Below are the minutes for the Regional Transportation Advisory Committee meeting, held on Friday, November 21, 2005, from 9:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m. in the Training Room 679 (6th Floor), at the Clark County Public Service Center, 1300 Franklin Street, 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 Monday, November 21, 2005, at 9:00 a.m. in the Clark County Election Building, Room # 226 at 1408 Franklin Street, Vancouver, Washington. Dean Lookingbill, Transportation Director, served as Chair for the meeting. Those in attendance follow:
Sam Adams City of Battle Ground Alissa Bateman Human Services Council Lynda David RTC Rebecca Eisiminger Port of Vancouver Mark Harrington RTC Bob Hart RTC Shinwon Kim RTC Katherine Klockenteger WSDOT Jordan Larner Port of Ridgefield Dean Lookingbill RTC Mike Mabrey Clark County Steven Mathews WSDOT, SW Region Eric Phillips WSDOT Thomas Picco ODOT Ed Pickering C-TRAN Matt Ransom City of Vancouver Sandi Roberts RTC Dale Robins RTC Wade Strange SW Clean Air Agency Dick Walker Metro Steve Wall City of Ridgefield Bill Wright Clark County Dean Lookingbill, RTC, asked for any changes or corrections to the October 21, 2005, meeting minutes.
BECKY EISIMINGER, PORT OF VANCOUVER, MOVED FOR APPROVAL OF THE OCTOBER 21, 2005, MINUTES, AND THOMAS PICCO, ODOT, SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
II. Metropolitan Transportation Plan Update: Draft MTP, Action
Lynda David, RTC, presented the Metropolitan Transportation Plan Update: Draft MTP. The “Draft MTP” was distributed to RTAC members. Lynda highlighted the Key elements in the 2005 MTP that were updated: 1) Update to the MTP’s Vision and Goals [Chapter 1], 2) Horizon Year Update to 2030 [Chapter 2], demographic data & travel model results in [Chapter 3], 3) New Demographic Data Forecast for 2030 [demographic data in Chapter 2], 4) Transportation Improvement List Update [regional system list with cost estimates in Chapter 4 and full list of improvements coded in the travel forecast model and included in air quality conformity analysis in Appendix A], 5) Financial Plan Element Update [Chapter 4], 6) Regional Air Quality Conformity Analysis [air quality conformity analysis results for the Carbon Monoxide pollutant in Appendix A], and 7) MTP Strategic Plan Update [MTP Appendix B].
Lynda pointed out the MTP Financial Plan includes a description of federal, state, and local revenue sources as well as data showing the amount of revenues this region has received in past years. The Financial Plan also provides a description of anticipated expenditures on operations and maintenance as well as capacity expansion projects and capital needs. Projects completed since the last MTP update in 2002 are deleted with the 2005 Financial Plan update. Lynda noted estimated costs for capital projects that are part of the Designated Regional Transportation System are provided in 2005 dollars. The MTP must be “fiscally constrained” meaning that there should be a reasonable expectation that revenues will be available to provide for the list of projects contained in the MTP and to support the operations and maintenance of the multimodal transportation system. Lynda pointed out that in Chapter 7 a matrix showing how RTC implements the federally-required planning factors is included in the MTP for the first time.
Lynda said under the new 8-hour federal Ozone standard, the Vancouver/Portland Air Quality Maintenance Area (AQMA) has been redesignated from “maintenance” to “unclassifiable/attainment” for Ozone and no longer needs to demonstrate conformity for Ozone. The Vancouver AQMA is currently designated as a CO maintenance area. Therefore, the MTP does include regional conformity analysis for CO.
Lynda noted the “List of MTP and Local Projects”. All projects need to be identified in the MTP before they can be programmed for federal and state funding in the Metropolitan Transportation Improvement Program (MTIP). Lynda pointed out projects listed in italics are local projects, and the projects in regular font are part of the designated regional transportation system and cost estimates for these regional system projects are included in Chapter 4. Lynda reported the 2005 MTP update is viewed as an interim update, because a further MTP update will be developed in 2006 to bring the MTP into consistency with the anticipated 2006 update to the Comprehensive Growth Management Plan for Clark County. Lynda was complimented on the great job she has done on the MTP. Lynda reminded RTAC members that the draft MTP is available on RTC’s Web site.
MATT RANSOM, CITY OF VANCOUVER, MADE THE MOTION TO FORWARD THE MTP FOR APPROVAL AT THE DECEMBER 2005 RTC BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING FOR ADOPTION WITH THE EDITS DISCUSSED BY RTAC. ED PICKERING, C-TRAN, SECONDED THE MOTION. IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
III. 2006 Travel Behavior and Household Activity Survey, Discussion
Dick Walker, Metro, presented a power point presentation of the “2006 Travel Behavior and Household Activity Survey”. The Clark County region has been included in past survey efforts, and data from the surveys has provided valuable information with which to update and refine the regional travel forecast model. Issues that this region need to consider are the interest of RTC member agencies in participating in the 2006 survey, how costs can be shared, and what specific travel data needs may be fulfilled by the survey.
Dick Walker said it had been 11 years since the last household survey was conducted in this region. Metro is now making plans to conduct a travel behavior and household activity survey in the fall of 2006. Preparation efforts include the development of the survey instrument, the design of an implementation strategy, and the work toward an agreement to a funding strategy. Dick said as in 1994, Metro is working together with the other MPO’s in the state of Oregon and the ODOT Transportation Planning Analysis Unit to conduct a survey that covers the entire state. A common contractor and survey form will be used to ensure data compatibility and to maximize the efficient use of the financial resources.
Dick noted the survey strategy for this region involves a five-year plan. During the first two years, cross-sectional data for 6,000 households throughout the region will be captured. Essentially, households will be randomly selected. However, stratified samples will be identified to make sure that we collect enough observations to make meaningful statements about different market segments of the traveling population. Dick pointed out that years three through five will introduce a new survey concept to this region – the longitudinal panel survey. This survey will draw samples from those households interviewed in years one and two. The households will then be interviewed once each year during the latter three-year period.
There is a need to update the regional demand models and in these models the values placed on time, costs, and environment is important as part of the travel decision making process for individuals. A key question is, how much is a person willing to spend to save a few minutes? Dick pointed out the panel survey technique excels at identifying transitional effects: 1) What happens with regard to travel characteristics when a household gets a new licensed driver? 2) What happens when a job location changes? 3) What happens when a household member retires? 4) What happens as new shopping opportunities emerge nearby? 5) How do carpools change through time? Dick said this data would be used to build a host of tables that summarize transitional effects through time.
This survey would also feature new data collection techniques. A pilot survey was conducted last winter and spring. As part of the pilot survey, the effectiveness of using GPS as a collection tool was tested. Use of GPS in vehicles to record trip times, routes, and stop durations not only provides very acute temporal and geographical information, it also saves significant time in the processing of the survey data. The vehicular data will be collected for at least two (likely seven) days of vehicle use. He said that non-vehicular travel would not be ignored. It will be collected using more traditional techniques.
Dick said, consistent with past surveys, Metro is seeking partners to share costs. Potential funding partners in this region could include ODOT, TriMet, RTC, and Metro. Funding for the other Oregon statewide locations will be obtained from their respective areas. The target date to start the survey would be fall of 2006. The next step in the process would be to hire a contractor to finalize the survey questions and review the efficiency of survey wording. Dick commented that one of the most difficult responses to acquire is household income. Dick said the pilot survey, sponsored by ODOT, was done with participation of 300 households. RTC will e-mail to RTAC members Dick Walker’s slide show presentation and the ODOT report on the pilot survey. RTC will set a follow up meeting regarding the survey.
IV. 2006 RTC Emphasis Areas, Discussion
Dean Lookingbill presented the 2006 RTC Emphasis Areas and gave an overview of the proposed areas of emphasis and RTC’s work plan for 2006. RTC’s 2006 Work Plan and 2006 Budget will be presented to the RTC Board of Directors for adoption in December.
Dean said the 2005 Washington State Legislature passed a 16-year, statewide $7.1 billion Partnership Package of transportation projects. Clark County is set to receive $244 million for 13 projects. The Partnership funding package is in addition to the $4.2 billion, 10-year Nickel Package of transportation improvements passed by the 2003 legislature. Dean pointed out, with the two packages combined, Clark County will receive about $450 million in transportation projects. Because of the region’s critical need for transportation infrastructure investment, RTC will continue to have as one of its top priorities the provision of travel model and other related traffic analysis needed to support the projects funded by the Legislature as they move though the planning, design, and environmental phases.
Dean stated a significant revision to Clark County’s GMA plan was begun early in 2005 with the intent of completing the revised GMA plan by the end of the year. However, due to a number of circumstances, the new GMA plan will not be completed in 2005 and is now scheduled for completion in 2006. Dean said the land use and growth forecasts that result from the revised 2006 GMA plan are expected to target a 2024 forecast year. These growth forecasts are the drivers that produce the future year travel demand and lead to the identification of regional transportation system improvements. These ultimately result in the development of the Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP). Dean said a redraft of the MTP, given the new land use plan, will be undertaken as a part of RTC’s 2006-work plan.
Dean pointed out the regional transportation policy direction surrounding the issue of high capacity transit, including corridors and an alternative high capacity transit mode, has been an uncertain part of the regional transportation system for the last 10 years. Dean noted in late November of 2004, the 2005 federal transportation Appropriations Bill included a $1.488 million earmark to RTC for the analysis of the I-5/I-205/SR-500 transit loop. RTC’s 2006 work plan proposes to utilize this funding source to assist the RTC Board in facilitating a broad discussion with affected Clark County agencies on modal alternatives for future high capacity corridors within Clark County and how that system would connect to transit across the Columbia River. Dean said one of the anticipated products of the analysis would lead to a set of high capacity transit policies that would balance the land use policies, transit priorities, and regional transportation system priorities to help policy makers determine whether a high transit component is needed in Clark County and to guide development of RTC’s long-range regional transportation system plan.
Dean said the continuation of the Columbia River Crossing Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) process would be another significant activity in RTC’s 2006 work plan. RTC as the federally designated Metropolitan Transportation Planning Organization (MPO) for Clark County has a mandated role regarding the DEIS process. The primary decision RTC is required to make is to address the adoption of the locally preferred highway and transit alternatives and their incorporation into the region’s adopted MTP. RTC staff has a part in the Columbia River Crossing Project Development Team and will have extensive involvement in the technical analysis throughout 2006. The RTC Board will be informed periodically and will have the opportunity to weigh in on a number of policy issues.
Dean reported other key transportation planning projects to be addressed in 2006 include the following: 1) continuation of the I-205 Corridor Environmental Assessment, 2) completion of the SR-35 Columbia River Bridge Environmental Impact Statement in Klickitat County, and 3) completion of the Washington State Transportation Plan.
Dean reviewed the MTP Major Revision and said the MTP will be revised in order to reestablish consistency with the 2006 adoption of the County’s 2004 Comprehensive Growth Management Plan update. The County’s Comprehensive Plan update revision began in 2005, and to date, forecasts higher population and employment growth totals and expanded Urban Growth Area as compared to the previously plan.
Dean highlighted the 2006 Major Projects: 1) High Capacity Transit Corridors, 2) I-205 Corridor Environmental Assessment, 3) Transportation Operations and Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) Development, 4) Washington State Transportation Plan, 5) I-5 Columbia River Crossing DEIS process, 6) Bi-State Coordination Committee, 7) Transportation Technical Services, 8) Skamania and Klickitat Counties Regional Transportation Programs, and 9) RTC Continuing Program Activities. Dean concluded saying as a whole, the 2006 Work Plan provides the RTC Board and its member agencies with the regional coordination, information, and decision-making process to ensure that transportation investments contribute to the economic and land use goals of our region.
Lynda David pointed out the FY 2007 Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP) will soon have to be drafted. The federal and state UPWP review for RTC and Metro is scheduled for February 13, 2006. The FY 07 UPWP will use the 2006 Work Program as its basis.
V. FY ’07 Appropriation Requests - Issues, Discussion
Dean Lookingbill, said once again it is time to begin working on the region’s FY ’07 Federal Transportation Appropriations request. Dean pointed out that requests need to be in to our congressional representatives by the end of February. We are anticipating a recommendation from the RTC Board at the February 6, 2006 meeting. Dean referred to the memorandum included in the meeting packet. The memorandum has a list of issues that are intended to begin to frame the discussion.
Dean reported the list of issues is a set of proposed recommendations that once agreed to would be used to help set the region’s project priorities. Requests for earmarks for the past several years have been in the context of a 6-year reauthorization bill, which provided for higher funding levels. The ’07 request is for an annual appropriations bill, which provides a lower level of funding opportunity in the highway program categories. Dean said while the Clark County region did very well with earmarks (high priority projects) in the Authorization Bill, many of those were a partial amount of the whole project costs. In the previous criteria set for the region’s authorization earmark requests, the sponsoring jurisdiction was expected to address how they could complete a logical phase of the project with a partial earmark. The FY ’06 Appropriations Bill is still pending in Congress so our region does not know which earmark requests will be successful and which ones might be pursued again in FY ’07. Dean said projects not selected as a priority for FY ’07 appropriations earmark could be considered in future years. Transit earmark requests are usually from discretionary programs, whereas highway projects are primarily funded through categorical programs with some opportunity for earmarks.
Dean said the RTC Board should set policy direction to help produce the priority list of projects. The following options could be considered: 1) emphasize picking projects that have already been started and can be carried through the next logical step with the earmark request and thereby not allow new project earmarks, 2) require each jurisdiction to narrow their request to a single priority and 3) limit project requests to those projects that emphasize economic development and jobs growth.
Dean said following RTAC’s discussion, the issue and proposed recommendations for prioritizing the earmark requests will be forwarded to the RTC Board for their initial discussion at the December 6, 2005, meeting. RTAC members will be asked to identify and discuss their project requests at the December 16, 2005 RTAC meeting. The RTC Board will be asked to adopt a set of policy recommendations for prioritizing the ’07 earmarks and to also review the entire list of project requests at their January 3, 2006, meeting. RTAC will be asked to make their project recommendations at their January 20, 2006 meeting. The RTC Board will be asked to take into consideration RTAC’s recommendations and to complete the prioritization of project requests for FY ’07 at their February 7, 2006, meeting.
Last year’s Appropriation-RTC Region and Reauthorization-RTC Region lists were distributed to RTAC members. Dale Robins referred RTAC members to page (2), “Reauthorization-RTC Region”, which reflects the six-year Bill. Dale explained some of the authorization is for TEA-21 and some for SAFETEA-LU. Dean said that by looking at these lists, it may help guide the creation of a list for for 2007, 2008, and 2009. Dean asked RTAC members to come back next month with their project ideas. This would help in discussions about projects as a region.
VI. Other Business
A. RTAC Members
B. RTC Staff
The TIB met in Vancouver last week, November 17th/18th. The City of Vancouver received $4.5 million dollars for the 137th Avenue Corridor from 28th Street to 49th Street. Vancouver also received $150,000 for a pedestrian project on Andresen Road. The City of Ridgefield received $680,000 for S 10th Avenue. This project had also secured federal STP funds.
Ed Pickering said C-TRAN has applied for funding from the state’s new Regional Mobility grant program for the 99th Street Park and Ride and for articulated buses. RTC staff has participated in the state’s Advisory Committee and Grant Technical Working Group to help establish this program and recommend projects for funding to the legislature.
Dean Lookingbill said RTC purchased Visum / Vissim modeling software. Training will start next week.
The meeting was adjourned at 10:53 a.m. The next meeting will be Friday, December 16, 2005.
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.
       
|