Below are the minutes for the Regional Transportation Advisory Committee meeting, held on Friday, July 16, 2004, from 9:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m. in Conference Room East (6A), at the Clark County Public Service Center, 1300 Franklin Street - Floor 4, Vancouver, Washington. The agenda for this meeting is also available.
I. Call to Order and Approval of Minutes
The meeting of the Regional Transportation Advisory Committee was called to order on Friday, July 16, 2004 at 9:00 a.m. in the Conference Room (6th Floor) at the Public Service Center, 1300 Franklin Street Vancouver, Washington. Dean Lookingbill, Transportation Director, served as Chair for the meeting. Those in attendance follow:
Sam Adams City of Battle Ground Jim Carothers City of Camas Justin Clary City of Ridgefield Sonny Conder Metro John Cullerton Metro Lynda David RTC Evan Dust Clark County John Fratt Port of Vancouver Chuck Green Parsons Brinckerhoff Mark Harrington RTC Bob Hart RTC Shinwon Kim RTC Dean Lookingbill RTC Thomas Picco ODOT Ed Pickering C-TRAN Cathreen Richards WSDOT Sandi Roberts RTC Dale Robins RTC Bryan Snodgrass City of Vancouver Kevin Snyder City of Ridgefield Wade Strange SW Clean Air Agency Mark Turpel Metro Bill Wright Clark County Phil Wuest City of Vancouver Dean Lookingbill, RTC, asked for any changes or corrections to the May 21, 2004, meeting minutes.
EVAN DUST, CLARK COUNTY, MOVED FOR APPROVAL OF THE MAY 21 2004 MINUTES AND JOHN CULLERTON, METRO, SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
II. 2004-2006 MTIP Amendment #5: I-5 E. Fork Lewis River Bridge, Action
Dale Robins, RTC, said WSDOT is requesting an MTIP amendment to advance the preliminary engineering for the I-5 East Fork Lewis River Bridge Repair up to September 2004. The advancement of the preliminary engineering will help insure that WSDOT will meet the August 2006 construction start date. Dale said the proposed project would amend the 2004 element of the MTIP. This amendment is consistent with the Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP), congestion management system, air quality conformity analysis, and is financially constrained. This project will help meet the need for transportation investment in the region.
Dale noted that regionally significant projects must be programmed in the MTIP and STIP in order to obligate funds. Action on this amendment will provide $91,000 in federal Interstate Maintenance funds for repair of the I-5 East Fork Lewis River Bridge.
PHIL WUEST, CITY OF VANCOUVER, MADE THE MOTION TO APPROVE 2004-2006 MTIP AMENDMENT #5: I-5 EAST FORK LEWIS RIVER BRIDGE AND EVAN DUST, CLARK COUNTY, SECONDED THE MOTION. IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
III. MTIP Process/Policies/Criteria, Action
Dale Robins, RTC said the process for development of the 2005-2007 Metropolitan Transportation Improvement Program (MTIP) has begun. The goal is to build upon the MTIP process utilized in previous years and adopt a three-year MTIP that helps the region meet obligation levels and leverage competitive dollars. The MTIP is a list of all regionally significant transportation projects. The MTIP includes a priority list of projects to be carried out in each of the next three years and has a financial plan that demonstrates how it can be implemented.
Dale said an RTAC subcommittee has met several times during the past month and recommended changes to the MTIP policies and criteria. Dale noted that the RTC Board adopted the MTIP development process. The steps of the MTIP development process include: 1) project screening for consistency with local land use plans and the Metropolitan Transportation Plan, 2) evaluation and ranking of projects by the adopted set of selection criteria. 3) project selection, and 4) programming of projects.
Dale said RTC is opening the MTIP process to program $3 million for STP-TMA funds for year 2007 of the MTIP. These are estimated funds for 2007. Dale said money has been used quite successfully in the past to leverage state TIB funds.
Dale noted changes to the proposed Project Screening Criteria. All projects must be consistent with the Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) and Local Comprehensive Plans. Road projects that add capacity must be listed in the MTP before being programmed in the MTIP. In 2004, RTC will allow projects included in adopted Capital Facility Plans that have been submitted to RTC for certification review to be submitted for funding consideration. Projects must be classified as an urban collector/rural minor arterial to be considered for STP-TMA funding. The projects should be ready to proceed and have reasonable timeline for implementation.
Dale reviewed rules relating to project delays. Agencies will have two years from start date listed in their project application to obligate a project phase (preliminary engineering, right of way, or construction). If a project is delayed because of a factor outside of an agency’s control, the agency can request an extension from RTAC and receive approval by the RTC Board. Dale also said that to ensure funding match percentage agencies are to submit to RTC a copy of their local agency agreement and/or other documentation displaying the actual federal/local funding percentages. Dale said the MTIP project selection criteria has changed with TDM/TSM criteria now under its own heading. Other criteria included Congestion Management, TDM/TSM, Safety, Multimodal, Economic Development, Financial/Implementation and Air Quality. Dale reviewed the point system.
Sam Adams, City of Battle Ground, questioned how Battle Ground would compete if C-TRAN service is eliminated in the Battle Ground area following the November 2004 vote. Dean Lookingbill, RTC, said we will make a note and would discuss this issue in the next round of MTIP project selection. However, agencies should be able to take credit for existing transit service. Phil Wuest, City of Vancouver, said he had some other details he would like to discuss when MTIP project selection criteria is reviewed in future years. He noted that the congestion portion, V/C ratio, benefit estimate, and overall volume boils down to the benefit of the project. Phil said his other concern is how multimodal projects are evaluated and whether they are being scored appropriately. Phil also noted that economic development should be addressed in more detail at a future date.
Bill Wright, Clark County, commented on the federal functional classification of roadways. He said the County is looking to re-classify some facilities, for example the possible transfer of minor arterial designation from Union Road, south of NE 179th Street, to the proposed NE 15th Avenue alignment.
BILL WRIGHT, CLARK COUNTY, MADE A MOTION TO RECOMMEND ADOPTION OF THE REVISED MTIP POLICIES AND CRITERIA BY THE RTC BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND ED PICKERING, C-TRAN, SECONDED THE MOTION. IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
IV. TIB Competitive Project Development, Discussion
Dale Robins, RTC, said we are working hard to have a successful Transportation Improvement Board (TIB) process. The FY 2006 TIB urban programs include $20-$25 million funding for the Arterial Improvement Program (AIP), $25-$30 million for the Transportation Partnership Program (TPP) and about $2-$3 million for the Pedestrian Safety & Mobility Program (PSMP). The Small City Program (SCP) will have $5-$7.5 million in funding. Dale said in an attempt to try to continue the success of our region, a subcommittee of RTAC has been working to coordinate grant applications. The subcommittee includes representatives from WSDOT, Clark County, Battle Ground, Camas, Washougal, Vancouver, Port of Vancouver, C-TRAN, and RTC.
Dale reminded RTAC that draft grant applications are due to RTC by Thursday, August 12, 2004. Draft grant applications will then be reviewed and comments returned the following week. Final grant applications will be due to RTC on Monday, August 30, 2004. Grants will be submitted as a region with a cover letter noting regional support for the project applications.
Dale described the projects that can be submitted for both AIP and TPP funds. Dale said TIB would evaluate the projects for both programs and select the best projects for funding under each program. They are: NE 63rd Street from Andresen Road to I-205 (Clark County), NE 88th Street from St. Johns Road to Andresen Road (Clark County), NE 72nd Avenue, from 88th Street to 110th Street (Clark County), NE 15th Avenue from 20th Avenue to 179th Street (Clark County), NE 137th Avenue from 28th Street to SR-500 (Vancouver/Clark County), NE 18th Street from 112th Avenue to 138th Avenue (Vancouver), Parkway Avenue from NE 5th Street to NW Onsdorff Boulevard (Battle Ground), and Leadbetter Drive, from Lake Road to Parker, added by Camas. The City of Vancouver has two projects to submit for PSPM consideration: Devine from 18th Street to Mill Plain, and 28th Street from 142nd Avenue to 162nd Avenue.
Dale asked Committee members to let him know whether there are any other applications that people are planning to submit. Dale said that in the past RTC has not coordinated the rural program grant applications but RTC is more than willing to help rural jurisdictions with grant applications. Dale said that at the August RTAC meeting the list of applications with cost estimates would be finalized.
V. Congestion Relief Study - Update
Dean Lookingbill, RTC, said that in March 2004 an overview of the Congestion Relief Study had been presented to RTAC. This included information on study approach, preliminary findings for the unconstrained scenarios and the first iteration of the Highway Bookend definition. Since March, all of the alternatives for analysis have been defined and most of the analysis has been completed. Dean explained that the purpose of this agenda item includes review of alternatives developed for the analysis and outline of performance indicators. Chuck Green of Parsons Brinckerhoff, the lead consultant for the Study, presented the preliminary study results and findings.
A technical team of bi-state agencies, including RTC, C-TRAN, Metro, TriMet, and ODOT, has been assisting WSDOT and the consultant team to review and develop performance measures and transportation alternatives for analysis and to provide overall technical review for the study. While there are many facets, there are two components that are key to the whole process, the definition of transportation alternatives and the analysis of performance.
Bob Hart, RTC, noted that the mid-range scenarios have now been analyzed: High Highway/High Transit, High Highway/Low Transit, Low Highway/High Transit with Freeway Pricing, and Low Highway/High Transit with TDM.
Chuck Green distributed copies of his presentation, “Urban Areas Congestion Relief Assessment Vancouver Urban Area Analysis Summary of Analysis and Results”. He said the report that is being put together from Secretary Doug MacDonald’s office would get the most airplay. This covers congestion, bottlenecks and what to do about it. Chuck said the study is to look at options to relieve congestion with its focus on state highways in the three main urban areas in Washington State (Puget Sound, Spokane and Clark County).
Chuck said that in this region the defined corridors for analysis included the state highway system on both sides of the river with the addition of some of Clark County’s regionally significant arterials such as Andresen, 162nd/164th, 192nd Avenues, Padden Park Way, Fourth Plain, Burton/28th and 18th Street. The study is not intended to develop a plan nor lead to modification of a plan. Chuck said the intention is to learn some lessons and use some of the technical work that has been done to help in the update of the Washington Transportation Plan. Chuck suggested that we could use some of the analysis to help in the forthcoming Columbia River Crossing work though we need to be careful that this study not compromise the integrity of any other studies.
Chuck highlighted results from the Highway Mid-Range, Highway Lane Miles by Alternative, the Transit Mid-Range, Transit Service Levels by Alternative, Sensitivity Analyses, Capital Cost ($ Billions), Total Study Area Vehicle Trips, Delay per Vehicle (Minutes), Average Vehicle Occupancy (AVO), V/C Ratios for the various scenarios, Daily River Crossings (Vehicles), River-Crossing Person Trips (excluding walk and bike trips), Daily VMT Relative to No-Action, Travel Time Reductions for Trips to/from Vancouver CBD, Clark County Transit Trip Productions (Weekday), Transit Mode Share Clark to Oregon Trips, Clark County to Oregon Transit Trips (Weekday), I-5 Congestion Results and Potential Environmental Impacts (Systemwide). Chuck pointed out that 2025 is the horizon year and GMA land use is kept constant.
Chuck concluded with a review of the findings from the Study in this region. Findings included that any new I-5 cross-Columbia River capacity will be used, significant improvements in I-5 capacity attract trips from I-205, scenarios with combined highway and transit improvements have highest reduction in VHT and delay, the Highway Bookend scenario and the highest Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT), “borderline” failing corridors with low transit tend to meet V/C goals with high transit, land use patterns may change depending on improved accessibility throughout the study area and pricing and TDM strategies have the highest impact on congestion though this needs more analysis.
Sonny Conder, Metro, distributed copies of ‘Washington State Department of Transportation, Congestion Relief Study, Land Use Impact Evaluation – Vancouver/Portland Metropolitan Area’. Sonny Conder provided a Power Point presentation and gave an overview of the land use assessment conducted by Metro as part of the Congestion Relief Study. The analysis evaluated potential changes to land use patterns within and outside the urban growth boundaries (UGBs) due to changes in accessibility that result from significant changes to highway capacity within the region. The methodology for the analysis was consistent with the land use analysis conducted as part of Metro’s 2040 process. The analysis for the Congestion Relief Study compared a No Action alternative with the Highway Bookend alternative. The findings indicated that the bookend alternative could have significant land use changes outside the UGB as well as changes to the type and patterns of land use within the UGB.
VI. Other Business
A. RTAC Members
B. RTC Staff
Congestion Monitoring Report
Dean reminded RTAC members that the Congestion Monitoring Report is available.
Dale Robins, RTC, said STP applications are due July 30th and TIB draft applications are due August 30th.
The meeting was adjourned at 11:00 a.m. The next meeting will be Friday, August 20, 2004.
Regional Transportation Council
1300 Franklin Street, Floor 4
Vancouver, Washington 98660Tel: 360-397-6067
Fax: 360-397-6132
E-mail: info@rtc.wa.govServed by C-TRAN Route 3.
If you have special needs, please contact RTC.
       
|