewed stated that changes to the legislation would be helpful in acquiring bonds. Dr. Ravanbakht replied the HRTPO 2016 Legislative Agenda is on the agenda for Board approval. Chair Johnson asked HRTPO Counsel for a possible solution. Ms. Amber Randolph, HRTPO Counsel, replied that HRTAC is considering its own legislative agenda and indicated that this issue could be incorporated into it. Mr. Crum commented that the HRTPO Board could endorse the HRTAC related items today and as the HRTPO and HRTAC work collaboratively over the next month, any legislative addendums could be brought forth to the HRTPO Board at its November meeting. Mr. Tom Shepperd expressed concern with the HRTAC voting structure as it pertains to County representation. He noted that Mayors are elected for four-year terms and have the opportunity to become familiar with the transportation planning process; whereas, the Chair of the County Board of Supervisors rotates every year placing the counties at a disadvantage. He suggested the legislative priority regarding HRTAC representation be

Attachment 17-A


modified to reflect the counties’ ability to elect a member from their Board of Supervisors to serve continually on the HRTAC. Mr. Shepperd also expressed concern regarding the section of I-64, outside of both the HRTPO and the Richmond TPO boundaries, that is currently not scheduled to be widened at any future date. He stated this section of I-64 is the most intensely traveled rural interstate system in the state of Virginia and recommended the HRTPO advocate for the widening of this portion of I-64 in its legislative agenda. Ms. Mary Jones suggested deferring the approval of the HRTPO 2016 Legislative Agenda until next month since more discussion was needed. She questioned the HRTPO’s support of the Marketplace Fairness Act (MFA) and noted this Act is another tax burden for the citizens. Ms. Cathie France inquired as to the origin of the dedicated public transit source and expressed concern that funding may be diverted from other revenue sources. Dr. Ravanbakht replied that the HRTPO Legislative Ad-hoc Committee recommended re-engaging the Passenger Rail Task Force for future discussion. Ms. France asked to be included in that discussion. Dr. Ravanbakht replied affirmatively. Mr. Crum thanked the HRTPO Board members for their input and proposed deferring action on the HRTPO 2016 Legislative Agenda until the Legislative Ad-hoc Committee convened again to discuss the matters from today’s meeting. He indicated that HRTPO staff would bring the Legislative Agenda back to the HRTPO Board for approval in November. Mayor Fraim stated that the “emergency” language in the HRTAC legislative priority was too harsh and recommended using softer language. Hampton Roads Regional Priority Projects Status Update Mr. Tony Gibson, VDOT HRTAC Project Manager, reported the HRTPO Board approved a list of nine projects at its October 17, 2013 meeting to be funded wholly or in part with the Hampton Roads Transportation Fund (HRTF). He commented that since July of 2014, the Hampton Roads Transportation Accountability Commission (HRTAC) has been working toward moving the projects forward into the construction phase. (Senator Frank Wagner arrives) He indicated that to date, the HRTAC has allocated $352 million from the Hampton Roads Transportation Fund (HRTF) to five of the nine projects and noted the HRTPO Board has submitted three of the regional priority projects for consideration under the HB2 Statewide Project Prioritization Process.

Attachment 17-A


Mr. Gibson presented a status update for each of the following nine Hampton Roads Regional Priority projects:

• I-64 Peninsula Widening Segment I • I-64 Peninsula Widening Segment II • I-64 Peninsula Widening Segment III • I-64 Interchange at Fort Eustis Boulevard • I-64/I-264 Interchange • I-64 Southside Widening including High-Rise Bridge • Hampton Roads Third Crossing: includes Patriots Crossing with the Craney Island

Connector and the I-664 Widening • U.S. Route 460/58/13 Connector

Mr. William Harrell, HRT President and CEO, stated that transit was clearly defined as an element of the Hampton Roads Crossing Study (HRCS) in the original Record of Decision (ROD). He commented that while VDOT and FHWA are lead agencies for the upcoming HRCS Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS), no transit organization is represented. Therefore, he requested that the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) be considered as a cooperating agency for the HRCS SEIS. Deputy Secretary Grindly Johnson acknowledged that there has not been sufficient communication regarding the HRCS SEIS; hence, the Secretary’s office is working on a comprehensive communication plan that will roll out within the next few weeks. Hampton Roads 2040 Long-Range Transportation Plan: Candidate Project Evaluation Title VI-Environmental Justice Methodology Chair Johnson reported that due to time constraints, this item will be deferred to next month. Freight Transportation Advisory Committee: 2016 Goals and Objectives Mr. Art Moye, Co-Chair of the HRTPO Freight Transportation Advisory Committee (FTAC), reported that as an advisory committee of the HRTPO, FTAC advises the HRTPO Board on regional freight transportation requirements, conducts public outreach activities that assist in the HRTPO efforts to help raise awareness of the importance of freight transportation to the region, and collects region-wide public input on these matters. Mr. Moye stated that FTAC prepares a list of goals and objectives annually in the form of an FTAC Resolution which has been submitted to the HRTPO Board for endorsement under Agenda Item #18-K.

Attachment 17-A


Economic Assessment of Tolls on Freight Transportation in the Hampton Roads Region Mr. Jay Evans of Cambridge Systematics, Inc. reported that in 2011, the HRTPO Board approved an allocation of $400,000 in Regional Surface Transportation Program (RSTP) funds for an economic analysis of freight movements. The HRTPO Freight Transportation Advisory Committee (FTAC) engaged Cambridge Systematics, Inc., to conduct the study. Mr. Evans stated the study overview as follows:

• Analyze the economic trade-offs of the benefits of transportation infrastructure investments and tolls as a way to pay for the investments

• Focus on competitiveness of freight transportation in the region Cambridge Systematics’ research included:

• Stakeholder Interviews • Benchmark Assessment • Freight Cost Analysis

Key findings from the study are as follows:

• Freight rates in the region are generally competitive with peer ports • Cost of doing nothing is significant – $974 million in 2040 • Based on current tolling rates, industry will be better off building new capacity with

tolls than continuing in a business as usual mode • Consideration should be given to mitigation of tolling costs such that regional trips

do not absorb an unfair portion of the costs of an enhanced transportation network Mr. Evans stated the draft report is currently under public review and the final report will be for HRTPO Board consideration in November.

Meeting Agenda Public Comment Period Ms. Dianna Howard, representing the VBTP, VBTA, and the TLP, addressed the HRTPO regarding the HRTPO 2016 Draft Legislative Agenda.

A transcription of the public comments made orally during this HRTPO Board meeting will be included in the HRTPO Agenda each month. The transcript will also be posted on the HRTPO website when available.

Attachment 17-A


Submitted Public Comments Chair Johnson reported there were no submitted public comments in the Agenda packet. Consent Agenda The Consent Agenda, as listed in the Agenda Packet, is as follows:

• Minutes • HRTPO Financial Statement • FY 2015-2018 TIP Revision – CMAQ Transfer Request: Chesapeake • HRTPO 2016 Legislative Agenda – HRTPO Board Resolution 2015-11 • Transportation Alternatives Program: Endorsement of Project Proposals • Volumes, Speeds, and Congestion on Major Roadways in Hampton Roads • HB2: HRTPO Resolutions of Support: HRT & Isle of Wight County • HRTPO Citizen Transportation Advisory Committee: Membership • Hampton Roads 2040 LRTP: Candidate Project Evaluation Title VI/EJ Methodology • Freight Transportation Advisory Committee – 2016 Goals and Objectives • FY 2015-2018 TIP Amendment: VDOT

Mr. Harrell Moved to approve the consent agenda as amended with the deferral of Agenda Item 18-D: HRTPO 2016 Legislative Agenda – HRTPO Board Resolution 2015-11 and Agenda Item #18-I: Hampton Roads 2040 LRTP: Candidate Project Evaluation Title VI/EJ Methodology; seconded by Mayor Wright. The Motion Carried. HRTPO Board Three-Month Tentative Schedule Chair Johnson outlined the HRTPO Board three-month tentative schedule included in the Agenda Packet. Correspondence of Interest Chair Johnson highlighted the Correspondence of Interest section in the Agenda Packet. Minutes of HRTPO Committee Meetings Chair Johnson noted there were summary minutes from the Transportation Technical Advisory Committee (TTAC) included in the Agenda packet. For Your Information Chair Johnson summarized the items in the For Your Information section of the Agenda packet.

Attachment 17-A


Old/New Business Mr. Robert Crum, HRTPO Executive Director, announced that HRTAC will convene in approximately 30 minutes and requested the room be cleared in order to allow HRTPO staff to reset the boardroom. Adjournment With no further business to come before the Hampton Roads TPO, the meeting adjourned at 12:05 p.m.

Mayor Linda Johnson Robert A. Crum, Jr.

Chair Executive Director/Secretary

Attachment 17-A


B. HRTPO FINANCIAL STATEMENT

The Statement of Revenues and Expenditures for the activities of September 2015 is attached. This statement reflects the financial status of the HRTPO as a whole. Attachment 17-B RECOMMENDED ACTION:

Accept the HRTPO Financial Statement.

REVENUESAnnual Budget

Previous YTD

Current Month YTD

% Received /Expended

VDOT-PL SEC 112 FEDERAL 1,962,404$ -$ -$ -$ 0%VDOT-PL SEC 112 STATE 245,301 - - - 0%VDOT-PL SEC 112 LOCAL 245,301 - - - 0%HRT MATCH 32,016 - - - 0%WAT MATCH 24,706 - - - 0%STATE PASS-THROUGH 56,722 - - - 0%FEDERAL PASS-THROUGH 453,781 - - - 0%HRTAC 95,000 - - - 0%VDRPT 5303 FEDERAL 365,201 - - - 0%VDRPT 5303 STATE 45,650 - - - 0%VDRPT 5303 LOCAL 45,650 - - - 0%SP&R 72,500 - - - 0%RSTP 10,000 - - - 0%Total Revenue 3,654,232$ -$ -$ -$ 0%

EXPENSESPERSONNEL 1,766,653$ 263,771$ 152,878$ 416,649 24%CONTRACTUAL 30,000 - - - 0%SPECIAL CONTRACTS 408,488 638 2,619 3,257 1%OFFICE SERVICES 126,936 22,717 2,739 25,456 20%PASS THROUGH EXPEND 567,225 - 73,323 73,323 13%INDIRECT COSTS 754,930 116,728 69,931 186,659 25%

Total Expenses 3,654,232$ 403,854$ 301,489$ 705,343$ 19%

AGENCY BALANCE -$ (403,854)$ (301,489)$ (705,343)$

25% OF FISCAL YEAR COMPLETE

HRTPOFISCAL YEAR 2016

9/30/2015STATEMENT OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES

Attachment 17-B


C. FY 2016 BUDGET AMENDMENTS

There was an additional unanticipated carry over in funding for the FTA 5303 FY-2015 grant, both in federal grant funding and the state match. This amendment increases the FY-2016 grant to reflect these carry over funds. FTA 5303 Federal Grant and State Matching funds: FY-2015 FTA 5303 funding anticipated to be expended in FY-2015 carried over into FY-2016. Attachment 17-C RECOMMENDED ACTION:

Approve the budget amendment for this period.

HAMPTON ROADS TRANSPORTATION PLANNING ORGANIZATIONFY2016 BUDGET

APPROVED TPO TPO CURRENT NEW TPO TPOAMENDED PASS-THRU OPS AMENDMENT AMENDED PASS-THRU OPS

REVENUESOPERATIONS

FEDERAL GRANTS 2,400,457 2,400,457 43,007 2,443,464 2,443,464STATE GRANTS 339,058 339,058 5,376 344,434 344,434LOCAL:

Member Dues 306,058 306,058 5,376 311,434 311,434TOTAL OPERATIONS 3,045,573 0 3,045,573 53,759 3,099,332 0 3,099,332PASS-THROUGH FUNDS

FEDERAL GRANTS 453,781 453,781 453,781 453,781STATE GRANTS 56,721 56,721 56,721 56,721

TOTAL PASS-THROUGH FUNDS 510,502 510,502 0 0 510,502 510,502 0TOTAL REVENUE 3,556,075 510,502 3,045,573 53,759 3,609,834 510,502 3,099,332

EXPENDITURESPERSONNEL 2,327,040 2,327,040 2,327,040 2,327,040STANDARD CONTRACTS 114,547 114,547 114,547 114,547SPECIAL CONTRACTS 43,531 43,531 43,531 43,531PASS-THROUGH ACTIVITY 510,502 510,502 0 510,502 510,502 0OPERATING SCHEDULES 224,346 224,346 224,346 224,346CONTINGENCIES/RESERVES 336,109 336,109 53,759 389,868 389,868

TOTAL EXPENDITURES 3,556,075 510,502 3,045,573 53,759 3,609,834 510,502 3,099,332

Attachment 17-C


D. FY 2015-2018 TIP REVISION – RSTP AND CMAQ TRANSFER REQUEST: SUFFOLK

Attached is a request from the City of Suffolk to transfer available funds from two completed City projects to cover a cost increase on a third, active Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program (CMAQ) project. Since a portion of the available funding is Regional Surface Transportation Program (RSTP) funds, the City has coordinated with the City of Newport News to swap $36,621 in RSTP funds for an equivalent amount of CMAQ funds. The specifics of the City’s request are described below:

• Transfer $36,621 FY 2011 RSTP funds, including state match, from the ITS Master Plan project (UPC 97726) in Suffolk to the Multimodal Station Relocation project (UPC 102734) in Newport News.

• Transfer $36,621 FY 2016 CMAQ funds, including state match, from the

Multimodal Station Relocation project (UPC 102734) in Newport News to the North Main Street Sidewalk project (UPC 99172) in Suffolk.

• Transfer $56,000 FY 2015 CMAQ funds, including state match, from the Harbour

View Area Traffic Signal Coordination project (UPC 100603) in Suffolk to the North Main Street Sidewalk project (UPC 99172) in Suffolk.

This request was made available for public review and comment from October 28, 2015 through November 11, 2015. The Transportation Technical Advisory Committee has recommended approval of the fund transfers and associated TIP amendment. Attachment 17-D RECOMMENDED ACTION:

Approve the RSTP and CMAQ fund transfers and the associated TIP amendment.

Attachment 17-D

Attachment 17-D


E. HRTPO 2016 LEGISLATIVE AGENDA – HRTPO BOARD RESOLUTION 2015-11

This item was presented under Workshop Agenda Item 10. RECOMMENDED ACTION:

Approve the resolution.


F. HRTPO PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN AND HRTPO TITLE VI/LEP PLAN

The HRTPO Public Participation Plan (PPP) and Title VI/Limited English Proficiency (LEP) Plan are designed as resources for the HRTPO Board, staff, and general public to better understand the Organization’s overall public participation strategy and procedures, as well as the federal mandates that guide HRTPO public participation efforts. They also address the responsibilities of the HRTPO under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and outline a strategy for the HRTPO to implement when working with all populations in Hampton Roads.

The current PPP and Title VI/LEP Plan were approved and adopted by the HRTPO Board on May 1, 2014.

Because the PPP and Title VI/LEP Plan are living documents that reflect changes in Federal law and mandates and new approaches to the transportation planning process, it is necessary for both Plans to be current and up-to-date. Therefore, the HRTPO staff has updated the HRTPO PPP and Title VI/LEP Plan. The draft documents were available for public review and comment from September 29, 2015 through November 15, 2015. The Transportation Technical Advisory Committee has recommended adoption of the plans. Please follow the link below to view the plans:

http://www.hrtpo.org/page/public-involvement RECOMMENDED ACTION:

Adopt the HRTPO Public Participation Plan and the HRTPO Title VI/LEP Plan.

http://www.hrtpo.org/page/public-involvement


G. HAMPTON ROADS 2040 LRTP: CANDIDATE PROJECT EVALUATION TITLE VI/EJ METHODOLOGY

The HRTPO is responsible for evaluating and monitoring compliance with applicable nondiscrimination authorities in all aspects of the HRTPO planning and programming processes. As part of these efforts, HRTPO staff has evaluated the 2040 LRTP Candidate projects via the HRTPO Title VI/Environmental Justice (EJ) Methodology.

This report summarizes the results of the Title VI/Environmental Justice evaluation of the 2040 LRTP candidate projects, including the details regarding the Title VI/EJ Methodology, EJ Impact Scores, EJ community locations, and outreach strategies. The report was made available for public review from May 6, 2015 through August 31, 2015. In addition to the public comment period, the report was presented to the Long-Range Transportation Plan Subcommittee, Transportation Technical Advisory Committee, Citizen Transportation Advisory Committee, and Environmental Justice Roundtable. All comments received have been addressed by staff. The final version of the report is enclosed. The Transportation Technical Advisory Committee has recommended approval of the final report.

Enclosure 17-G: Hampton Roads 2040 Long-Range Transportation Plan: Candidate

Project Evaluation Title VI/Environmental Justice Methodology

RECOMMENDED ACTION:

Approve the final report.


H. ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT OF TOLLS ON FREIGHT TRANSPORTATION IN THE HAMPTON ROADS REGION

In 2011, the HRTPO Board approved an allocation of $400,000 in Regional Surface Transportation Program (RSTP) funds for an economic assessment of freight movements in the Hampton Roads region. The study was conducted by Cambridge Systematics, Inc. The Freight Transportation Advisory Committee (FTAC) provided guidance to the consultant during the development of the study.

The purpose of this study was to determine the truck toll rate at which the increased cost to freight businesses outweighs the benefit of a proposed highway improvement. Knowledge of such truck toll “tipping points” will be valuable to decision-makers when planning highway infrastructure improvements that may involve tolls.

The draft report was presented during the October 2015 HRTPO Board meeting and was made available for public review and comment from October 7, 2015 through October 21, 2015. No comments were received. The final report is enclosed.

Enclosure 17-H: Economic Assessment of Tolls on Freight Transportation in the Hampton

Roads Region

RECOMMENDED ACTION:

Approve the report.


I. FTAC RESOLUTION: EQUITABLE TOLL ASSESSMENTS ON THE REGIONAL FREIGHT INDUSTRY

As an advisory committee of the HRTPO, the Freight Transportation Advisory Committee (FTAC) advises the HRTPO Board on regional freight transportation issues. FTAC approved a resolution detailing equitable toll assessments on the regional freight industry (attached) based on the results of the Economic Assessment of Tolls on Freight Transportation in the Hampton Roads Region report. Attachment 17-I RECOMMENDED ACTION:

Endorse the resolution.

HAMPTON ROADS TRANSPORTATION PLANNING ORGANIZATION FREIGHT TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE

FTAC RESOLUTION 2015-01 A RESOLUTION OF THE FREIGHT TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE OF THE HAMPTON ROADS TRANSPORTATION PLANNING ORGANIZATION RECOMMENDING POLICY DEVELOPMENT TO PROVIDE EQUITABLE TOLL ASSESMENTS ON THE FREIGHT INDUSTRY FOR REGIONAL AND NON REGIONAL FREIGHT MOVEMENTS. WHEREAS, as prescribed in the Hampton Roads Transportation Planning Organization (HRTPO) Bylaws, the HRTPO Freight Transportation Advisory Committee (FTAC) advises the HRTPO Board on regional freight transportation requirements, conducts public outreach activities that help HRTPO efforts to help raise awareness of the importance of freight transportation to the region, and collects region-wide public input on these matters; WHEREAS, the HRTPO and Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) have identified a program of improvements to maintain and enhance the performance and integrity of the region’s highway network over the coming decades to include more traditional projects included in the 2040 Long-Range Transportation Plan along with major regional projects associated being implemented by Hampton Roads Transportation Accountability Commission; WHEREAS, in response to the issue of how these improvements may be funded, the FTAC led an initiative to conduct an economic impact assessment on the effect of future and proposed tolls rates on retaining and attracting freight related businesses to Hampton Roads; WHEREAS, funded with HRTPO Regional Surface Transportation Program (RSTP) funds, the contract for the study was awarded to Cambridge Systematics, Inc. in April 2014; WHEREAS, completed in September 2015, the Economic Assessment of Tolls on Freight Transportation in the Hampton Roads Region analyzes the economic trade-offs of the benefits of transportation infrastructure investments and tolls as a way to pay for the investments, and addresses the following two questions:

• What are the impacts on freight traffic and the economy if the improvements are not made?

• What are the impacts on freight traffic and the economy if tolls are used to pay for the improvements?

WHEREAS, based on stakeholder interviews, a benchmarking analysis of competing port regions, and an analysis of future truck travel using the regional travel demand model, the study finds:

• Without the proposed major regional capacity projects, there will be an additional 4 million hours of truck delay in 2040.

Attachment 17-I

• The cost of doing nothing is significant and equates to $1.0 billion increase in trucking costs in 2040.

• The freight industry will have less costs if new capacity is constructed on key truck routes with tolls than the cost arising from doing nothing.

• Both tolls and congestion costs impact local trips more than trips originating or terminating outside the region.

WHEREAS, the study recommends:

• The region should consider the impact on the freight industry as they evaluate and prioritize capacity expansion projects. Evaluation of individual projects is required to better understand the trade-offs between congestion relief benefits and toll costs on the freight industry.

• The analysis indicates that a significant amount of the toll burden will fall on local truck trips. This has the potential to impact if and where businesses locate in the region. As plans move forward and toll rates are examined for each facility, the region should consider mitigation strategies. Strategies may include variable toll prices by user type, frequency of trip, and other local incentives that create equitable toll structure between local and non-local user.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that if tolls are considered as a funding source in Hampton Roads and policies are developed by the region, that FTAC participate in the process to ensure any tolls on the regional freight industry are equitable. APPROVED and ADOPTED by the HRTPO Freight Transportation Advisory Committee at its meeting on the 1st day of October, 2015.

Delegate Christopher P. Stolle Co-Chairperson

HRTPO Freight Transportation Advisory Committee

Arthur W. Moye, Jr. Co-Chairperson

HRTPO Freight Transportation Advisory Committee

Attachment 17-I


J. 2015 CMAQ/RSTP PROJECT SELECTION PROCESS – RECOMMENDED PROJECTS AND ALLOCATIONS

The Transportation Technical Advisory Committee (TTAC) met on November 4, 2015 to consider a set of recommended projects to receive allocations of FY 2022 Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program (CMAQ) funds and Regional Surface Transportation Program (RSTP) funds. The CMAQ and RSTP funding currently available through FY 2022 is shown below:

The Transportation Technical Advisory Committee has recommended approval of the RSTP/CMAQ projects and allocations as shown in the tables below.

CMAQ FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018 FY 2019 FY 2020 FY 2021 FY 2022

Available Funding $0 $12,540 $47,540 $47,540 $47,540 $82,540 $14,243,448

RSTP FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018 FY 2019 FY 2020 FY 2021 FY 2022

Available Funding $226,735 $70,476 $70,476 $70,476 $70,476 $70,476 $26,867,539

Recommended RSTP Projects and Allocations

ID/UPC# Jurisdiction Project DescriptionProposed Allocation

FY-22

T1404 HRT TRAFFIX Program $1,000,000

VB1RS Virginia Beach Elbow Road Extended - Phase 2 $13,612,795

VP1RS VPA Port of Virginia - Norfolk International Terminals Master Plan $150,000

SF3RS Suffolk Spieghts Spillway Bridge Replacement $1,350,000

IW2RS Isle of Wight Cty. Route 607 (Old Mill Road) Signalization $257,728

HT6RS HRT Bus Vehicle Replacement $2,432,027

HT1RS HRT Naval Station Norfolk Transit Extension Study FEIS/PE $6,000,000

CH1RS Chesapeake Study of Light Rail Extension to Chesapeake $2,000,000Total $26,802,550

Previously Approved Projects

Highway Projects

Non-Highway Projects


RECOMMENDED ACTION:

Approve the RSTP and CMAQ projects and allocations as shown in the tables above.

Recommended CMAQ Projects and Allocations

ID/UPC# Jurisdiction Project DescriptionProposed Allocation

FY-22

HR1CM HRT Bus Vehicle Replacement $3,349,302

WA4CM WATA WATA Transfer Station (HUB) $2,500,000

NF1CM Norfolk Norfolk Systemwide Signal Controller and System Upgrade $3,000,000

CH1CM Chesapeake Chesapeake Signal Timing & Incident Management Plans $150,000

VB4CM Virginia Beach Traffic Adaptive Corridor Implementation $390,000

NN2CM Newport News Briarfield Sidewalk $600,000

SF1CM Suffolk Suffolk TOC $50,000

NF2CM Norfolk Bus Shelters and Pedestrian Improvements $315,000

HM1CM Hampton Traffic Signal System Retimings $1,055,000

WA3CM WATA York County - Southeast - Demonstration Routes $597,977

SF2CM Suffolk Suffolk Citywide Signal Timings $140,000

VB1CM Virginia Beach Corridor Retiming - Kempsville Road and Newtown Area $521,180

NN1CM Newport News Warwick Boulevard Sidewalk Widening $500,000

VB3CM Virginia Beach Rosemont Road/South Plaza Trail Intersection Improvements $363,000

VB2CM Virginia Beach Independence Blvd./Edwin Drive Intersection Improvements $647,000Total $14,178,459

New CMAQ Projects with FY-22 Allocations


ITEM #18: HRTPO BOARD THREE-MONTH TENTATIVE SCHEDULE December 2015 Wednesday, December 16, 2015: 10:00 a.m. – 12:00 p.m.

• First Annual HRPDC/HRTPO Regional Legislative Forum Chesapeake Conference Center: 700 Conference Center Dr., Chesapeake, Virginia

Thursday, December 17, 2015: 10:30 a.m. – 12:00 p.m.

• The HRTPO Board meeting will be cancelled. January 2016 Thursday, January 21, 2016: 10:30 a.m. – 12:00 p.m.

• FY 2017 UPWP Planning Priorities • Sea Level Rise and Storm Surge Impacts to Roadways in Hampton Roads • Active Transportation Safety Study • Signature Paths • 2040 LRTP Update • HB2 Projects Update • Identifying Promising Intersections for High-Congestion-Benefit/Low-cost Improvements

February 2016 Thursday, February 18, 2016: 10:30 a.m. – 12:00 p.m.

This meeting will be cancelled due to the HRPDC Retreat.


ITEM #19: CORRESPONDENCE OF INTEREST

A. LETTER CONCERNING THE HRTPO 2016 FEDERAL PLANNING CERTIFICATION REVIEW

Attached is a letter, dated October 2, 2015, from The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA), to HRTPO Chair McKinley Price, regarding the quadrennial Federal Planning Certification Review of the transportation planning process for the Hampton Roads Transportation Planning Organization metropolitan planning area to be held March 29-31, 2016. Attachment 19-A

B. LETTER OF ANNOUNCEMENT REGARDING 2015 FALL TRANSPORTATION MEETINGS

Attached is a letter, dated October 27, 2015, from Mr. James Utterback, District Administrator, VDOT, to Mr. Robert A. Crum, Executive Director, HRTPO, announcing the meeting dates for the nine public meetings being held across the state in November 2015 by the Commonwealth Transportation Board (CTB). Attachment 19-B

Attachment 19-A

Attachment 19-A

Attachment 19-A

Attachment 19-B

Attachment 19-B

Attachment 19-B


ITEM #20: MINUTES OF HRTPO COMMITTEE MEETINGS A. FREIGHT TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE

The summary minutes of the June 30, 2015 meeting of the Freight Transportation Advisory Committee are attached. Attachment 20-A

B. HRTPO NOMINATING COMMITTEE

The summary minutes of the September 24, 2015 meeting of the HRTPO Nominating Committee are attached. Attachment 20-B

C. HRTPO LEGISLATIVE AD-HOC COMMITTEE

The summary minutes of the September 25, 2015 meeting of the Legislative Ad-Hoc Committee are attached.

Attachment 20-C

D. TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE

The summary minutes of the October 7, 2015 meeting of the Transportation Technical Advisory Committee are attached. Attachment 20-D

E. HRTPO LEGISLATIVE AD-HOC COMMITTEE

The summary minutes of the October 27, 2015 meeting of the Legislative Ad-Hoc Committee are attached. Attachment 20-E

FTAC June 30, 2015 | Meeting Minutes| Page 1

Freight Transportation Advisory Committee of the HRTPOMeeting Minutes

June 30, 2015The Virginia Port Authority

101 W Main St., #600, Norfolk, VA 235101:30 pm – 2:30 pm

Co-Chairman Arthur W. Moye, Jr. called the HRTPO Freight Transportation AdvisoryCommittee (FTAC) to order at 1:35 p.m. in the Waterside Conference Room at the VirginiaPort Authority, with the following in attendance:

MEMBERS:Amy Brown (The CrossGlobe Group)Arthur W. Moye, Jr. (Virginia Maritime Association) – Co-ChairpersonChris Luebbers (Norfolk Southern Corporation)Delegate Christopher P. Stolle (Virginia General Assembly) – Co-ChairpersonKeith Helton (Givens Transportation)Mike Abbott (COSCO Container Lines)Rick Morris (Canon Virginia, Inc.)

STAFF:Jeff Florin (Virginia Port Authority)Karen McPherson (McPherson Consulting)Rob Case (HRTPO)Dale Stith (HRTPO)Michelle Dieges (Port of Virginia)Paula Dowell (Cambridge Systematics, Inc.)

PUBLIC:Tom Cosgrove (NNS)Mack Frost (FHWA)Ivan Rucker (FHWA)Frank Papcin

Attachment 20-A


1. CALL TO ORDER

The meeting was called to order by Co-Chairman Moye at 1:35 p.m.

2. PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD

There were no public comments.

3. APPROVAL OF PREVIOUS MEETING’S MINUTES

Co-Chairman Moye indicated the FTAC Summary Minutes of the March 25, 2015 wereincluded in the agenda. He asked for corrections or amendments to the minutes.Hearing none, Mr. Abbott Moved to approve the minutes as written, seconded by Ms.Brown. The Motion Carried.

4. ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT OF THE IMPACT OF TOLLS ON FREIGHTTRANSPORTATION COSTS IN HAMPTON ROADS REGION

Ms. Dowell with Cambridge Systematics presented the preliminary findings of thefindings of the Economic Analysis of Freight Movements in the Hampton Roads study tothe FTAC. She provided a study overview that outlined how the benefits oftransportation infrastructure investment and tolls as a method to fund transportationprojects. Ms. Dowell indicated that the study will summarize the benefits from increasedcapacity, benefits of the freight community, and will not include benefits realized by theeveryday commuter. She also indicated that the study area included the MetropolitanStatistical Area and included freight-related data for the region not solely focused onport-related data.

Ms. Dowell’s presentation outlined three major sections of the study:

Stakeholder InputMs. Dowell stated that the focus on stakeholder interviews was to identifycongestion areas in the region outside of the physical port terminal. Intervieweesincluded shippers, carriers’ economic developers and real estate developers.Carriers noted a decrease in the number of turns as well as the increase of drayrates over the last 12 months, which is seen nationally. The Hampton Roads ThirdCrossing was identified as the biggest regional need. Economic developers notedqualified labor pool as a key factor.

Benchmarking AssessmentsMs. Dowell stated that the study team used manufacturing FAF codes forcomparison and further noted the proprietary data evaluated by Parson’s waslimited and did not provide sufficient number of data points to be used in theanalysis. In addition, to commodity data, the benchmarking evaluated distancetrip comparison between the Port of Virginia, New York/New Jersey, Baltimore,Charleston, and Savannah.

Attachment 20-A


Freight Cost AnalysisMs. Dowell indicated that the cost of truck analysis included four types of costs:VOT (Value of Time), VOC (Vehicle Operating Cost), Reliability (predictability oftrip), and Tolls. The VOT and VOC costs utilized standards published by AmericanTransportation Research Institute (ATRI) and were summarized in per mile andper hour cost. The future cost were generated using truck miles for the HRTPOregional modal and then applying the ATRI cost to each trip. As with any traveldemand model, there are subjective assumptions required in order to performmore subarea assessment on a per truck basis. Ms. Dowell reviewed several keyassumptions on toll rates, which trips were tolled and projects included in thefuture scenario.

Mr. Papcin asked if future truck growth associated with port growth was accounted for infuture projects. Ms. Dowell noted that specific growth for the port was not applied but isincluded as part of the assumptions for land use in the regional 2034 model.

The FWHA representative asked if future cost considered the change in fuel efficienciesand standards anticipated with newer vehicles. Ms. Dowell noted that while a validbenefits that level of detailed was not included in this study.

As part of the fuel efficiency discussion, it was mentioned that natural gas is starting to bean attractive fuel for areas in south Florida and is providing reduced truck cost. Mr. Moyeasked Mr. Helton if Givens Transportation is considering switching to this type of fuel inthe future. Mr. Helton indicated there had been no discussion of consider to mover tonatural gas.

Ms. Dowell provided summaries on two options, with each scenario outlining the fourtypes of cost associated with the regional truck trip and the non-regional truck trip.

2040 Business as usual with increase truck traffic and no capacity improvement. 2040 with Capacity improvements funded by tolls.

The initial evaluation illustrated a cost saving with the 2040 Capacity improvementfunded by tolls. However, under this scenario, the regional trip pays a larger percentageof the cost than the not regional trip. A preliminary “tipping point” was illustrated. Ms.Dowell noted that this is was regional cost per trips and that each user would have theirown metric of costs.

Ms. Dowell concluded that the preliminary findings indicated that freight rates for thePort of Virginia are competitive with peer ports. In addition, the cost of nothing issignificantly higher than adding capacity funded by tolls. Ms. Dowell also stated that thedraft study will be presented to the FTAC in August and that she will be available toaddress comments on some of the input assumptions.

Attachment 20-A


Based on the questions and assumptions identified during the discussion, Co-ChairmanMoye asked if the study was ready to be released. Mr. Florin noted given the dialogue inthe FTAC meeting, it would be more appropriate to delay the presentation to the TTACuntil the report and supplementary information have been reviewed and approved byFTAC.

5. UPDATE ON DRAFT 2040 LRTP

Ms. Stith provided the FTAC a status update on the HRTPO 2040 Long-RangeTransportation Plan (LRPT). The Plan is currently in Year 4 of the four-year processesand is nearing completion. The draft fiscally-constrained list of projects has beensubmitted to the HRTPO advisory committees a for review and comment as well as thepublic. Pending direction from the Hampton Roads Transportation AccountabilityCommission (HRTAC), additional projects will be added with the respecting fundingplans.

Ms. Stith indicated that as part of the 2040 LRTP, the HRTPO had assembled acompendium of reports:

Visioning Survey Report 2040 Socioeconomic Forecast and TAZ Allocations Committed and Candidate Transportation Projects Prioritization of Transportation Projects: Project Evaluation and Scoring Candidate Project Evaluation: Title VI and Environmental Justice Methodology Transportation Challenges and Strategies

Ms. Stith stated that the remaining 2040 LRTP products included the Funding Plan, PublicOutreach, Project Information Guide, Plan Performance Evaluation, and ExecutiveSummary.

Ms. Stith noted the FTAC participation in the review process and that freight is a largecomponent in the System Preservation, Safety and Security section of the Plan. Ms. Stithalso indicated that the six FTAC projects have been included in the draft plan:

Dominion Blvd Phase II [CH] J. Clyde Morris Blvd/G.W. Hwy (US 17) [NN] G.W. Mem Hwy (US 17) (Dare to Denbigh) [YK] Triple Decker Bridge (interchange of US 13, US 460, and NS Rail Line) [CH] Hampton Blvd at Terminal Blvd (NO) I-64 at Northampton Blvd (study) [NO/VB]

Ms. Stith provided an overview of the funding plan for the LRTP, 2040 forecastedrevenues, revenues available for construction, 2040 LRTP draft list of projects, and asummary of Committed Projects, Planned Construction Projects, Planned Studies, andPlanned Locally-Funded Construction Projects.

Attachment 20-A


Ms. Stith noted that the HRTAC projects are not currently included in the Draft LRTPfiscally-constrained list of projects, and will be included once the HRTAC develops afunding plan.

Ms. Stith concluded that the next steps in the process include developing a funding planfor HRTAC projects, public outreach and HRTPO advisory committee reviews of the draftfiscally constraint plan, completion of the LRTP documentation, and HRTPO Boardapproval, which is anticipated by the end of 2015.

6. FREIGHT FACTS REGARDING THE REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION NETWORK

As part of an on-going effort to compile Freight Fact for Hampton Roads, Ms. McPhersonprovided on update on the committee’s projects.

Using data generated by the HRTPO staff in key freight studies, Ms. McPhersonpresented a Freight Fact sheet, which was developed to illustrate the top 10 freightgateways along with key freight bottlenecks in the area, identified by overall truckdelay.

Ms. McPherson presented a second graphic, which illustrated the economic freightgenerators within the region. This graphic illustrated approximately 20 companies,sorted by industry type (distribution, food, manufacturing, military, shipbuilding, andother). Employment information was also illustrated in ranges and depicted by varioussize circles.

Ms. McPherson indicated that these graphics are a work in progress and several piecesof information are incomplete. Ms. McPherson requested FTAC members to provideinput and/or guidance for the refinement of these graphics, and noted that once thegraphics are finalized, they will be presented to the FTAC for final review and approval.

7. POTENTIAL 2015 ACTION ITEMS

Mr. Florin shared the previous goal and resolution (FTAC Resolution 2013-01)approved and adopted by the FTAC in January 2013 and suggested that this be theupdated and the focus of the next meeting.

8. ANNOUNCEMENT OF NEXT MEETING DATE

The next meeting was tentatively scheduled for August 2015. A meeting date will befinalized via the coordination between FTAC staff and FTAC members to determine acomplementary time.

ADJOURNMENT

With no further business to come before the HRTPO FTAC, the meeting adjourned at 2:45p.m.

Attachment 20-A

HRTPO Nominating Committee Meeting Summary Minutes – September 24, 2015 – Page 1 Prepared by K. Grauberger

Summary Minutes HRTPO Nominating Committee Meeting of September 24, 2015

Chair Paul Fraim called the meeting of the HRTPO Nominating Committee to order at 2:04 p.m. in the Regional Building Board Room with the following in attendance: HRTPO in Attendance: Paul Fraim, Chair (NO) James Utterback (VDOT)

HRTPO Nominating Committee Members Absent: William Harrell (HRT) Mary Jones (JC) McKinley Price (NN)

Kenneth Wright (PO) William Sessoms (VB)

HRTPO Staff: Robert Crum Camelia Ravanbakht Kathlene Grauberger

Others Recorded Attending: Thelma Drake, Brittany Forman (NO); Mike Long, Chris Vaigneur (HRPDC) Public Comment Period There was no public comment. Approval of Agenda Chair Fraim reported the Committee will meet in work session as a quorum was not achieved. Discuss Nominations Chair Fraim nominated the current HRTPO Vice-Chair, Mayor Linda Johnson of Suffolk for HRTPO Chair and Mayor George Wallace of Hampton for HRTPO Vice-Chair. He stated that he had previously discussed these nominations with HRTPO Nominating Committee members Kenneth Wright, McKinley Price, and William Sessoms and all agreed. Mr. Utterback also agreed. Recommendation of Candidates to the October 2015 HRTPO Meeting Chair Fraim stated the HRTPO Nominating Committee will recommend Mayor Linda Johnson and Mayor George Wallace for HRTPO Chair and Vice-Chair, respectively at the October 15, 2015 HRTPO Board meeting. Adjournment There being no more business before the HRTPO Nominating Committees, the meeting was adjourned at 2:08 p.m.

Attachment 20-B

HRTPO Legislative Ad-hoc Committee Meeting Summary Minutes – September 25, 2015 – Page 1 Prepared by K. Grauberger

Summary Minutes HRTPO Legislative Ad-hoc Committee

Meeting of September 25, 2015 Mr. Robert Crum, HRTPO Executive Director, called the meeting of the HRTPO Legislative Ad-hoc Committee to order at 9:30 a.m. in the Regional Building Board Room with the following in attendance: HRTPO Legislative Ad-hoc Committee Members in Attendance: Jerri Wilson (NN) Robert Matthias (VB) Delegate David Yancey (GA)*

HRTPO Legislative Ad-hoc Committee Members Absent: Linda T. Johnson, Chair (SU) McKinley Price (NN) Senator Frank Wagner (GA)

HRTPO Staff: Robert Crum Camelia Ravanbakht Kathlene Grauberger John Mihaly

Other Participants: Andrew Fox (CH) Mary Ann Saunders (CH) Bryan Pennington (NO) Sheri Neil (PO) Brian Smith (HRT) Peter Huber (Willcox & Savage)

* Late Arrival or Early Departure

Others Recorded Attending: Frank Papcin (Citizen); Thelma Drake (NO), Joe Dillard (HRT); Kevin Page (HRTAC); Hollis Ellis (CAE, Inc./HRPTA); Ron Broughton, Will Christopher, Jonathan Nye (HRPTA); Mike Long, Chris Vaigneur (HRPDC) Public Comment Period Mr. Jonathan Nye of the HRPTA addressed the HRTPO Legislative Ad-hoc Committee regarding past funding policies. Mr. Frank Papcin, Virginia Beach Citizen, addressed the HRTPO Legislative Ad-hoc Committee regarding opposition to tolls.

Attachment 20-C


Approval of Agenda Mr. Robert Crum reported the Committee will meet in work session as a quorum has not been achieved. Summary Minutes from the Joint HRTPO/HRPDC Legislative Ad-hoc Committee Meeting of December 18, 2014 This item is deferred since a quorum has not been achieved. Research on Potential Funding Sources for Public Transportation Mr. Greg Grootendorst, HRPDC Chief Economist, reported that the HRTPO Legislative Ad-hoc Committee requested staff research potential revenues and determine whether to pursue any of these sources more aggressively in the future. Mr. Grootendorst noted that for this presentation, he concentrated his research efforts on the gas and sales tax for Virginia explained how these taxes are utilized by the Commonwealth, and indicated the State could increase its taxable sales if it did not exempt items in the Services category. (Delegate David Yancey arrives) Review of the HRTPO 2015 Legislative Agenda Dr. Camelia Ravanbakht, HRTPO Deputy Executive Director, outlined the items from the HRTPO 2015 Legislative Agenda that were not addressed during the 2015 General Assembly session. After a lengthy discussion, the Committee agreed to carry over the following State items to the 2016 HRTPO Legislative Agenda:


• Identification of a dedicated source of funding for public transportation for the Hampton Roads region.

• Amendment of HRTAC enabling legislation to allow the use of HRTF monies for HRTAC staff and administration expenses.


The Committee also decided to add two new State items to the 2016 Legislative Agenda as follows:

• Pursuit of federal/state funding for Trains 2 & 3 to Norfolk. • Amendment of HB 1402 (Highway maintenance: payments to City of Richmond for

moving-lanes converted to bicycle lanes) to include any local government.

Attachment 20-C


Development of the HRTPO 2016 Legislative Agenda Mr. Robert Crum, HRTPO Executive Director, outlined three federal items for consideration by the Legislative Ad-hoc Committee to move forward for inclusion in the 2016 Legislative Agenda. Discussion ensued and the Committee decided to include these items in the Legislative Agenda as follows:


• Support Congressional approval for the Marketplace Fairness Act (MFA). • Support Congressional recognition of regions that increased local taxes to bridge the

gap between federal transportation funding and regional transportation infrastructure needs by providing bonus funding to these metropolitan regions.

Mr. Crum stated staff will be presenting the draft 2016 HRTPO Legislative Agenda to the HRTPO Board at it October 15, 2015 meeting for approval. He indicated that the HRTPO plans to present its proposed legislative items to the Hampton Roads General Assembly Caucus in December. Old/New Business There was no old/new business. Adjournment There being no more business before the HRTPO Legislative Ad-hoc Committee, the meeting was adjourned at 11:06 a.m.

Attachment 20-C

Summary TTAC Minutes – October 7, 2015 – Page 1 Prepared by K. Grauberger

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

October 7, 2015

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

TTAC Voting Members in Attendance: Robert Gey (Chair, VB) Steve Froncillo (CH) Steve Lambert (CH) Earl Sorey (CH) Garrey Curry (GL) Lynn Allsbrook (HA) Keith Cannady (HA) John Yorks (HA) Jamie Oliver (IW) Michael Stallings (IW) Paul Holt (JC)

Tammy Rosario (JC) Claudia Cotton (Alternate, NN) Jackie Kassel (NN) Bryan Stilley (NN) Robert Brown (NO) Thelma Drake (NO) Jeff Raliski (NO) James Wright (PO) Kevin Wyne (PQ) Sherry Earley (SU) LJ Hansen (SU)

Robert Lewis (SU) Phil Pullen (VB) Brian Solis (VB) Reed Nester (WM) Tim Cross (YK) Chris Arabia (DRPT) Julie Navarrete (HRT) Dawn Odom (VDOT) Stephen Rowan (VDOT) Eric Stringfield (VDOT)

TTAC Voting Members Absent: Anne Ducey-Ortiz (GL) Brian Lewis (GL) Peter Stephenson (IW) Britta Ayers (NN)

Daniel Clayton (WM) Steve Martin (WM) Ellen Roberts (PQ) Debbie Vest (PQ)

J. Mark Carter (YK) Al Maddalena (YK) Jeff Florin (VPA) Jamie Jackson (WATA)

TTAC Nonvoting Members in Attendance: Rhonda Murray (NAVY) TTAC Nonvoting Members Absent: Ivan Rucker (FHWA) Tony Cho (FTA) HRTPO Staff: Sam Belfield Rob Case Kathlene Grauberger Rob Jaques Theresa Jones

Mike Kimbrel John Mihaly Kendall Miller Keith Nichols Joe Paulus

Leonardo Pineda, II David Pritchard Camelia Ravanbakht Dale Stith

Others Recorded Attending: Robert Brown (Citizen); Wanda Moore, Angela Rico (HA); Michael King (NAVY); Paula Dowell (via teleconference – Cambridge Systematics); Frank Papcin (CTAC); Rich Clifton (Allan Myers); Will Christopher (HRPTA); Karen McPherson (McPherson Consulting); Keisha Branch, Sam Sink (HRT); Angela Biney, Tony Gibson, Ray Hunt, Carl Jackson, Darryll Lewis, Bryant Porter (VDOT); Mike Long, Chris Vaigneur (HRPDC Staff)

Attachment 20-D


Introductions There were no introductions. Public Comment Period Mr. Robert Brown, Chesapeake Citizen, addressed the TTAC regarding a Hampton Roads Flood Barrier. Submitted Public Comments There was one submitted public comment in the agenda packet. Comments and Updates from State and Federal Agencies and the Military Ms. Dawn Odom of VDOT reported that VDOT had received over 321 HB2 online applications totaling $7 billion. She noted that VDOT Districts would validate the applications and then send them to the Office of Intermodal Planning and Investment (OIPI) who will evaluate the applications. There were no comments from DRPT. There were no comments from FHWA. There were no comments from VPA. There were no comments from NAVY. Approval of Agenda Chair Robert Gey asked for additions or deletions to the TTAC Agenda. Mr. Eric Stringfield requested to add a TIP Amendment as Agenda Item #9A. Chair Gey requested Agenda Item #16 be moved to after Agenda Item #10 in order to accommodate a change in presenters. Mr. Stringfield Moved to approve the agenda with the amendments; seconded by Mr. Earl Sorey. The Motion Carried. Summary Minutes Chair Gey reported that the TTAC summary minutes from the September 2, 2015 meeting were included in the October 7, 2015 TTAC Agenda Packet. Chair Gey asked for any additions or corrections to the minutes. Hearing none, Mr. Tim Cross Moved to approve the minutes as written; seconded by Ms. Tammy Rosario. The Motion Carried.

Attachment 20-D


Election of Officers Mr. Lynn Allsbrook, TTAC Nominating Committee Chair, reported that the Committee has recommended re-nominating Mr. Robert Gey as TTAC Chair and Mr. Paul Holt as TTAC Vice-Chair. Mr. Allsbrook Moved to re-elect Mr. Gey and Mr. Holt to their respective positions; seconded by Mr. Phil Pullen. The Motion Carried. FY 2015-2018 TIP Revision – CMAQ Transfer Request: Chesapeake Mr. Steve Froncillo reported that the City of Chesapeake is requesting to allocate funds from the FY 2017 Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program (CMAQ) reserve to an approved CMAQ project and return an equivalent amount of FY 2021 CMAQ allocations. The specifics of the City’s request are described below:

• Last year, the HRTPO approved three Chesapeake signal timing projects and allocated FY 2021 CMAQ funds to those projects. The Phase I project (UPC 106997) received an FY 2021 allocation of $150,000, including state match.

• Due to the recent completion of the Gilmerton Bridge project, the City is requesting

$35,000 from the FY 2017 CMAQ reserve to allow the project to move forward to reevaluate the signal timing along the Military Highway and George Washington Highway corridors. The City wishes to offset this request by transferring $35,000 of the project’s FY 2021 allocation to the CMAQ reserve.

This request has been made available for public review and comment. The public review period began on September 30, 2015 and runs through October 14, 2015. Mr. Froncillo Moved to recommend HRTPO Board approval of the CMAQ fund transfers and the associated TIP amendment; seconded by Mr. Sorey. The Motion Carried. FY 2015-2018 TIP Amendment – Addition of Project Grouping: VDOT Mr. Eric Stringfield reported that VDOT is requesting to add one new project grouping to the TIP, subject to the receipt of no adverse public comments. The specific details are described below:

• Construction: Federal Lands Highway o Add project grouping to TIP.

This request is being made available for public review and comment. The public review period begins on October 8, 2015 and runs through October 21, 2015. Mr. Stringfield Moved to recommend HRTPO Board approval of the TIP amendment; seconded by Mr. Brian Solis. The Motion Carried.

Attachment 20-D


Volumes, Speeds, and Congestion on Major Roadways in Hampton Roads Dr. Camelia Ravanbakht, HRTPO Deputy Executive Director, reported that the draft report of Volumes, Speeds, and Congestion on Major Roadways in Hampton Roads was presented to the TTAC and underwent public review from September 2, 2015 through September 23, 2015. Mr. Allsbrook Moved to recommend HRTPO Board approval of the final report; seconded by Mr. Robert Lewis. The Motion Carried. Economic Assessment of Tolls on Freight Transportation in the Hampton Roads Region Ms. Paula Dowell of Cambridge Systematics, Inc. reported that in 2011, the HRTPO Board approved an allocation of $400,000 in Regional Surface Transportation Program (RSTP) funds for an economic analysis of freight movements. The HRTPO Freight Transportation Advisory Committee (FTAC) engaged Cambridge Systematics, Inc., to conduct thestudy. Ms. Dowell stated the study overview as follows:

• Analyze the economic trade-offs of the benefits of transportation infrastructure investments and tolls as a way to pay for the investments

• Focus on competitiveness of freight transportation in the region Cambridge Systematics’ research included:

• Stakeholder Interviews • Benchmark Assessment • Freight Cost Analysis

Key findings from the study are as follows:

• Freight rates in the region are generally competitive with peer ports • Cost of doing nothing is significant – $974 million in 2040 • Based on current tolling rates, industry will be better off building new capacity with

tolls than continuing in a business as usual mode • Consideration should be given to mitigation of tolling costs such that regional trips do

not absorb an unfair portion of the costs of an enhanced transportation network The draft report is currently under public review and Ms. Dowell requested TTAC members submit their comments to Cambridge Systematics or Mr. Jeff Florin of the Virginia Port Authority by October 21, 2105.

Attachment 20-D


Hampton Roads 2040 Long-Range Transportation Plan: Candidate Project Evaluation Title VI/Environmental Justice Methodology Ms. Kendall Miller, HRTPO Public Involvement and Title VI Administrator, reported that the HRTPO is responsible for evaluating and monitoring compliance with applicable nondiscrimination authorities in all aspects of the HRTPO transportation planning and programming processes. She indicated that as part of these efforts, HRTPO staff has evaluated 2040 LRTP Candidate projects via the HRTPO Title VI/Environmental Justice (EJ) Methodology. Ms. Miller stated the report summarizes the results of the Title VI/Environmental Justice evaluation of the 2040 LRTP candidate projects, including details regarding the Title VI/EJ Methodology, EJ Impact Scores, EJ community locations, and outreach strategies. The report was made available for public review from May 6, 2015 through August 31, 2015. She noted that in addition to the public comment period, the report was presented to the Long-Range Transportation Plan Subcommittee, Transportation Technical Advisory Committee, Citizen Transportation Advisory Committee, and Environmental Justice Roundtable. All comments received have been addressed by staff. Next steps include:

• Defining those communities that may be impacted by LRTP projects • Using the findings to conduct public involvement • Continuing to refine the EJ Methodology • Continuing to meet with the HRTPO committees

Ms. Rosario Moved to recommend HRTPO Board approval of the final report; seconded by Mr. Stringfield. The Motion Carried. Transportation Alternatives Program Project Proposals Mr. Mike Kimbrel, HRTPO Principal Transportation Engineer, reported that the Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP), established under MAP-21, provides funding for a variety of transportation activities that were previously eligible for funding under separate programs under SAFETEA-LU, including Transportation Enhancements (TE), Recreational Trails, and Safe Routes to School. The VDOT Local Assistance Division (LAD) coordinates the TAP in Virginia. Mr. Kimbrel stated each year VDOT requests applications for candidate projects for TAP funding. The deadline for applications is November 2, 2015, and each proposed project must receive endorsement by the appropriate metropolitan planning organization. He outlined the TAP project proposals received to date and requested that TTAC members confirm receipt of their proposals by HRTPO staff. He noted that recommendation letters will be transmitted after the October HRTPO Board meeting.

Attachment 20-D


Mr. John Yorks Moved to recommend HRTPO Board approval of the TAP proposed projects; seconded by Mr. Allsbrook. The Motion Carried. HB2 Status Report Mr. Mike Kimbrel, HRTPO Principal Transportation Engineer, reported that House Bill 2 (HB2), signed into law in 2014, directed the Commonwealth Transportation Board (CTB) to develop and use a prioritization process to select transportation projects. The legislation is intended to improve the transparency and accountability of project selection, as well as improve stability in the Six-Year Improvement Program (SYIP). The process is to score projects based on an objective analysis and provide guidance to the CTB for project selection and funding. The deadline for project submissions under the HB2 prioritization process was September 30, 2015. Mr. Kimbrel stated that during the September 17, 2015 HRTPO Board meeting, the Board approved three projects to be submitted by the HRTPO as well as the priority order of those projects. HRTPO staff submitted the following projects in priority order as shown below on September 29, 2015:

1. I-64 Peninsula Widening 2. I-64 Southside Widening, including replacement of the High-Rise Bridge 3. I-64/I-264 Interchange Improvements

He noted that in addition, the HRTPO Board approved resolutions of support in accordance with the HRTPO Guidance on House Bill 2 for 17 projects to be submitted by seven localities. He commented that Hampton Roads Transit (HRT) submitted a request for an HRTPO resolution of support for two projects on September 23, 2015, and a request from Isle of Wight County is included in the agenda as a handout. He stated these requests will be on the HRTPO Board agenda for October. TTI Urban Mobility Scorecard Report Mr. Keith Nichols, HRTPO Principal Transportation Engineer, reported that the TTI Urban Mobility Scorecard report evaluates mobility levels and traffic congestion in all 471 metropolitan areas throughout the United States. Mr. Nichols stated that the key findings from the report included the following Hampton Roads statistics:

• Annual Delay o Ranked 11th among the 36 large metropolitan areas in delay per auto commuter in

2014 • Travel Time Index

o Average peak period trip takes 19% longer than the same trip during the non-peak periods

Attachment 20-D


• Congestion Costs o Costs each auto commuter an estimated $953 in 2014 o Ranked 23rd among the 36 large metropolitan areas in delay per auto commuter in

2014 Regional Priority Projects Update Mr. Tony Gibson of VDOT provided an update on the status of the nine regional priority projects in Hampton Roads. Dr. Camelia Ravanbakht, HRTPO Deputy Executive Director, indicated that the initial meeting for the Hampton Roads Crossing Supplemental Environmental Impact Study (SEIS) was held in July and asked when VDOT planned to convene a stakeholder meeting to share progress regarding the study. Mr. Gibson replied he would inquire and inform HRTPO staff at a later date. Three-Month Tentative Schedule Chair Gey outlined the Three-Month Tentative Schedule for TTAC and noted that the December TTAC meeting will be cancelled. For Your Information Dr. Camelia Ravanbakht, HRTPO Deputy Executive Director, briefed TTAC regarding the 2040 Long-Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) updated revenue forecast currently being revised by VDOT. She indicated that these revisions would cause the approval of the 2040 LRTP to be delayed. Announcements Chair Gey highlighted the announcements in the Agenda Packet. Mr. Kimbrel informed TTAC that the Transportation Programming Subcommittee (TPS) is scheduled to meet on October 16, 2015 to discuss CMAQ and RSTP project selection. Old/New Business There was no Old/New Business. Adjournment

With no further business to come before the Hampton Roads Transportation Technical Advisory Committee, the meeting adjourned at 11:05 a.m.

Attachment 20-D

HRTPO Legislative Ad-hoc Committee Meeting Summary Minutes – October27, 2015 – Page 1 Prepared by K. Grauberger

Summary Minutes HRTPO Legislative Ad-hoc Committee

Meeting of October 27, 2015 Chair Linda Johnson called the meeting of the HRTPO Legislative Ad-hoc Committee to order at 1:33 p.m. in the Regional Building Board Room with the following in attendance: HRTPO Legislative Ad-hoc Committee Members in Attendance: Linda T. Johnson, Chair (SU) Robert Matthias (VB)

HRTPO Legislative Ad-hoc Committee Members Absent: McKinley Price (NN) Jerri Wilson (NN) Senator Frank Wagner (GA) Delegate David Yancey (GA)

HRTPO Staff: Robert Crum Camelia Ravanbakht Kathlene Grauberger John Mihaly

Other Participants: Thelma Drake (NO) Bryan Pennington (NO) Sheri Neil (PO) Greg Grootendorst (HRPDC) Joe Dillard (HRT)

Brian Smith (HRT) Cathy France (VPA) Sarah McCoy (VPA) Peter Huber (Willcox & Savage) Tom Inglima (Willcox & Savage)

Others Recorded Attending: Frank Papcin (CTAC); Mike Long, Chris Vaigneur (HRPDC) Public Comment Period Mr. Frank Papcin, Virginia Beach Citizen, addressed the HRTPO Legislative Ad-hoc Committee regarding HRTAC representation and tolls. Approval of Agenda Chair Johnson reported the Committee will meet in work session as a quorum has not been achieved. Minutes This item is deferred since a quorum has not been achieved.

Attachment 20-E


Draft 2016 Legislative Agenda: Addressing Board Comments Mr. Robert Crum, HRTPO Executive Director, reported that during the October 15, 2015 HRTPO Board meeting, several HRTPO Board members raised questions regarding a number of items on the draft 2016 HRTPO Legislative Agenda. The Committee discussed each concern with the following recommendations:


Mr. Tom Inglima reported that HRTAC will submit its own 2016 Legislative Agenda. As such, the Committee recommended the priority be modified as follows: HRTPO supports HRTAC efforts to revise its enabling legislation to improve both

operational and governance efficiencies.

• Pursuit of federal/state funding for the widening of I-64 between Hampton Roads and Richmond. The Committee recommended adding this priority to the 2016 HRTPO Legislative Agenda.

• Support Congressional approval for the Marketplace Fairness Act (MFA). The Committee recommended keeping this priority in the Legislative Agenda.

• Identification of a dedicated source of funding for public transportation for the Hampton Roads region. After a briefing by Mr. Brian Smith of HRT and discussion by the Committee, it was decided to remove this item from the Legislative Agenda for this year. The HRTPO Passenger Rail Task Force will be re-convening as a Rail and Public Transportation Task Force to discuss the item further.

Draft 2016 HRTPO Legislative Agenda Mr. Robert Crum, HRTPO Executive Director, reviewed each priority in the draft 2016 HRTPO Legislative Agenda with the Committee while HRTPO staff made the appropriate changes to the Resolution. Mr. Crum stated staff will be presenting the amended draft 2016 HRTPO Legislative Agenda to the HRTPO Board at it November 19, 2015 meeting for approval. He indicated that the HRTPO and HRPDC plan to present their proposed legislative items to both the Hampton Roads General Assembly Caucus and the Hampton Roads Congressional Delegation on December 16, 2015 at the Chesapeake Conference Center.

Attachment 20-E


Old/New Business There was no old/new business. Adjournment There being no more business before the HRTPO Legislative Ad-hoc Committee, the meeting was adjourned at 2:53 p.m.

Attachment 20-E


ITEM #21: FOR YOUR INFORMATION A. HAMPTON ROADS TRANSPORTATION FUND: MONTHLY FINANCIAL REPORT

The Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) provides the HRTPO with monthly financial reports relating to the HRTF including the following information:

• Revenue from sources as detailed by the collecting agency • Interest earnings • Expenditures reflecting both the program (HRTF) total as well as project totals • The current cash position/balance in the HRTF as well as forecasted cash

position/balance

Attachment 21-A

November 9, 2015

HAMPTON ROADS TRANSPORTATION FUND FINANCIAL REPORT

FY2014 – FY2016

VDOT provides the HRTPO and HRTAC staff with monthly financial reports relating to the HRTF including the following information:

• Revenue from sources as detailed by the collecting agency • Interest earnings • Expenditures reflecting both the program total as well as project totals • The current cash position/balance in the HRTF as well as forecasted cash

position/balance

Attached are the September 2015 financial reports. Based on the financial reports received to date from VDOT, the HRTPO staff has analyzed the data and prepared the attached reports and summaries:

Revenues Total Gross Revenues (as of September 30, 2015): $351,767,628

• State Sales and Use Tax : $264,046,539 • Local Fuels Tax : $86,138,774 • Interest : $1,582,315

Expenditures Total Expenditures: $2,142,715

• I-64 Peninsula Widening – Segment 1: $1,544,502 • Total Dept. of Tax Administrative Fees: $499,518 • Total DMV Administrative Fees: $98,695

Cash Balance Ending Cash Balance: $349,624,913 Encumbered Balance Balance of Encumbered: $350,711,990

• Allocation: $352,256,492 • Less Construction Expenditures: $1,544,502

Attachment 21-A

Prep

ared

by

Ham

pton

Roa

ds T

rans

port

atio

n Pl

anni

ng O

rgan

izatio

n on

11/

9/20

15

Cum

mul

ativ

e Ba

lanc

eSa

les &

Use

Tax

Fuel

Tax

Inte

rest

Tota

lCo

nstr

uctio

nDe

pt o

f Tax

Adm

in F

eeDM

V Ad

min

Fee

Tota

l7/

1/13

- 9

/30/

15

July

201

3 - S

epte

mbe

r 201

413

9,79

5,95

3$

50

,169

,306

$

36

3,85

5$

190,

329,

114

$

1,

389,

208

$

484,

461

$

98

,695

$

1,97

2,36

4$

188,

356,

750

$

Oct

ober

201

410

,082

,755

3,95

0,83

4

28

4,42

1

14,3

18,0

10

91,2

05

59

3

-

91

,798

20

2,58

2,96

2

Nov

embe

r 201

49,

933,

770

3,

590,

415

-

13

,524

,185

39

,547

11,3

77

-

50

,924

21

6,05

6,22

3

Dece

mbe

r 201

49,

964,

325

2,

947,

347

-

12

,911

,672

16

,049

7,05

5

-

23,1

04

228,

944,

791

Janu

ary

2015

11,8

49,2

00

3,

561,

879

391,

282

15

,802

,361

23

,415

-

-

23,4

15

244,

723,

737

Febr

uary

201

58,

667,

143

2,

657,

036

-

11

,324

,180

(1

4,92

2)

(3

,969

)

-

(18,

891)

25

6,06

6,80

8

Mar

ch 2

015

8,46

3,03

0

2,34

7,17

1

-

10,8

10,2

01

-

-

-

-

266,

877,

009

April

201

510

,608

,274

2,24

9,59

5

40

5,38

6

13,2

63,2

56

-

-

-

-

280,

140,

265

May

201

510

,889

,809

2,28

7,39

3

-

13,1

77,2

02

-

-

-

-

293,

317,

467

June

201

517

,587

,265

4,51

9,54

5

13

7,37

1

22,2

44,1

81

-

-

-

-

315,

561,

648

July

201

54,

412,

902

1,

513,

488

-

5,

926,

390

-

-

-

-

321,

488,

038

Augu

st 2

015

10,8

70,4

38

3,

240,

804

-

14

,111

,242

-

-

-

-

33

5,59

9,28

0

Sept

embe

r 201

510

,921

,675

3,10

3,96

0

-

14,0

25,6

35

-

-

-

-

349,

624,

913

Tota

l 12

Mon

ths

12

4,25

0,58

6$

35

,969

,468

$

1,

218,

460

$

161,

438,

514

$

15

5,29

4$

15

,057

$

-

$

170,

350

$

Gran

d To

tals

264,

046,

539

$

86,1

38,7

74$

1,58

2,31

5$

35

1,76

7,62

8$

1,54

4,50

2$

49

9,51

8$

98,6

95$

2,

142,

715

$

Les

s Bal

ance

of E

ncum

bere

d

(350

,711

,990

)$

Tota

l Net

Ava

ilabl

e(1

,087

,077

)

Gro

ss R

even

ue

Expe

nditu

res

Ham

pton

Roa

ds T

rans

port

atio

n Fu

nd (H

RTF)

Tota

l of S

ales

& U

se a

nd F

uels

Tax

esSu

mm

ary

Attachment 21-A

-

5,0

00,0

00

10,

000,

000

15,

000,

000

20,

000,

000

25,

000,

000

October 2014

November 2014

December 2014

January 2015

February 2015

March 2015

April 2015

May 2015

June 2015

July 2015

August 2015

September 2015

HRTF

Rev

enue

Sale

s & U

se T

axFu

el T

axIn

tere

stTo

tal

Attachment 21-A

Sour

ce:

VDO

T re

port

"Rev

enue

s By

Loca

lity"

Prep

ared

by

Ham

pton

Roa

ds T

rans

port

atio

n Pl

anni

ng O

rgan

izatio

n on

11/

9/20

15

Loca

lity

Tot

al F

Y201

4

& F

Y 20

15

Pre

viou

s

FY

2016

Se

ptem

ber 2

015

Tot

al Y

TD

FY20

16

Tota

lCh

esap

eake

57,5

63,0

89$

3,

515,

562

$

2,40

2,20

8$

5,91

7,77

0$

63

,480

,860

$

Fran

klin

2,86

5,97

3

141,

993

11

1,08

0

25

3,07

3

3,11

9,04

7

Ham

pton

23,5

42,8

97

1,

415,

486

982,

972

2,39

8,45

8

25

,941

,355

Isle

of W

ight

5,28

2,25

3

305,

173

19

9,88

1

50

5,05

4

5,78

7,30

7

Jam

es C

ity14

,177

,964

982,

841

68

7,79

2

1,

670,

633

15,8

48,5

97

New

port

New

s33

,547

,498

2,01

9,06

4

1,

444,

800

3,

463,

864

37,0

11,3

62

Nor

folk

43,8

22,3

84

2,

656,

493

1,92

2,99

1

4,57

9,48

4

48

,401

,868

Poqu

oson

850,

501

53,2

94

34

,900

88

,194

938,

695

Port

smou

th11

,236

,094

755,

207

48

9,24

7

1,

244,

454

12,4

80,5

48

Sout

ham

pton

1,59

7,57

2

91,8

56

66

,546

15

8,40

2

1,75

5,97

4

Suffo

lk14

,942

,594

900,

228

62

1,89

6

1,

522,

124

16,4

64,7

18

Virg

inia

Bea

ch85

,034

,171

5,75

9,30

3

4,

053,

349

9,

812,

652

94,8

46,8

23

Will

iam

sbur

g7,

022,

217

46

4,37

3

304,

097

768,

470

7,

790,

686

York

14,6

36,8

39

97

6,76

0

703,

875

1,68

0,63

5

16

,317

,473

Tota

l31

6,12

2,04

6$

20,0

37,6

32$

14,0

25,6

35$

34

,063

,267

$

35

0,18

5,31

3$

Inte

rest

1,58

2,31

5

-

-

-

1,58

2,31

5

Tota

l Rev

enue

s31

7,70

4,36

1$

20,0

37,6

32$

14,0

25,6

35$

34

,063

,267

$

35

1,76

7,62

8$

Cons

truc

tion

(1,5

44,5

02)

-

-

-

(1,5

44,5

02)

Dept

of T

ax A

dmin

Fee

s(4

99,5

18)

-

-

-

(4

99,5

18)

DMV

Adm

in F

ees

(98,

695)

-

-

-

(98,

695)

Cash

Bal

ance

315,

561,

646

$

20

,037

,632

$

14

,025

,635

$

34,0

63,2

67$

349,

624,

913

$

Les

s Bal

ance

of E

ncum

bere

d

(350

,711

,990

)

Net

Ava

ilabl

e Ca

sh(1

,087

,077

)$

Fore

cast

331,

869,

992

21

,387

,131

15,0

21,6

06

36

,408

,737

368,

278,

729

To

tal R

even

ue -

Fore

cast

(und

er)/

over

(14,

165,

631)

(1,3

49,4

99)

(995

,971

)

(2,3

45,4

70)

(16,

511,

101)

Tabl

e 1

- Tot

al H

RTF

Reve

nues

Tota

l of S

ales

& U

se a

nd F

uels

Taxe

sFi

scal

Yea

r 201

6

Ham

pton

Roa

ds T

rans

port

atio

n Fu

nd (H

RTF)

Attachment 21-A

Sour

ce:

VDO

T re

port

"Rev

enue

s By

Loca

lity"

Prep

ared

by

Ham

pton

Roa

ds T

rans

port

atio

n Pl

anni

ng O

rgan

izatio

n on

11/

9/20

15

Loca

lity

Tota

l FY2

014

&

FY

2015

Pre

viou

s

FY

2016

Se

ptem

ber 2

015

Tota

l YTD

FY

2016

Tota

l

Ches

apea

ke42

,602

,215

$

2,

610,

301

$

1,81

7,13

0$

4,42

7,43

1$

47

,029

,646

$

Fran

klin

1,85

5,10

5

10

2,02

3

77,8

35

179,

858

2,

034,

963

Ham

pton

17,5

39,7

54

1,04

4,90

7

74

6,83

5

1,

791,

742

19,3

31,4

96

Is

le o

f Wig

ht2,

663,

976

171,

197

11

2,61

1

28

3,80

8

2,94

7,78

4

Jam

es C

ity12

,098

,166

82

3,73

2

595,

650

1,41

9,38

2

13

,517

,548

New

port

New

s25

,985

,257

1,

513,

423

1,13

4,89

0

2,64

8,31

3

28

,633

,570

Nor

folk

35,1

21,6

31

2,09

6,97

2

1,

567,

673

3,

664,

645

38,7

86,2

76

Poqu

oson

558,

003

36

,170

24,2

72

60,4

42

61

8,44

5

Port

smou

th7,

793,

823

523,

102

34

3,17

7

86

6,27

9

8,66

0,10

2

Sout

ham

pton

617,

250

38

,491

26,2

58

64,7

49

68

1,99

9

Suffo

lk9,

516,

894

613,

401

42

1,18

6

1,

034,

587

10,5

51,4

81

Virg

inia

Bea

ch65

,279

,448

4,

587,

425

3,26

3,92

8

7,85

1,35

3

73

,130

,801

Will

iam

sbur

g5,

391,

622

365,

636

24

7,80

7

61

3,44

3

6,00

5,06

5

York

10,8

18,3

81

756,

559

54

2,42

3

1,

298,

982

12,1

17,3

63

Tota

l23

7,84

1,52

5$

15,2

83,3

40$

10,9

21,6

75$

26

,205

,015

$

26

4,04

6,53

9$

Upd

ated

For

ecas

t23

6,87

1,04

0

16,6

56,2

25

10,6

49,9

47

27

,306

,172

26

4,17

7,21

2

Diff(

unde

r)/o

ver

970,

485

(1

,372

,885

)

27

1,72

8

(1

,101

,157

)

(1

30,6

73)

Tabl

e 1A

- St

ate

Sale

s & U

se T

axHa

mpt

on R

oads

Tra

nspo

rtat

ion

Fund

(HRT

F)St

ate

Sale

s & U

se T

axFi

scal

Yea

r 201

6

Attachment 21-A

Sour

ce:

VDO

T re

port

"Rev

enue

s By

Loca

lity"

Prep

ared

by

Ham

pton

Roa

ds T

rans

port

atio

n Pl

anni

ng O

rgan

izatio

n on

11/

9/20

15

Loca

lity

Tota

l FY2

014

&

FY

2015

Pre

viou

s

FY

2016

Se

ptem

ber 2

015

Tota

l YTD

FY

2016

Tota

l

Ches

apea

ke14

,960

,876

$

905,

261

$

58

5,07

8$

1,

490,

339

$

16,4

51,2

15$

Fran

klin

1,01

0,86

8

39,9

69

33

,245

73

,214

1,08

4,08

2

Ham

pton

6,00

3,14

5

370,

579

23

6,13

7

60

6,71

6

6,60

9,86

1

Isle

of W

ight

2,61

8,27

5

133,

976

87

,270

22

1,24

6

2,83

9,52

1

Jam

es C

ity2,

079,

798

15

9,10

9

92,1

42

251,

251

2,

331,

049

New

port

New

s7,

562,

240

50

5,64

1

309,

910

815,

551

8,

377,

791

Nor

folk

8,70

0,75

4

559,

522

35

5,31

8

91

4,84

0

9,61

5,59

4

Poqu

oson

292,

497

17,1

24

10

,629

27

,753

320,

250

Port

smou

th3,

442,

272

23

2,10

5

146,

070

378,

175

3,

820,

447

Sout

ham

pton

980,

321

53,3

65

40

,288

93

,653

1,07

3,97

4

Suffo

lk5,

425,

699

28

6,82

7

200,

710

487,

537

5,

913,

236

Virg

inia

Bea

ch19

,754

,723

1,17

1,87

7

78

9,42

1

1,

961,

298

21,7

16,0

21

Will

iam

sbur

g1,

630,

595

98

,736

56,2

90

155,

026

1,

785,

621

York

3,81

8,45

8

220,

201

16

1,45

2

38

1,65

3

4,20

0,11

1

Tota

l78

,280

,521

4,

754,

292

$

3,10

3,96

0$

7,85

8,25

2$

86

,138

,773

$

Upd

ated

For

ecas

t94

,200

,002

4,

730,

906

4,37

1,65

9

9,10

2,56

5

10

3,30

2,56

7

Diff(

unde

r)/o

ver

(15,

919,

481)

23,3

86

(1

,267

,699

)

(1,2

44,3

13)

(17,

163,

794)

Tabl

e 1B

- Lo

cal F

uels

Tax

Ham

pton

Roa

ds T

rans

port

atio

n Fu

nd (H

RTF)

Loca

l Fue

ls T

axFi

scal

Yea

r 201

6

Attachment 21-A

Sour

ce:

VDO

T re

port

"Reg

iona

l Por

tion

of S

ales

Tax

"Pr

epar

ed b

y Ha

mpt

on R

oads

Tra

nspo

rtat

ion

Plan

ning

Org

aniza

tion

on 1

1/9/

2015

Loca

lity

Tota

l FY2

014

&

FY

2015

Pre

viou

s

FY

2016

Se

ptem

ber 2

015

Tota

l YTD

FY

2016

Tota

l

Ches

apea

ke88

,870

$

-$

-

$

88,8

70$

Fran

klin

3,81

7

-

-

3,81

7

Ham

pton

36,7

11

-

-

36

,711

Isle

of W

ight

5,72

9

-

-

5,72

9

Jam

es C

ity27

,205

-

-

27,2

05

New

port

New

s54

,648

-

-

54,6

48

Nor

folk

74,0

54

-

-

74

,054

Poqu

oson

1,12

0

-

-

1,12

0

Port

smou

th15

,747

-

-

15,7

47

Sout

ham

pton

1,36

6

-

-

1,36

6

Suffo

lk19

,302

-

-

19,3

02

Virg

inia

Bea

ch13

6,88

4

-

-

136,

884

Will

iam

sbur

g11

,448

-

-

11,4

48

York

22,6

17

-

-

22

,617

Tota

l49

9,51

8$

-

$

-$

-$

49

9,51

8$

% o

f Sal

es &

Use

Tax

Rev

enue

0.21

%0.

00%

0.00

%0.

00%

0.19

%

Tabl

e 2A

- De

pt o

f Tax

Adm

inis

trat

ive

Fee

Ham

pton

Roa

ds T

rans

port

atio

n Fu

nd (H

RTF)

Adm

inis

trat

ive

Fee

Fisc

al Y

ear 2

016

Attachment 21-A

Sour

ce:

VDO

T re

port

"Reg

iona

l Por

tion

of S

ales

Tax

"Pr

epar

ed b

y Ha

mpt

on R

oads

Tra

nspo

rtat

ion

Plan

ning

Org

aniza

tion

on 1

1/9/

2015

Loca

lity

Tota

l FY2

014

&

FY

2015

Pre

viou

s

FY

2016

Se

ptem

ber 2

015

Tota

l YTD

FY

2016

Tota

l

Ches

apea

ke18

,260

-

$

-$

-$

18

,260

$

Fran

klin

1,25

5

-

-

-

1,

255

Ham

pton

7,78

1

-

-

-

7,

781

Isle

of W

ight

3,30

5

-

-

-

3,

305

Jam

es C

ity2,

869

-

-

-

2,86

9

New

port

New

s9,

844

-

-

-

9,84

4

Nor

folk

10,8

66

-

-

-

10,8

66

Poqu

oson

275

-

-

-

27

5

Port

smou

th4,

957

-

-

-

4,95

7

Sout

ham

pton

1,21

2

-

-

-

1,

212

Suffo

lk7,

249

-

-

-

7,24

9

Virg

inia

Bea

ch24

,312

-

-

-

24

,312

Will

iam

sbur

g1,

616

-

-

-

1,61

6

York

4,89

5

-

-

-

4,

895

Tota

l98

,695

-$

-

$

-

$

98,6

95$

% o

f Fue

l Tax

Rev

enue

s0.

13%

0.00

%0.

00%

0.00

%0.

11%

Tabl

e 2B

- DM

V Ad

min

istr

ativ

e Fe

eHa

mpt

on R

oads

Tra

nspo

rtat

ion

Fund

(HRT

F)Ad

min

istr

ativ

e Fe

eFi

scal

Yea

r 201

6

Attachment 21-A

Prep

ared

by

Ham

pton

Roa

ds T

rans

port

atio

n Pl

anni

ng O

rgan

izatio

n on

11/

9/20

15

Proj

ect

Tota

l FY2

014

&

FY

2015

Pre

viou

s

FY

2016

Se

ptem

ber 2

015

Tota

l YTD

FY

2016

Tota

l

I-64

Peni

nsul

a W

iden

ing

-

UPC

104

905

(Seg

men

t 1) -

Cons

truc

tion

44,0

00,0

00$

-$

-

$

44,0

00,0

00$

-

UPC

106

665

(Seg

men

t 2) -

PE

& C

onst

ruct

ion

6,00

0,00

0

207,

592,

853

20

7,59

2,85

3

213,

592,

853

I-64/

264

Inte

rcha

nge

Impr

ovem

ent

-

UPC

176

30 -

PE/R

OW

54,5

92,5

76

-

-

54,5

92,5

76

-

UPC

570

48 -

PE/R

OW

15,0

71,0

63

-

-

15,0

71,0

63

Third

Cro

ssin

g - U

PC 1

0672

4 - S

EIS

5,00

0,00

0

-

-

5,00

0,00

0

I-64

Sout

hsid

e/Hi

gh-R

ise B

ridge

- U

PC 1

0669

2 - P

E20

,000

,000

-

-

20

,000

,000

Tota

l14

4,66

3,63

9$

20

7,59

2,85

3$

-$

207,

592,

853

$

35

2,25

6,49

2$

Tabl

e 3

- Allo

catio

nsHa

mpt

on R

oads

Tra

nspo

rtat

ion

Fund

(HRT

F)Al

loca

tions

Fisc

al Y

ear 2

016

Attachment 21-A

Sour

ce:

VDO

T re

port

"All

Proj

ect C

osts

"Pr

epar

ed b

y Ha

mpt

on R

oads

Tra

nspo

rtat

ion

Plan

ning

Org

aniza

tion

on 1

1/9/

2015

Proj

ect

Tota

l FY2

014

&

FY

2015

Pre

viou

s

FY

2016

Se

ptem

ber 2

015

Tota

l YTD

FY

2016

Tota

l

I-64

Peni

nsul

a W

iden

ing

-

UPC

104

905

(Seg

men

t 1) -

Cons

truc

tion

1,54

4,50

2$

-

$

-

1,

544,

502

$

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

Tota

l1,

544,

502

$

-$

-

$

-$

1,

544,

502

$

Tabl

e 4

- Exp

endi

ture

sHa

mpt

on R

oads

Tra

nspo

rtat

ion

Fund

(HRT

F)Ex

pend

iture

sFi

scal

Yea

r 201

6

Attachment 21-A


B. NATIONAL HIGHWAY SYSTEM MODIFICATIONS - VIRGINIA

The attached letter from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) approving the National Highway System (NHS) modifications requested subsequent to the Virginia Department of Transportation’s (VDOT) statewide highway functional reclassification process includes 557 and deletes 224 miles from the State’s (Conditionally Approved) NHS.

Attachment 21-B

Attachment 21-B


C. U.S. DOT TIGER GRANT AWARDS

The U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) has awarded $500 million in Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) grants to 39 transportation projects across the country. TIGER grants “recognize projects nationwide that will advance key transportation goals such as safety, innovation and opportunity.” USDOT received 627 applications from all 50 states and several territories for the seventh round of funding. These applications were valued at $10.1 billion or 20 times the allocated amount. The Commonwealth of Virginia did not receive any funding as a result of the seventh round of awards. The full listing of awards is attached.

Attachment 21-C

201 5 AWARDS

Rural Award

Urban Award

! (

" )

Attachment 21-C

2015 TIGER Awards

Project Name (click to link) State TIGER Grant

Award

Urban/

Rural

Connecting our Neighborhoods to

Opportunities Alabama $20,000,000 Urban

Native Village of Point Hope Transportation

Infrastructure and Transit Improvement

Project Alaska $2,899,992 Rural

Grand Canal Bike and Pedestrian

Improvements Arizona $10,330,000 Urban

SR 347 Grade Separation Project Arizona $15,000,000 Rural

Port of Hueneme Intermodal Improvement

Project California $12,300,000 Urban

Rail to Rail Active Transportation Corridor

Connector Project California $15,000,000 Urban

Tenth Avenue Marine Terminal

Modernization Project California $10,000,000 Urban

Southwest Chief Route Advancement and

Improvement Project Colorado $15,210,143 Rural

Barnum Station Project Connecticut $10,000,000 Urban

Līhu‘e Town Core Mobility and Revitalization Hawaii $13,815,100 Rural

Milwaukee District – West Line Fox River

Bridge Improvement Project Illinois $14,000,000 Urban

Port of Indiana - Jeffersonville Truck-to-Rail

and Rail-to-Water Improvements Indiana $10,000,000 Urban

Regional Truck Parking Information and

Management System Kansas $25,000,000 Rural

Transforming Dixie Highway Project Kentucky $16,910,000 Urban

New Orleans Canal Street Ferry Terminal Louisiana $10,038,678 Urban Attachment 21-C

2015 TIGER Awards (Continued)

Project Name (click to link) State TIGER Grant Urban/

Rural

Maine Regional Railways Project Maine $20,000,000 Rural

Southeast Baltimore Port Industry Freight

Corridor Plan Maryland $10,000,000 Urban

Lowell Canal Bridges Massachusetts $13,389,750 Urban

Willmar Rail Connector and Industrial

Access Minnesota $10,000,000 Rural

Greening the Gateways Mississippi $16,500,000 Urban

U.S. Route 54 Mississippi River Bridge Missouri $10,000,000 Rural

Glacier Rail Park/Kalispell Core Area

Development and Trail Project Montana $10,000,000 Rural

NEC Portal Bridge Replacement

Acceleration Project New Jersey $16,000,000 Urban

Pueblo of Laguna Bike and Pedestrian

Priority Route Construction New Mexico $1,000,000 Rural

Bronx River Greenway: Bridge the Critical

South Bronx Gap New York $10,000,000 Urban

Hudson Links I-287 BRT/ITS Project New York $10,000,000 Urban

Main Street Multi-Modal Access and

Revitalization New York $18,000,000 Urban

Charlotte Gateway Station Track and Safety

Improvements North Carolina $25,000,000 Urban

U.S. 301: Road to Opportunity North Carolina $10,000,000 Rural

Transit Tech Ohio Ohio $6,839,860 Rural

Port of Newport International Terminal

Shipping Facility Oregon $2,000,000 Rural

Closing the Gaps Pennsylvania $10,265,000 Urban Attachment 21-C

2015 TIGER Awards (Continued)

Project Name (click to link) State TIGER Grant Urban/

Rural

Hopkinton Travel Plaza and Transit Hub Rhode Island $9,000,000 Rural

South Dakota Freight Capacity Expansion

Project South Dakota $6,000,000 Rural

Texas Rural Transit Asset Replacement

Project Texas $20,802,400 Rural

Western Vermont Freight-Passenger Rail

Project Vermont $10,000,000 Rural

Mukilteo Multimodal Ferry Terminal Washington $10,000,000 Urban

Tacoma LINK Expansion Washington $15,000,000 Urban

Milwaukee Streetcar - Lakefront Line Wisconsin $14,200,000 Urban

Attachment 21-C


D. 2040 LRTP REVISED FORECASTED REVENUES AND SCHEDULE

On October 30, 2015, HRTPO staff received revised revenue forecasts for the 2040 Long-Range Transportation Plan (LRTP). The revised revenue forecast reflects House Bill 1887 funding distributions for State of Good Repair, High-Priority Projects Program, and the District Grant Program. Over the next few months, HRTPO staff will work closely with the LRTP Subcommittee and the Transportation Technical Advisory Committee (TTAC) to develop a new 2040 LRTP Draft Fiscally-Constrained List of Projects, reflecting the new funding assumptions contained in the revised forecast. The Transportation Technical Advisory Committee was provided with a brief presentation (attached) detailing the revised revenue forecasts at the November 2015 meeting. Attachment 21-D

Revised Revenue Forecast

Presented to the Transportation Technical Advisory Committee November 4, 2015 Dale M. Stith, AICP, GISP Principal Transportation Planner Hampton Roads Transportation Planning Organization

Attachment 21-D

2

• Original 2040 LRTP Revenue Forecast received December 2013

• HRTPO staff informed by VDOT that the 2040 LRTP Revenue Forecast was being revised

July 2015

• Revised 2040 LRTP Revenue Forecast received • House Bill 1887 Funding Distributions • State of Good Repair • High-Priority Projects Program • District Grant Program

October 30, 2015

Attachment 21-D

ORIGINAL Forecast: $24.8 Billion

(Received December 2013)

FY 2014 – 2040

Maintenance – VDOT and Localities $12 Billion

Hampton Roads Transportation Fund $8.4 Billion

Construction $4.4 Billion

Source: VDOT 3

48% 34%

18%

Attachment 21-D



FY 2014 - 2040 FY 2016 - 2040

Maintenance – VDOT and Localities $12 Billion $12 Billion

Hampton Roads Transportation Fund $8.4 Billion $8 Billion

Construction $4.4 Billion $4.2 Billion

Source: VDOT 4

Attachment 21-D



FY 2014 - 2040 FY 2016 - 2040

Maintenance – VDOT and Localities $12 Billion $12 Billion

Hampton Roads Transportation Fund $8.4 Billion $8 Billion

Construction $4.4 Billion $4.2 Billion

Source: VDOT 5

REVISED Forecast: $21 Billion

(Received October 30, 2015)

FY 2016 - 2040 Difference

$12 Billion* NONE

$6 Billion - $2 Billion

$3 Billion - $1.2 Billion

*Includes State of Good Repair Funds

Attachment 21-D

• LRTP Subcommittee Meeting – THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 12th at 9:30am •Revise working Draft Fiscally-Constrained List of Projects November

•Continue working on Draft Fiscally-Constrained List of Projects •Anticipate HRTAC Financing Plan for Regional Priority Projects December

•Present Draft Fiscally-Constrained List of Projects to TTAC •Present Draft Fiscally-Constrained List of Projects to HRTPO Board January

•Advisory Committee Review of Draft Fiscally-Constrained List of Projects •Public Review of Draft Fiscally-Constrained List of Projects

January - March

•HRTPO Board Final Approval of Fiscally-Constrained List of Projects March

•Board Approved and Adopted 2040 LRTP Spring 2016

6

Attachment 21-D


ITEM #22: OLD/NEW BUSINESS ADJOURNMENT

Documents

WORKSHOP AGENDA - Hampton Roads Agenda.pdf · C. FY 2016 Budget Amendments D. FY 2015-2018 TIP Revision – RSTP and CMAQ Transfer Request: Suffolk E. HRTPO 2016 Legislative Agenda