11.13.13 pc meeting packet - fmats

POLICY COMMITTEE MEETING

Wednesday, November 13, 2013 10:00 am – 12:00 pm State of Alaska DOT & PF, 2301 Peger Road, Main Conference Room

1. Call to Order

2. Introduction of Members and Attendees

3. Public Comment Period (3 minute limit)

4. Approval of the November 13, 2013 Agenda 5. Approval of the October 16, 2013 Minutes

6. Committee Reports

a. Coordinator’s Office Report and Technical Committee Action Items

7. Old Business

8. New Business

a. Chair and Vice-Chair Elections (Action Item) b. Request for Funding to the Governor (Action Item) c. Scope of Services for MPO Agreement Consolidation (Action Item) d. Long Range Transit Plan Approval (Action Item) e. College Road Corridor Study Update

9. Public Comment Period (3 minute limit) 10. Other Issues

11. Informational Items

a. Historical Plaque Update b. Obligations/Offsets c. ARRC Mega Project Report

12. Policy Committee Comments

13. Adjourn

Next Scheduled Policy Committee Meeting, 10:00 am, Wednesday, December 18, 2013 at the DOT&PF Main Conference Room.

dltodd

Typewritten Text

Pg. 21

dltodd

Typewritten Text

Pg. 23

dltodd

Typewritten Text

Pgs. 24-29

dltodd

Typewritten Text

dltodd

Typewritten Text

dltodd

Typewritten Text

dltodd

Typewritten Text

dltodd

Typewritten Text

dltodd

Typewritten Text

dltodd

Typewritten Text

dltodd

Typewritten Text

dltodd

Typewritten Text

dltodd

Typewritten Text

dltodd

Typewritten Text

dltodd

Typewritten Text

dltodd

Typewritten Text

Pgs. 2-13

dltodd

Typewritten Text

dltodd

Typewritten Text

Pgs. 14-15

dltodd

Typewritten Text

dltodd

Typewritten Text

dltodd

Typewritten Text

dltodd

Typewritten Text

Pgs. 18-20

dltodd

Typewritten Text

dltodd

Typewritten Text

dltodd

Typewritten Text

dltodd

Typewritten Text

dltodd

Typewritten Text

dltodd

Typewritten Text

dltodd

Typewritten Text

dltodd

Typewritten Text

POLICY COMMITTEE

Main Conference Room

State of Alaska DOT&PF, 2301 Peger Road

Fairbanks, Alaska

Meeting Minutes – October 16, 2013

1. Call to Order

Steve Titus called the meeting to order at 10:00 a.m.

2. Introduction of Members and Attendees

Attendee Representative Organization

*Mayor Jerry Cleworth Mayor, City of Fairbanks *Mayor Bryce Ward Mayor, City of North Pole *Mayor Luke Hopkins Mayor, Fairbanks North Star Borough *Steve Titus, Chair DOT&PF, Northern Region Director *Guy Sattley, Vice-Chair FNSB Assembly Member *Perry Walley City of Fairbanks Council Member *Alice Edwards DEC Division of Air Quality +Joan Hardesty DEC Division of Air Quality +Brian Lindamood Alaska Railroad

+Judy Chapman DOT&PF Planning +Michael Schmetzer City of Fairbanks, Public Works & Engineering **

+Donna Gardino FMATS, MPO Coordinator **Aaron Buckley FMATS Transportation Planner **Deborah Todd FMATS, Administrative Assistant **Kellen Spillman FNSB Community Planning **Linda Mahlen DOT&PF Planning Cindy Heil DEC Division of Air Quality Hannah Blankenship DOT&PF Public Information Ryan Anderson DOT&PF Preconstruction Jae Hill FNSB Deputy Planning Director Bob Laurie DOT&PF Headquarters Jeff Otteson DOT&PF Headquarters Murray Walsh DOT&PF Headquarters Brenda Hewitt (via telephone) Representative Isaacson’s Office Kevin Keller HDR

*FMATS Policy Committee Members, **FMATS Staff Members, +FMATS Technical Committee Members

October 16, 2013 Policy Committee Meeting Minutes

2

Mr. Titus presented Mayor Cleworth with a Certificate of Appreciation and thanked him for his service to FMATS. Mr. Titus stated that he wished Mayor Cleworth the best of luck in all his future endeavors.


No public comment.

4. Approval of October 16, 2013 Agenda

• Motion: To approve the October 16, 2013 Agenda. (Hopkins/Sattley). Discussion: Mayor Hopkins requested that the Nordale Road Trail Crossing be added to the Agenda under “Other Issues.”

• Vote on the motion: None opposed. Approved

5. Approval of September 18, 2013 Minutes

• Motion: To approve the September 18, 2013 meeting minutes. (Ward/Hopkins)

• Vote on the motion: None opposed. Approved.

6. Committee Reports a. Coordinator’s Office Report and Technical Committee Action Items

Ms. Gardino provided an update and highlights from all workshops and meetings she had attended, as well as all other FMATS activities that had occurred since the last meeting.

7. Old Business

a. Public Participation Plan (Action Item)

Motion: To approve the Public Participation Plan as presented. (Ward/Heil)

Discussion: Ms. Gardino explained that the Public Participation Plan had gone out for a 75-day review and no additional comments had been received. Ms. Gardino summarized all revisions that had been made to the document. Mayor Hopkins stated that it was his recollection at the last Policy Committee meeting that the document had been sent back to the Technical Committee for review. Ms. Gardino stated that the document was sent out for further public review until the end of the month and Technical Committee had recommended approval of the document by the Policy Committee. Mayor Cleworth stated that this was a 30-page document that should be reduced to one page. Mayor Cleworth further stated that he understood the reasoning behind the number of pages, given all the laws and regulations that governed it. Mayor Cleworth stated that he thought DOT, the Borough and the Cities, had done a great job of keeping the public informed and involved. Mayor Cleworth stated that he thought all the rest of the document was a bureaucratic nightmare and he appreciated all that Ms. Gardino had done. Mayor Hopkins inquired if there were signatories required for the document. Ms. Gardino stated that the document was an existing document they were making updates to and required no signatures. Mr. Titus inquired if there had been any changes to the document since the previous meeting. Ms. Gardino


3

stated that there had been no further changes to the document since the previous meeting.

Vote on Motion: Six in favor. One opposed (Cleworth). Approved.

b. Operating Agreement (Action Item)

Ms. Gardino explained the status of the Operating Agreement draft included in the meeting packet. Ms. Gardino stated that she had taken the action item off the agenda for the last meeting per Mr. Hernandez’s request. Ms. Gardino explained that Mr. Hernandez wanted time for the Borough to further review the Agreement. Ms. Gardino stated that there had been a lengthy discussion of the Agreement at the Technical Committee meeting and she summarized discussion points brought up at that meeting for the Policy Committee. Ms. Gardino stated that Ms. Chapman had suggested the creation of a policy and procedures manual for FMATS to provide reference. Ms. Gardino stated that Ms. Hardesty had inquired about time constraints on the agreement. Ms. Gardino stated that Mr. Spillman had inquired if something was added about potential conflicts between FMATS and DOT. Ms. Gardino stated that in looking back at the minutes she realized that the Technical Committee had not addressed that issue.. Ms. Gardino stated that the issue of authorities had been brought up and the suggestion was made by Mr. Butler of having an attorney review the document, as well as looking at all the agreements for ways to streamline them. Mr. Titus stated that he recalled the State AG comments and the document being remanded back to the Technical Committee and inquired if the document would have to go back through the review process again if it were revised. Ms. Gardino stated that Mr. Titus was correct and it would have to go back through the review process if substantial changes were made to the document. Mr. Titus asked if opening the door for more comments would lengthen the approval time for the document and whether we could approve it this time and have a legitimate agreement in place. Mayor Ward inquired if this was correct procedure to take an action item off the agenda without the consent of the Technical Committee. Mayor Hopkins inquired whether the Technical Committee had taken all the action that they could take at that time. Mayor Hopkins stated that the document had been referred back to the Technical Committee and Mayor Ward had brought it forward to the Policy Committee. Mayor Ward stated that as a point of order, a motion should be on the table before further discussion. Motion: To approve the Operating Agreement as presented. (Cleworth/Ward). Discussion: Mayor Cleworth stated that he would like to offer an amendment to the previous motion. Mayor Cleworth stated that on Page 59 of the meeting packet, it should be revised to add a sentence in Section 5.2 prior to the sentence that read “The MPO Coordinator would serve as a secretary for the


4

Policy Committee.” The added sentence would read: “A majority vote of the Policy Committee, as defined by the Bylaws would be binding to all parties.”

Amendment to the Motion: Amend Section 5.2 by adding the following

sentence before the last sentence: “A majority vote of the Policy Committee, as defined by the Bylaws is binding on all parties. (Cleworth/Walley).

Discussion: Mr. Sattley inquired if this was a motion due to the Illinois Street landscaping issue. Mayor Cleworth stated that it was due, in part, to that but it would probably come up again in the future. Mr. Sattley stated that it had been decided that the project was not an FMATS project and inquired if that muddied the waters a little bit. Mayor Ward stated that he did not think it was a bad amendment and his effort in bringing this forward was to get it passed and sent on to the Governor for signature. Mayor Ward stated that his concern was that future actions would be jeopardized by further delays. Mayor Hopkins stated that when the Agreement was signed, it was signed by three mayors and the governor, and was not sure whether it would be binding to DOT, even if the Governor signed it. Mayor Hopkins stated that he was not sure if the Agreement would throw them into further unacceptable actions and throw a wrench into other people signing it, since we were putting it in saying that DOT would abide by that. Mayor Hopkins stated that he was not sure if any action taken at this meeting would solve the issue. Mayor Hopkins stated that he was currently not in favor of this amendment. Mayor Cleworth stated that he did not think it would affect anything negatively since he thought it stated the obvious. Mr. Titus stated that he believed it was a major change that would require an AG review. Mr. Titus stated that he did not believe that the MPO had authority over another organization, i.e., the DOT. Mr. Titus stated that the MPO did not have the authority to say that this was what they should do. Mr. Titus stated that there were a number of things that a Planning organization was required to do, but did not believe that it was a function to dictate to others what they could or could not do simply by a majority vote of the Policy Committee. Mr. Titus stated that he suspected it would require another review and take more time. Mr. Titus stated his research told him that an MPO did not have the authority to tell other entities what they could or could not do. Mr. Titus stated that the intent of this amendment would make it binding to the DEC as well since they were an enforcement agency. Mr. Sattley asked if the Policy Committee were to put conditions on a project prior to approval, would the DOT then be able to ignore it or deny approval. Mr. Titus stated that if those conditions were legitimate and within the project scope, they would then be incorporated into the project. Mr. Titus stated that the Department


5

could not change the scope, or refuse to do something if it were approved by the MPO. Mayor Ward stated that his effort in bringing this forward was to pass it without amendments. Mayor Ward stated that he agreed with the amendment in principle with regards to control of FMATS funding allocations. Mayor Ward stated that in an effort to get this through so that we could have an MOU that defined our boundaries, he would like to see it go through without this amendment. Mayor Cleworth stated that all the amendment was saying was that we controlled the money and could make recommendations. Mayor Cleworth stated that votes should be binding on the parties, but would not be binding if any of the parties had other conflicting laws. Mr. Sattley stated that since DEC was a party to this, they should have a say in the decision since it affected them. Ms. Edwards stated that she had a similar reaction as Mr. Titus to the amendment. Ms. Edwards stated that she would need to review this before DEC signed it, and whether it could be reviewed as a policy or procedure somewhere else. Ms. Edwards stated that to the extent if there were a conflict, the DEC should have a legal review of it to decide if it might cause an issue at some point in the future.

Vote on Amendment to the Motion: Two in Favor (Cleworth/Walley). Five opposed. (Hopkins/Sattley/Ward/Titus/Edwards). Motion did not pass.

Amendment to the Motion: Amend Section 6.1.4(2) by adding a new second sentence: “All PL funds shall be used to fund the MPO Coordinator’s Office. (Cleworth/Walley) Discussion: Mayor Hopkins stated that he could not agree with the amendment because as he understood PL funding, there were many different tasks performed under PL funding. Mayor Hopkins asked for clarification of what the PL funding was currently spent on. Ms. Gardino stated that it was outlined in the UPWP and right now funding was divided between DOT, FMATS, and the Borough for their various tasks. Ms. Gardino stated that the Coordinator’s Office was responsible for development of the Long Range Plan, the Public Participation Plan, running the meetings, and preparation of the TIP. Ms. Gardino stated that the Borough responsibilities included providing GIS work, platting, and floodplain permits. Ms. Gardino stated that DOT was responsible for maintenance and match agreements as well as project starts. Mr. Titus inquired whether if all PL funds were added to the budget of the Coordinator’s Office, would the funds cover the entire Coordinator’s Office operating budget. Ms. Gardino stated that all the PL funds would not cover the Coordinator’s Office budget. Mr. Titus stated that if all the PL funding were allocated to the Coordinator’s Office there would still be a deficit and Ms. Gardino would not be able to accomplish some of the tasks required of an MPO.


6

Mayor Cleworth stated that currently the FMATS Office was subsidized which was not the case elsewhere in the United States. Mayor Cleworth stated that we had a very unusual system here and felt that we were sometimes in violation of Federal rules with our funding allocation. Mayor Cleworth stated that he thought all monies should go to the intended office so precious highway funding was not used to subsidize the Coordinator’s office. Mr. Sattley stated that as he understood it, the Borough Transportation Planner was funded through the PL funds. Mr. Sattley inquired what would happen if that funding were taken away and how that office would be funded. Mayor Hopkins stated that we should be looking at the upcoming budget when discussing the Coordinator’s Office and address how those funds were allocated. Vote of Amendment to the Motion: Two votes for (Walley/Cleworth). Five votes against (Ward, Sattley, Hopkins, Edwards, Titus). Amendment failed. Amendment to the Motion: Delete the motion and replace it with the following: Refer the Operating Agreement back to the Technical Committee per the actions of the last Policy Committee meeting to address the issues raised on Page 3 of the 9.18.13 minutes. (Hopkins/Sattley). Discussion: Ms. Gardino stated that there were people in the audience who could answer the question of whether delaying action would jeopardize funding. Mr. Otteson stated that he did not believe that this action would jeopardize PL funding if remanded back to the Technical Committee. Mayor Ward stated that instead of referring this action back to the Technical Committee, we should go all the way back to the drawing board. Mayor Ward stated that he hated to see us go round and round in circles on this. Vote on Motion: Three in favor. (Hopkins, Sattley, Walley) Four opposed. (Ward, Titus, Edwards, Cleworth). Amendment failed. c. Local Planning Approval MOU

Ms. Gardino stated that a lot of work had been done by the Borough to streamline the process and there were some items that could be further streamlined such as right-of-way exemptions. Mr. Titus stated that there was a draft document with a number of comments at this time and inquired what was needed to move forward. Ms. Gardino stated that she had provided her comments and the moving forward was to be accomplished by DOT and the Borough. Ms. Chapman stated that they had received the information and comments. Ms. Chapman stated that when they were comfortable with the draft, they would present it to the AG and the Borough for review and signatures. Mr. Titus inquired approximately how long the process would take. Ms. Chapman stated that it could probably be accomplished in a couple months.


7

Mayor Cleworth stated that he felt we were moving forward in the right direction with this Agreement. Mayor Cleworth stated that we needed to continue to achieve the goals set forth in the document to expedite the review process. Mayor Ward stated that after reviewing this document he felt that there were some redundancies that could be looked at to smooth out and expedite the process. Mayor Ward stated that he hoped they could explore those possibilities in the future. Mayor Hopkins inquired whether this document was the same document that the Borough Planning Commission had already reviewed. Mr. Spillman stated that this was the same document reviewed by the Planning Commission.

8. New Business

a. Review of FMATS’ Agreements (Action Item)

Ms. Gardino stated that Mayor Ward had requested the addition of this item and deferred to Mayor Ward. Mayor Ward explained his reason for having this item placed on the agenda. Mayor Ward stated that he felt that all the documents should be consolidated into a single agreement and that was the effort he would like to move forward with. Mayor Ward stated that he would like to have a third party review of all the FMATS documents to bring them under one umbrella similar to articles of incorporation for a business. Motion: To direct the Coordinator’s office to obtain at least three proposals for the consolidation of FMATS Operating MOU, Coordinator’s Office MOU, and Bylaws and to update the UPWP accordingly, including the associated budget. (Ward/Cleworth). Discussion: Mayor Cleworth inquired if Mayor Ward was requesting a RFP for a professional services contract. Mayor Ward stated that Mayor Cleworth was correct. Mayor Ward stated that the MOU for the Coordinator’s Office and the Intergovernmental Operating Agreement were the documents that he would like to see incorporated. Mr. Sattley inquired what Mayor Ward had in mind for the type of professionals who would be reviewing the documents. Mr. Ward stated that it was his understanding that there were organizations or businesses that reviewed MOU’s for consolidation and consistency. Mr. Sattley inquired if this was a cleaned-up version of the mediator idea that had been brought up previously. Mayor Ward stated that even if we did not address those issues, he felt that it would be a very smart move if the documents were consolidated for transparency and consistency. Ms. Gardino stated that she had identified four companies that actually reviewed MPO documents. Mayor Hopkins inquired what Mayor Ward meant by consolidation and consistency when we already had approved documents in place that authorized and guided our operations. Mayor Hopkins inquired where funding would come from and


8

whether we had the resources available for such a review. Mayor Hopkins inquired if the consultant would review the FHWA Agreement that stated how we were authorized to do things. Mayor Hopkins stated that maybe a presentation was necessary to define what streamlining meant and whether a consultant was necessary to do that streamlining. Mayor Ward stated that we needed to have an MOU that addressed how the organization should run. Mr. Titus stated that he understood the intent to bring clarity to this, but passing a motion today would not clear it up. Mr. Titus stated that an RFP would have to be prepared with a defined scope of work and agreed with Mayor Hopkins that this would have to be funded somehow. Mr. Titus stated that this agreement should be remanded back to the Technical Committee for a minimum of two months for review and discussion of how we were operating and what needed to be done as far as scope of work. Mr. Titus stated that there should possibly be a third party review of the Agreement to come up with recommendations for a score card for what the MPO was doing and appropriate distribution of PL funds. Mr. Sattley stated that he would support sending it back to the Technical Committee for a couple months, but did not want the Technical Committee to waste a lot of time on the air quality issue. Mayor Ward stated that it was two-fold: consolidation of agreements and then substance of the agreements. Mayor Ward stated that it should be spelled out in the MPO about who would come up with an air quality plan, as it did not explicitly state that. Mayor Ward stated that he did not have a problem with coming up with a scope of work and authorizing it to go out for RFP. Vote on Motion: Motion withdrawn. Motion To direct the Technical Committee to obtain a scope of work for the consolidation of FMATS’ Operating MOU, Coordinator’s Office MOU, and Bylaws and to update the UPWP accordingly, including the associated budget. (Ward/Cleworth). Discussion: Mr. Sattley stated that the word “obtain” seemed to him like an RFP request and he would not be in favor of that wording. Mayor Cleworth stated that the reality here was that some of this would be boilerplate stuff like marrying the two documents and that could be done, but sending it to the Technical Committed was just kicking the can over to them. Mayor Cleworth stated that he felt this needed to be addressed by the Policy Committee rather than sent back to the Technical Committee. Mayor Cleworth stated that it needed to be done because it was very complicated and nagging questions needed to be answered. Mayor Cleworth stated that he was not against having the document reviewed, but hated to see the Technical Committee do all the work and then the Policy Committee voting against it. Mayor Cleworth stated that a “yes” vote on this motion would be sending the


9

message that the Policy Committee was fundamentally in agreement and supported the consolidation of the documents. Amendment to the Motion: Delete “obtain” and replace it with “recommend”. (Hopkins/Sattley)

Discussion: Mayor Ward stated that he agreed with Mayor Cleworth’s comment: “If you don’t think this is a good idea that these documents should be consolidated, then don’t waste our time.” Mayor Ward stated that he still thought it was a good idea to marry the two documents so that it was at least clear that there was one governing document for this organization. Mayor Ward stated that the way FMATS was currently structured was difficult to follow.

Amended Motion: To direct the Technical Committee to recommend a scope of work for the consolidation of FMATS’ Operating MOU, Coordinator’s Office MOU, and Bylaws and to update the UPWP accordingly, including associated budget.

Vote on Motion: None opposed. Approved.

b. FY 2014 FMATS Meeting Dates (Action Item)

Motion: To approve the Fiscal Year 2014 Technical and Policy Committee meeting dates. (Hopkins/Edwards).

Discussion: Mr. Titus stated that it should be noted that the November 14 Policy Committee meeting date might be changed due to the Alaska Municipal League Conference and the meeting date might be discussed and changed at the meeting next month.


c. Change in November Policy Meeting Date (Action Item)

Motion: To move the November Policy Committee meeting date to November 13, 2013 (Hopkins/Sattley)

Discussion: Mayor Hopkins stated that there were a number of reasons for the change to the November meeting date.



Brenda Hewitt of Representative Isaacson’s office spoke via telephone and stated that she just wanted to say hello and thank you.

10. Other Issues

a. Government Shutdown and Congressional Appropriation Delays


10

Ms. Gardino explained the governmental shutdown information included in the meeting packet. Mayor Hopkins inquired about General Fund impacts due to the government shutdown. Mr. Otteson explained that access was given to 94% of the FFY14 funding available to them but that could change if Congress did something to change that.

b. PL Funding Increase

Ms. Gardino explained the PL funding increase information she had received. Ms. Gardino stated that the UPWP would have to be amended to reflect the increased funding.

c. Nordale Road Crossing Mayor Hopkins stated that this could be discussed at another time due to the meeting time constraints.

11. Informational Items a. State Rail Plan Steering Committee Meeting (October 17-8:30 a.m.)

Ms. Gardino introduced Murray Walsh and Bob Laurie from DOT Headquarters who provided information regarding the State Rail Plan Update. Mr. Walsh stated that a Steering Committee meeting would be held from 8:30-11 a.m. on Thursday, October 17th and the public was welcome to attend.

b. Historical Plaque and Artwork Update

Ms. Gardino displayed two different design scheme samples for the historic plaques to the Policy Committee. Ms. Gardino explained the two different color schemes and designs stating that the color scheme were similar to the Downtown Wayfinding and Complete Streets projects. Ms. Gardino stated that they were working with an editor to shorten the narrative and provide for ease in reading. Mayor Hopkins stated that the blue color scheme rendered a much clearer and crisper picture. Mr. Titus stated that the pedestals for the plaques were already in place.

c. DEC Open House on Air Quality Proposed Regulation Changes

Ms. Gardino stated that information was included about the DEC Open House she had attended and another was being held at North Pole Middle School from 5-7 p.m. Ms. Edwards explained that there would be a variety of things going on to explain the Plan, the process, and provide opportunity for comments. Ms. Edwards stated that there would be a third open house in November at the Watershed School with the fourth and final open house being held January 8th at the Westmark Hotel. Ms. Edwards stated that DEC was hopeful they would get a lot of good comments and hoped to see everyone there.

d. Guidance on MPO Representation

Ms. Gardino explained the proposed guidance included in the meeting packet for MPO representation. Ms. Gardino stated that Mr. Lindamood of the Railroad stated that FTA had requested that the Railroad have a seat on the FMATS Policy Committee. Mr. Lindamood stated that the Railroad’s lawyers


11

were attempting to get clarification from FTA with the attempt to get the ruling overturned. Mayor Hopkins stated that the Borough would like to receive any coordination of comment opportunities that were offered.

e. Obligations/Offset List

Ms. Gardino explained the obligations/offset list included in the meeting packet for the past fiscal year. Ms. Gardino explained the aerial photo taken of Illinois Street taken by Tom George who was a pilot and regular at the Transportation Committee breakfasts. Ms. Gardino stated that Mr. George had given her the license to use the photos.

12. Policy Committee Comments

• Mayor Cleworth asked Ms. Gardino to thank Mr. George for the photos.Mayor Cleworth thanked everyone for their help and dedication and wished them all the best in the future.

• Mr. Walley stated that he was excited about the possibility of combining all the various documents. Mr. Walley stated that he felt it would be easier to understand if it was all one document. Mr. Walley stated that he wanted to wish Mayor Cleworth good luck in his future endeavors. Mr. Walley stated that it had been an honor serving beside him on this committee.

• Ms. Edwards thanked Mayor Cleworth stating that she appreciated all his efforts over the years and working with him on this committee. Ms. Edwards stated that she would be happy to provide air quality status updates to anyone that requested them.

• Mr. Titus thanked Mayor Cleworth for his service stating that it had been fun and liked that he was not afraid of sharing his perspective with them. Mr. Titus stated that he was sure they would see him at the coin shop. Mr. Titus stated that he knew that the Illinois Street had been a topic on the news and everywhere else, but he took every chance he got to drive Illinois Street and Helmericks. Mr. Titus stated that he was amazed how much time it saved in getting across town. Mr. Titus stated that he appreciated all the effort that went into the design and construction of the project. Mr. Titus stated that he was excited that it was done and that people would get to use it for years to come.

• Mayor Ward thanked Mayor Cleworth for his political insights and assistance and wished him the best in the future.

• Mr. Sattley stated that he also wanted to wish Mayor Cleworth the best and would see him at his coin shop.

• Mayor Hopkins stated that he appreciated that Mayor Cleworth had brought forward respectful discussions to the committee and they would all move forward with those discussions in the future. Mayor Hopkins thanked Mayor Cleworth for the North Chena Riverwalk that had been permitted by the Railroad under his authority. Mayor Hopkins stated that he was sure that Mayor Cleworth would be keeping tabs on them in the future and would not be going away. Mayor Hopkins asked Ms. Gardino to put forth a written thank you note to Mr. George for taking the photos rather than a verbal thank you.


12

13. Adjourn

Motion to Adjourn: (Walley/Edwards).

The meeting was adjourned at 12:02 p.m.

The next Policy Committee Meeting is scheduled for 10 a.m. on Wednesday,

November 13, 2013 at the DOT&PF Main Conference Room on Peger Road. Approved: ________________________________ Date: _______________________

Steve Titus, P.E., Chair

FMATS Policy Committee

FMATS | 800 CUSHMAN STREET | FAIRBANKS, ALASKA 99701 | WWW.FMATS.US

November 13, 2013

Honorable Governor Parnell

P.O. Box 11001

Juneau, AK 99811-0001

RE: Fiscal Year 2015: FMATS Surface Transportation Improvements:

Priority Project Funding Request

Dear Governor Parnell:

The Fairbanks Metropolitan Area Transportation System (FMATS) Policy Committee respectfully

requests $16 million in General Funds to be allocated, in the Governor’s FY2015 budget, to the FMATS

Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) project priorities as determined by the FMATS Policy

Committee.

The funding will do many things. It will:

1) help address local match requirements that are difficult for local governments without road powers

to meet;

2) allow flexibility to meet estimate, scope, and scheduling changes;

3) address FMATS priority projects within the Metropolitan Planning Area that are short-funded;

4) enable FMATS to expedite project delivery using the state approved process; and

5) offset a 30% decrease in FMATS’ federal funding for transportation infrastructure.

We appreciated the $7.5 million appropriation in the FY13 Capital Budget for use on any project in our

Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). We plan on expending $5 million of that funding next

summer to complete the reconstruction of South Cushman Street from Airport Way to the Mitchell

Expressway. This is being accomplished by coupling $3.5 million of federal funds with the state funds. In

addition, almost $2 million will be programmed for the Yankovich-Miller Hill Multi-use Path construction

project next year however, that project is still short-funded.

FMATS has additional projects coming up in the next few years that currently have construction funding

shortfalls. The following projects demonstrate needs identified in the TIP that are currently unfunded or

under-funded:

� Cushman Street Bridge Reconstruction

� Construction of the Chena Small Tracts Bicycle and Pedestrian Facility

� Noble Street Upgrades Construction

� Gold Hill Road Bicycle and Pedestrian Facility Construction

These are just a few of the needed improvements within FMATS and these projects will cost

over $16 million to complete. Project descriptions and funding shortfalls are attached. The

FMATS Policy Committee encourages you to request language that would allow us the flexibility

FMATS | 800 CUSHMAN STREET | FAIRBANKS, ALASKA 99701 | WWW.FMATS.US

to prioritize funding based on project development needs, schedules and estimates, which are

unpredictable at times.

Thank you for considering this critical request to improve the regional infrastructure of the

Fairbanks Area. We hope you will make FMATS a priority when evaluating budget proposals.

Contact the FMATS Coordinator, Donna Gardino, at 459-6786 with any questions or email her

at [email protected].

Sincerely,

Policy Committee Chair

Attachments: Example Outstanding Project Needs in the FMATS area

CC: Interior Delegation

Karen Rehfeld, Director, OMB

Policy Committee

Jeff Ottesen, DOT&PF Program Development Director

EXAMPLE OUTSTANDING PROJECT FUNDING NEEDS IN THE FMATS AREA

11.13.13

PROJECT NAME DESCRIPTION PHASE/EXPECTED

EXPENDITURE

DATE

CONSTRUCTION

SHORTFALL

AMOUNT

(TOTAL

CONSTRUCTION

AMOUNT)

Yankovich to Miller Hill

Multi-use Path

Provide funding to construct the path from Ballaine Road

along Yankovich to Miller Hill Road and down to Sheep

Creek to the roundabout. State funds have been

provided for the design and right-of-way phases.

Construction ready

in 2014

$500,000

($2,300,000)

Chena Small Tracts Bicycle

and Pedestrian Facility

Provide funding to construct the bicycle and pedestrian

facility from Chena Pump Road to the end to facilitate a

safer route to Woodriver Elementary School.

Construction ready

in 2014

$1,000,000

($1,500,000)

Birch Hill Bicycle and

Pedestrian Facility

Provide funding to construct safe access to the Birch Hill

Recreational Trail System.

Construction ready

in 2015

$2,800,000

($2,800,000)

Gold Hill Bicycle and

Pedestrian Facility

Widen the shoulders on Gold Hill Road to accommodate

bicycles and pedestrians. Improvements will also include

resurfacing the roadway, approach work, signing and

striping.

Construction ready

in 2015

$250,000

($5,200,000)

Cushman Street Bridge

Replacement

Replace the Cushman Street Bridge Construction ready

in 2014

$11,050,000

($11,050,000)

FMATS Pedestrian

Improvements Stage II

Construct new facilities to improve connectivity within

the FMATS boundary on Wilbur Street, Davis Road, Peger

Road and Lathrop Street.

Construction ready

in 2014

$710,000

($1,420,000)

Noble Street Upgrades Reconstruct Noble Street from 1st Avenue to Gaffney

Road.

Construction ready

in 2015

$750,000

($9,000,000)

NOTE: This list is only a sampling of the identified outstanding needs in the FMATS area in the TIP.

FAIRBANKS NORTH STAR BOROUGH SHORT/LONG RANGE TRANSIT PLAN

JUNE 2013

MOORE & ASSOCIATES, INC. PAGE 3

CHAPTER 1 – EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

With more than 99,000 residents, the Fairbanks North Star Borough (FNSB) is Alaska’s second largest

community after Anchorage, and functions as the transportation hub for central Alaska. The FNSB,

founded in 1964, is comprised of the cities of Fairbanks and North Pole, as well as various

unincorporated communities located in more rural portions of the region. The FNSB is home to the

University of Alaska Fairbanks, with approximately 5,500 students enrolled. The FNSB also hosts

significant military installations including Fort Wainright in the city of Fairbanks and Eielson Air Force

Base, located south of the city of North Pole. In addition, Fairbanks is a key tourist destination chiefly

during the summer season.

The Fairbanks North Star Borough began operating the Metropolitan Area Commuter System (MACS)

fixed-route transit service in 1977. As of Fiscal Year 2013, the MACS system included nine fixed routes

and provided over 476,000 trips. Key destinations served by the MACS network include the University of

Alaska at Fairbanks, Fairbanks International Airport, Downtown Fairbanks Transit Center, East Fairbanks

Shopping District, and West Fairbanks Shopping District. While operating hours vary by line, MACS

service operates Monday through Friday from 6:00 a.m. until 9:45 p.m., and on Saturday from 8:45 a.m.

until 7:45 p.m., although not all routes operate on Saturday. There is no Sunday service.

Complementing FNSB’s fixed-route service is the Van Tran Dial-A-Ride service, required by the

Americans with Disabilities Act. Van Tran service began in 1988 and serves approximately 20,000

passengers annually. The service utilizes up to five nine-passenger vans and gives priority to ADA-

certified disabled and senior passengers within a ¾-mile zone around all MACS fixed routes, although

service is provided beyond the ¾-mile buffer on occasion.

Key Findings

Public awareness and support of fixed-route transit is very high among FNSB residents, although

most do not believe the current service meets their travel needs.

University of Alaska, Fairbanks (UAF) students and faculty comprise roughly one-third of all

MACS users during the typical academic year. This market share declines during the summer

when UAF is not in session.

The majority of current MACS users would like to see Sunday service.

The busiest lines are the Blue and Red Lines, serving the urban core of Fairbanks and UAF, while

the least-used line is the Black Line, operating along the Richardson Highway to Salchaket

Roadhouse in Salcha.

System ridership has grown, on average, by nearly seven percent annually since 2007.

Page 23


JUNE 2013


Report Overview

This report includes both a Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP) and Long Range Transit Plan (LRTP). The

SRTP presents a plan for short-term operational, financial, and capital improvements for FNSB’s transit

services. The SRTP, covering a five-year horizon, includes strategies to increase service efficiency and

effectiveness, and how to finance implementation of those strategies. These strategies reflect findings

from rider and non-rider (community) input as well as a review of transit system performance. The LRTP

covers an approximate 25-year horizon and describes long-term forecasted population and

infrastructural changes that could affect transit provision, as well as approaches the FNSB could take to

address these opportunities and challenges. The full report containing both the SRTP and LRTP is

organized into the following chapters:

1. Executive Summary;

2. Overview and Population Analysis;

3. Existing Conditions, including performance measures;

4. Public Outreach;

5. Analysis and Recommendations;

6. Financial Plan;

7. Long Range Transit Plan; and

8. Appendices.

The SRTP and LRTP fulfill the requirements set forth by the Federal Transit Administration for short and

long range transit plans. As required of all metropolitan planning processes under the Safe, Accountable,

Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU), each Plan will:

Support the economic vitality of the FNSB metropolitan area,

Increase the safety and security of the transportation system for motorized and non-motorized

users,

Increase the accessibility and mobility of people and for freight within the FNSB,

Protect and enhance the environment, promote energy conservation, improve the quality of

life, and encourage consistency between state and local planning,

Enhance the integration and connectivity of the transportation system across and between

modes,

Promote efficient system management and operation, and

Emphasize the preservation of the existing transportation system.

The Overview and Population Analysis chapter describes the FNSB’s population characteristics, with a

focus on what aspects of the FNSB’s population are most relevant to transit planning. It includes the

Transit Needs Index map, which provides a general idea of the geographic distribution of Fairbanks

residents who are more likely to depend on public transportation for their travel needs. In addition, it

Page 24


JUNE 2013


overlays the existing MACS fixed-route network on a map of likely transit-dependent populations to

illustrate how well the current MACS system serves those populations.

The Existing Conditions chapter begins by describing the various transportation providers within FNSB

including FNSB services such as MACS and Van Tran, taxi companies, as well as other providers such as

social service agencies. Following the overview of transportation providers, the chapter focuses on and

evaluates MACS service, providing a snapshot of current transit usage and system performance. Such

data include ridership at a system level and by line, stop activity along each route, variations in ridership

by time of year, and by time of day. Also included are several performance measurements including

riders per service hour, farebox recovery, and how MACS compares to other similar transit operations

on these performance measurements.

Supplementing the performance data in the Existing Conditions chapter is the feedback summarized in

the Public Outreach chapter. Public involvement efforts included two onboard rider surveys (conducted

both during winter and summer months) collectively gathering nearly 1,800 rider surveys; seven

community meetings; feedback from 18 key stakeholders; and more than 550 community surveys.

Public involvement in the preparation of the 2013 SRTP and LRTP has been important to understanding

the transit needs and priorities of residents throughout the FNSB. Through this process four key desires

were identified among FNSB transit riders and residents:

1. A desire for improved bus stop shelters and amenities. Rider surveys, and particularly the

winter survey, revealed riders were least satisfied with the limited availability of bus shelters

at bus stops, particularly during the winter months.

2. Riders desire Sunday service. In the summer and winter surveys, the most-requested service

improvement, stated by more than half of riders in each survey, was Sunday service.

3. A desire for more frequent Red and Blue Line Service. Participants at several community

meetings described how these lines can become overcrowded during peak operating hours,

and how increased frequency would relieve these problems.

4. A need for greater security at the Transit Center. Community meeting participants

repeatedly described incidences of public intoxication, panhandling, littering, and public

urination that support a perception of the Center being unsafe.

The Analysis and Recommendations chapter begins by summarizing the goals and principles that guided

development of the recommendations. A partial list of these goals includes:

Maximize the efficiency of the MACS program by continually evaluating routes, personnel,

and by implementing changes designed to better serve the public within current funding

levels.

Page 25


JUNE 2013


Meet the growing need for transportation services in a geographically dispersed residential

community.

Service and infrastructure recommendations were developed with a focus on furthering these goals

while addressing both the needs and realities revealed through demographic analysis, service

evaluation, and public outreach efforts. Exhibit 1.1 summarizes each of the recommendations that

optimally respond to the FNSB’s transit needs, while Exhibit 1.2 provides a map of the MACS system if

FNSB were to implement all of the service recommendations.

The Analysis and Recommendations chapter also contains a ‘baseline comparison’ section. The

comparison lists the relative advantages and disadvantages of maintaining existing service as it is

currently provided versus implementing all recommendations. In brief, continuing current service as is

would cover a large service area, but offer less frequency and very low farebox recovery on certain lines.

The recommended scenario, by contrast, reduces the MACS service area, yet serves more people per

vehicle service hour and reallocates service to where it is most used.

Exhibit 1.1 Infrastructure and Service Recommendations

Recommendation

Recommendation

Type Catalyst Rationale/Goal

Increase PM peak service on Red and

Blue linesService

Community meetings,

ride check data

Reduce peak-period loads, improve

service for key markets

Adjust schedules on Grey and Purple

LinesService Ride check data

Achieve 80 percent on-time

performance

Eliminate Yellow Line connection to

Transit CenterService Ride check data

Increase service to Line's strongest

markets, reduce duplicity with Red

and Blue Lines

Begin Sunday service on Blue and Red

LinesService

Onboard survey and

community meeting

feedback

Respond to majority desire for

Sunday service

Add benches and shelters to key stops, Infrastructure

Onboard survey and

community meeting

feedback

Improve current rider experience,

potentially attract new riders

Construct an improved transfer facil ity

at Fred Meyer WestInfrastructure

Onboard survey and

community meeting

feedback

Provide a more comfortable waiting

area for transferring riders

Construct a larger vehicle storage and

maintenance facil ityInfrastructure FNSB existing plans

Accommodate expected increases

in fleet size

Improve security and maintenance of

the Transit CenterInfrastructure

Community meeting

feedback



Page 26

SCOPE OF PROFESSIONAL SERVICES

Background

The Fairbanks Metropolitan Area Transportation System (FMATS) is the designated Metropolitan

Planning Organization (MPO) of the Fairbanks Urban Area. It officially became the designated MPO in

Spring 2003 with the signing of the Inter-Governmental Operating Agreement and Memorandum of

Understanding for Transportation and Air Quality Planning. The Policy Committee and Technical

Committee Bylaws were also approved at this time.

In 2007, the FMATS Organizational Study was completed to develop the optimal organizational structure

for FMATS to accomplish its mandated responsibilities and to provide additional flexibility in meeting

future requirements. As a result, the Memorandum of Understanding for the Implementation of a

Fairbanks Metropolitan Area Transportation System Coordinator’s Office was executed in November

2007 and such office was opened in April 2008, housed by the City of Fairbanks. FMATS staff is currently

comprised of employees from the FMATS Coordinators Office, the FNSB, and the State of Alaska

DOT&PF.

The FMATS’ Policy Committee is made up of the mayors from the City of Fairbanks, the City of North

Pole and the Fairbanks North Star Borough (FNSB). The FNSB and the City of Fairbanks also have an

assembly and council representative on the Policy Committee. The State of Alaska DOT&PF and

Department of Environmental Conservation round out the seven member committee.

In 2009, the FMATS Metropolitan Planning Area (MPA) and a donut area outside the MPA was

designated as a non-attainment area for Particulate Matter 2.5. As a result, and in accordance with the

regulations, a Memorandum of Agreement for the Selection and Funding of Projects Funded by CMAQ

within the Fairbanks Nonattainment Area for PM2.5 was executed in the fall of 2010.

Scope

FMATS proposes to contract with a Consultant to do the following:

1. Review the current organizational and operational structure and various agreements/studies

outlined above. Recommend changes as deemed appropriate in compliance with state and

federal statutes and develop a streamlined approach to incorporate the required elements of all

the documents. Deliverable will be draft consolidated agreement(s).

2. Conduct stakeholder interviews with the Policy Committee members, Technical Committee

members and FMATS staff in an effort to better understand the duties of each party as it

pertains to the operations of the MPO.

3. Review the Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP) and develop task recommendations to

improve the UPWP and to ensure consistency with the streamlined agreement(s) and all

applicable federal and state statutes. Conduct a review of these draft recommendations with

the MPO staff and Technical Committee and prepare a revised technical report with completed

Page 21

Planning Process tasks based on the feedback received. All proposed changes should include

justifications.

4. Propose a sub-allocation budget recommendation based on the newly drafted UPWP.

5. Present the draft findings to the FMATS Technical and Policy Committees for comments by

February 2014.

6. Submit a final report for the March 2014 Policy Committee meeting.

Page 22


JUNE 2013


CHAPTER 1 – EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

With more than 99,000 residents, the Fairbanks North Star Borough (FNSB) is Alaska’s second largest

community after Anchorage, and functions as the transportation hub for central Alaska. The FNSB,

founded in 1964, is comprised of the cities of Fairbanks and North Pole, as well as various

unincorporated communities located in more rural portions of the region. The FNSB is home to the

University of Alaska Fairbanks, with approximately 5,500 students enrolled. The FNSB also hosts

significant military installations including Fort Wainright in the city of Fairbanks and Eielson Air Force

Base, located south of the city of North Pole. In addition, Fairbanks is a key tourist destination chiefly

during the summer season.

The Fairbanks North Star Borough began operating the Metropolitan Area Commuter System (MACS)

fixed-route transit service in 1977. As of Fiscal Year 2013, the MACS system included nine fixed routes

and provided over 476,000 trips. Key destinations served by the MACS network include the University of

Alaska at Fairbanks, Fairbanks International Airport, Downtown Fairbanks Transit Center, East Fairbanks

Shopping District, and West Fairbanks Shopping District. While operating hours vary by line, MACS

service operates Monday through Friday from 6:00 a.m. until 9:45 p.m., and on Saturday from 8:45 a.m.

until 7:45 p.m., although not all routes operate on Saturday. There is no Sunday service.

Complementing FNSB’s fixed-route service is the Van Tran Dial-A-Ride service, required by the

Americans with Disabilities Act. Van Tran service began in 1988 and serves approximately 20,000

passengers annually. The service utilizes up to five nine-passenger vans and gives priority to ADA-

certified disabled and senior passengers within a ¾-mile zone around all MACS fixed routes, although

service is provided beyond the ¾-mile buffer on occasion.

Key Findings

Public awareness and support of fixed-route transit is very high among FNSB residents, although

most do not believe the current service meets their travel needs.

University of Alaska, Fairbanks (UAF) students and faculty comprise roughly one-third of all

MACS users during the typical academic year. This market share declines during the summer

when UAF is not in session.

The majority of current MACS users would like to see Sunday service.

The busiest lines are the Blue and Red Lines, serving the urban core of Fairbanks and UAF, while

the least-used line is the Black Line, operating along the Richardson Highway to Salchaket

Roadhouse in Salcha.

System ridership has grown, on average, by nearly seven percent annually since 2007.

Page 23


JUNE 2013


Report Overview

This report includes both a Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP) and Long Range Transit Plan (LRTP). The

SRTP presents a plan for short-term operational, financial, and capital improvements for FNSB’s transit

services. The SRTP, covering a five-year horizon, includes strategies to increase service efficiency and

effectiveness, and how to finance implementation of those strategies. These strategies reflect findings

from rider and non-rider (community) input as well as a review of transit system performance. The LRTP

covers an approximate 25-year horizon and describes long-term forecasted population and

infrastructural changes that could affect transit provision, as well as approaches the FNSB could take to

address these opportunities and challenges. The full report containing both the SRTP and LRTP is

organized into the following chapters:

1. Executive Summary;

2. Overview and Population Analysis;

3. Existing Conditions, including performance measures;

4. Public Outreach;

5. Analysis and Recommendations;

6. Financial Plan;

7. Long Range Transit Plan; and

8. Appendices.

The SRTP and LRTP fulfill the requirements set forth by the Federal Transit Administration for short and

long range transit plans. As required of all metropolitan planning processes under the Safe, Accountable,

Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU), each Plan will:

Support the economic vitality of the FNSB metropolitan area,

Increase the safety and security of the transportation system for motorized and non-motorized

users,

Increase the accessibility and mobility of people and for freight within the FNSB,

Protect and enhance the environment, promote energy conservation, improve the quality of

life, and encourage consistency between state and local planning,

Enhance the integration and connectivity of the transportation system across and between

modes,

Promote efficient system management and operation, and

Emphasize the preservation of the existing transportation system.

The Overview and Population Analysis chapter describes the FNSB’s population characteristics, with a

focus on what aspects of the FNSB’s population are most relevant to transit planning. It includes the

Transit Needs Index map, which provides a general idea of the geographic distribution of Fairbanks

residents who are more likely to depend on public transportation for their travel needs. In addition, it

Page 24


JUNE 2013


overlays the existing MACS fixed-route network on a map of likely transit-dependent populations to

illustrate how well the current MACS system serves those populations.

The Existing Conditions chapter begins by describing the various transportation providers within FNSB

including FNSB services such as MACS and Van Tran, taxi companies, as well as other providers such as

social service agencies. Following the overview of transportation providers, the chapter focuses on and

evaluates MACS service, providing a snapshot of current transit usage and system performance. Such

data include ridership at a system level and by line, stop activity along each route, variations in ridership

by time of year, and by time of day. Also included are several performance measurements including

riders per service hour, farebox recovery, and how MACS compares to other similar transit operations

on these performance measurements.

Supplementing the performance data in the Existing Conditions chapter is the feedback summarized in

the Public Outreach chapter. Public involvement efforts included two onboard rider surveys (conducted

both during winter and summer months) collectively gathering nearly 1,800 rider surveys; seven

community meetings; feedback from 18 key stakeholders; and more than 550 community surveys.

Public involvement in the preparation of the 2013 SRTP and LRTP has been important to understanding

the transit needs and priorities of residents throughout the FNSB. Through this process four key desires

were identified among FNSB transit riders and residents:

1. A desire for improved bus stop shelters and amenities. Rider surveys, and particularly the

winter survey, revealed riders were least satisfied with the limited availability of bus shelters

at bus stops, particularly during the winter months.

2. Riders desire Sunday service. In the summer and winter surveys, the most-requested service

improvement, stated by more than half of riders in each survey, was Sunday service.

3. A desire for more frequent Red and Blue Line Service. Participants at several community

meetings described how these lines can become overcrowded during peak operating hours,

and how increased frequency would relieve these problems.

4. A need for greater security at the Transit Center. Community meeting participants

repeatedly described incidences of public intoxication, panhandling, littering, and public

urination that support a perception of the Center being unsafe.

The Analysis and Recommendations chapter begins by summarizing the goals and principles that guided

development of the recommendations. A partial list of these goals includes:

Maximize the efficiency of the MACS program by continually evaluating routes, personnel,

and by implementing changes designed to better serve the public within current funding

levels.

Page 25


JUNE 2013


Meet the growing need for transportation services in a geographically dispersed residential

community.

Service and infrastructure recommendations were developed with a focus on furthering these goals

while addressing both the needs and realities revealed through demographic analysis, service

evaluation, and public outreach efforts. Exhibit 1.1 summarizes each of the recommendations that

optimally respond to the FNSB’s transit needs, while Exhibit 1.2 provides a map of the MACS system if

FNSB were to implement all of the service recommendations.

The Analysis and Recommendations chapter also contains a ‘baseline comparison’ section. The

comparison lists the relative advantages and disadvantages of maintaining existing service as it is

currently provided versus implementing all recommendations. In brief, continuing current service as is

would cover a large service area, but offer less frequency and very low farebox recovery on certain lines.

The recommended scenario, by contrast, reduces the MACS service area, yet serves more people per

vehicle service hour and reallocates service to where it is most used.

Exhibit 1.1 Infrastructure and Service Recommendations

Recommendation

Recommendation

Type Catalyst Rationale/Goal

Increase PM peak service on Red and

Blue linesService

Community meetings,

ride check data

Reduce peak-period loads, improve

service for key markets

Adjust schedules on Grey and Purple

LinesService Ride check data

Achieve 80 percent on-time

performance

Eliminate Yellow Line connection to

Transit CenterService Ride check data

Increase service to Line's strongest

markets, reduce duplicity with Red

and Blue Lines

Begin Sunday service on Blue and Red

LinesService

Onboard survey and

community meeting

feedback

Respond to majority desire for

Sunday service

Add benches and shelters to key stops, Infrastructure

Onboard survey and

community meeting

feedback



Construct an improved transfer facil ity

at Fred Meyer WestInfrastructure

Onboard survey and

community meeting

feedback

Provide a more comfortable waiting

area for transferring riders

Construct a larger vehicle storage and

maintenance facil ityInfrastructure FNSB existing plans

Accommodate expected increases

in fleet size

Improve security and maintenance of

the Transit CenterInfrastructure

Community meeting

feedback



Page 26


JUNE 2013


Exhibit 1.2 Map of Proposed MACS System (Full Implementation)

Following the near-term recommendations is the Financial Plan chapter. This chapter begins by

comparing detailed cost projections for the Baseline and Recommended scenarios, giving an idea of

expected operating and capital costs associated with continuing service in its present form versus

implementing the recommendations provided in the Analysis and Recommendations chapter. After

providing cost projections, the Financial Plan chapter breaks down how each scenario’s respective

operating and capital costs would be financed over the next five years using a combination of fare

revenues, local subsidies, and federal grants.

Chapters 1 through 6 together comprise the Short Range Transit Plan, while Chapter 7 contains the Long

Range Transit Plan (LRTP). The LRTP provides a more general blueprint which the FNSB may follow in

making transit planning decisions over the next 25 years. The Plan describes other local and regional

plans for the FNSB, including the Fairbanks Metro 2035 Plan, Vision Fairbanks Plan, and FNSB

Comprehensive Land-Use Plan. The LRTP also summarizes the aspects of these plans most relevant to

transit planning, giving the FNSB a concise list of upcoming and proposed changes that could present

new challenges and opportunities for transit provision throughout the FNSB.

Page 27


JUNE 2013


The LRTP also describes transit service types and infrastructure options the FNSB may want to consider

in the future, such as flex-route service, bicycle storage facilities, park-and-ride lots, and local circulators.

Finally, the LRTP accompanies the descriptions of these service and infrastructure options with key

criteria or “trigger points” at which the FNSB should consider these options so that they bring the most

benefit to the FNSB and make the most prudent use of resources.

Page 28

FMATS' FFY 14 Offset List

October 28, 2013

PROJECT FEDERAL TOTAL

Available Offset Funding (does not include earmarks)

South Cushman Mitchell to Sanduri $322,806.00 $354,848.0 PH4 Closure

Pending Offsets

FMATS ADA Curb Corner Project PH4 Expected in November 2013

Total Offset Funding to Date $322,806.00 $354,848.00 Available for other uses

Committed Offsets:

FMATS FFY13 Surface Upgrade Project $89,559.06 $98,449.0 Overruns and Change Orders Coord. Approved 10.28.13

Total Committed Offsets $89,559.1 $98,449.0

Remaining Funds to be Obligated $233,246.94 $256,399.00

1

Page 23

MEGA PROJECT REPORT: OCTOBER 07, 2013

Page 1

NORTHERN RAIL EXTENSION

Levee rip rap haul from Fort Knox for blending with BHQ has concluded. Contract amount of 409,000 tons of rip rap has been completed.

To date approximately 405,000 tons have been delivered to the site. BHQ has dropped its “Change Site” claim against Kiewit. Hunting season concluded Sept. 25 without incident. A huge milestone was achieved last Thursday. All permanent pile driving is

complete, including the bridge abutments. All rip rap material will be delivered to the site by the end of the week. All concrete work should be complete by next report. Girder placement is scheduled to begin October 15th.

Last of permanent piling

Page 24

Seal pour complete pier 5

Page 25

PORT MACKENZIE RAIL EXTENSION

Little Su Bridge South Sheetpile Abutment Work

Work in ‘Magic Mtn’ Cut Looking South

Embankment No. of Completed Baker Farm Bridge

Page 26

PORT MACKENZIE RAIL EXTENSION (CONT.)

o Sierra Club’s petition before the 9th Circuit to suspend the Corps of Engineers permit pending the outcome of their challenge was denied. The hearing on the case before the Alaska District Court scheduled for November 15th, 2013 has been delayed due to the government shut-down.

o FY 2014 Capital Budget includes $25MM to MSB for project. Funding is expected to be used for Segment 5 and for long lead items.

Segment 1 Summary: (Construction) Contractor: Bristol Construction

o Grade construction continues at north end of project. o Winter Trail crossing Culvert (19’6”) is under construction. o Baker Farm Bridge is completed. o Wet weather has slowed scheduled earthwork completion

Segment 2 Summary: (ROW and Design) o ROW acquisition is underway by the MSB. 1 of 11 parcels has

been acquired. o Engineering is complete to 60%. o Construction is not funded.

Segment 3 Summary: (Construction) Contractor: Quality Asphalt Paving (QAP)

o Grade construction is nearly complete throughout the project. o Contractor working on bridge construction at Old Iditarod Trail

Iditarod Trail bridges. o Wet weather has slowed completion of earthwork. o ENSTAR pipe realignment at Ayeshire Road is complete.

Segment 4 Summary: (Construction) Contractor: Bristol Construction

o Mental Health lands (more than half the segment) will not be available until February.

o Delays in access to CIRI property are beginning to hind Contractor progress.

o Limited notice to proceed to Bristol Construction on August 27, 2013.

o Contractor has clearing on available parcels.

Segment 5 Summary: (ROW and Design) o Intent to Bid (ITB) for segment 5 will be fall of 2013 pending ROW. o ROW acquisition is underway by the MSB. 0 of 1 parcel are

acquired. o Engineering is complete. o Construction is funded.

Segment 6 Summary: (Construction) Contractor: Granite Construction

O Embankment south of the Little Susitna River bridge, including the wye, is complete. Embankment work continues on the north end of the project. Wet weather has slowed completion of earthwork.

Page 27

O All foundation piling on the south side of the Little Susitna River is completed for the new bridge. Piling on the north side of the river is expected to be complete by October 20th.

POSITIVE TRAIN CONTROL (PTC)

Office Segment: The Wabtec Computer Aided Dispatch System is still being tested. Wabtec representatives continue to work in Anchorage and their home office to fix bugs that are detected. Implementation is expected before the end of the year. Wabtec and ARRC personnel have been working to debug the office segment in the lab environment.

On Board Systems: ARRC visited Kansas City Southern Railroad at their locomotive facilities in Shreveport, LA. A number of issues were resolved regarding antenna placement and wire runs. Negotiations are underway with Wabtec Global Services for installation on locomotives starting in early 2014.

Communications: Data radios for CP1147 and 1140 are being tested after field installation. The solid oxide fuel cell for Hunter base station site is installed and tanks filled with propane for this winter test.

Wayside Systems: o Field work continues with power and signal cables from Wolf to Talkeetna o The team also worked on engineering and procurement for the 2014

summer season work plan including CTC from Pittman to Kashwitna and switch monitoring from Wolf to Talkeetna.

o PTC Software for the wayside locations in the test corridor arrived and was tested in the lab. A few changes are needed.

o The Invitation to Bid for the CTC installation in the corridor from north of Pittman to Kashwitna has been extended until next week. Vendor questions are being responded to now.

Integration and Implementation: o The test corridor from Anchorage to Whittier continues to be the focus of

integration activities. The test corridor will prove the software/hardware in a manageable area. The beginning of testing is scheduled for early next year.

o The PTC system requires all dispatchable features to be designated in a database by common name and latitude, longitude and elevation that will be used in the office and locomotive segments. The lab has been validating the database but there are still areas that need additional work.

Page 28

36th

111.21

Spenard111.01

44th

110.64

Arctic109.40

100th

106.68

Potter2,179

Coastal Anchorage

CP 1051 CP 1072 CP 1095 CP 1102

120th

105.39Klatt

105.64104th

106.42C St.

108.91

C & 1st114.42

Cordova114.67

CP 1140

OVL

CP 1147CP 1097

68th

108.80

D

AnchorageInternational Airport

Passenger 1

Passenger 3

Passenger 2

113.01

South Yard Lead

Portage Glacier62.85

CP F120

Girdwood1,855

Brookman2,511

Rainbow792

F 5.20F 2.55

Bear Valley2,126

Coho4,666

Whittier CP F040

PortageNorth Ladder

F 11.89

CP F084

Indian1,822

PTC Test Corridor

Legend:Station Name – Centralized Traffic ControlStation Name – Track Warrant Control (dark-territory)

PTC Test Corridor

Page 29

dltodd

Typewritten Text

11.13.13 pc meeting packet - fmats

Documents