DOCSLIB.ORG

Green Mountain Transit Board of Commissioners Meeting February 16, 2021 - 7:30 A.M

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Green Mountain Transit Board of Commissioners Meeting February 16, 2021 - 7:30 A.M Green Mountain Transit Board of Commissioners Meeting February 16, 2021 - 7:30 a.m. 101 Queen City Road, Burlington VT 05401 The mission of GMT is to promote and operate safe, convenient, accessible, innovative, and sustainable public transportation services in northwest and central Vermont that reduce congestion and pollution, encourage transit oriented development, and enhance the quality of life for all. Due to current social distancing measures, this meeting will be held entirely virtually. To join the meeting via Zoom: Video Conferencing: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/89305968523 Audio Only: (646)-558-8656 Meeting ID: 893 0596 8523 7:30 a.m. 1. Open Meeting 7:31 a.m. 2. Adjustment of the Agenda 7:33 a.m. 3. Public Comment 7:35 a.m. 4. Consent Agenda (Action Item) Pages 4-40 a. January 19, 2021 Board Meeting Minutes b. Check Register c. Finance Report d. Maintenance Report e. Planning, Marketing and Public Affairs Report f. IT Support, Administrative Support, Training and HR Report g. Ridership Reports 7:40 a.m. 5. VTrans Update 7:50 a.m. 6. General Manager Report – Updates and Opportunity for Questions on the Report Pages 41-45 101 Queen City Park Rd, Burlington, VT 05401 | T: 802-540-2468 F: 802-864-5564 6088 VT Route 12, Berlin, VT 05602 | T: 802-223-7287 F: 802-223-6236 375 Lake Road, Suite 5, St. Albans, VT 05478 | T: 802-527-2181 F: 802-527-5302 1 8:00 a.m. 7. Board Committee Reports 8:10 a.m. 8. Justice, Equity, Diversity & Inclusion (JEDI) Standing Committee Policy (Action Item) Pages 46-47 8:20 a.m. 9. FY20 Audit Presentation & Discussion (Action Item) Pages 48-100 8:30 a.m. 10. Purchasing Policy Update Presentation & Discussion (Action Item) Pages 101-144 8:40 a.m. 11. Paid Time-off (PTO) Policy Update Presentation & Discussion (Action Item) Pages 145-151 8:55 a.m. 12. Executive Session: 1 VSA 313(a) (1) (b), labor relations agreements with employees. Is there a motion to find that premature public knowledge regarding the upcoming Collective Bargaining negotiations would place GMT at a substantial disadvantage? Is there a motion to enter executive session pursuant to 1 VSA 313(a) (1) (b) to discuss labor relations agreements with employees? 9:20 a.m. 13. Executive Session: 1 VSA 313(a) (1) (e), pending or probable civil litigation or prosecution, to which the public body is or may be a party. Is there a motion to find that premature public knowledge of a pending civil litigation to which GMT is a party would place GMT at a substantial disadvantage? Is there a motion to enter executive session pursuant to 1 VSA 313(a) (1) (e) to discuss a pending civil litigation? 9:30 a.m. 14. General Commissioner Comments 9:40 a.m. 15. Adjourn Next GMT Board of Commissioners Meeting Date: March 16, 2021 NOTES 101 Queen City Park Rd, Burlington, VT 05401 | T: 802-540-2468 F: 802-864-5564 6088 VT Route 12, Berlin, VT 05602 | T: 802-223-7287 F: 802-223-6236 375 Lake Road, Suite 5, St. Albans, VT 05478 | T: 802-527-2181 F: 802-527-5302 2 • Persons with disabilities who require assistance or special arrangements to participate in programs or activities are encouraged to contact Jamie Smith at 802-540-1098 at least 48 hours in advance so that proper arrangements can be made. Hearing disabled patrons can contact GMT through the Vermont Relay Service (711). • Free transportation to and from GMT Board Meetings is available within the GMT service area. To make advance arrangements, please call GMT’s Customer Service Representatives at 802-540- 2468. • Municipal Clerks: Please post this public meeting notice pursuant to Act 78 of the Acts of the 1979 Vermont Legislature. Thank you. 101 Queen City Park Rd, Burlington, VT 05401 | T: 802-540-2468 F: 802-864-5564 6088 VT Route 12, Berlin, VT 05602 | T: 802-223-7287 F: 802-223-6236 375 Lake Road, Suite 5, St. Albans, VT 05478 | T: 802-527-2181 F: 802-527-5302 3 Green Mountain Transit Board of Commissioners Meeting January 19, 2021 - 7:30 a.m. 101 Queen City Road, Burlington VT 05401 The mission of GMT is to promote and operate safe, convenient, accessible, innovative, and sustainable public transportation services in northwest and central Vermont that reduce congestion and pollution, encourage transit oriented development, and enhance the quality of life for all. Present: Commissioner Davis Jon Moore, General Manager Commissioner Waninger Jamie Smith, Director of Marketing and Planning Commissioner Pouech Devin Mason, Transit Planner Commissioner Derenthal Chris Damiani, Transit Planner Commissioner Kaynor Kim Wall, Grants Manager Commissioner Buermann Trish Redalieu, Director of Human Resources Commissioner Dimitruk Nick Foss, Director of Finance Commissioner Spencer Matt Kimball, Capital Projects Manager Commissioner Baker Jordan Posner, Paratransit and Broker Services Manager Commissioner Polyte Ross MacDonald, VTrans Commissioner Bohn Public: Commissioner Brewer Laura Jacoby, Old Spokes Home Commissioner Wallis Spencer Smith, Member of the Public Commissioner Sharrow Absent: None 1. Open Meeting Commissioner Waninger opened the meeting at 7:31 AM. 2. Adjustment of the Agenda None. 3. Public Comment Laura Jacoby indicated self as present. Spencer Smith was present to hear VTrans report. 4 4. Consent Agenda (Action Item) Commissioner Waninger entertained motion to approve Consent Agenda or remove anything therefrom. Commissioner Kaynor motioned to approve but would like to make comments after second to motion. o Commissioner Baker seconded. Further Discussion o Commissioner Kaynor indicated error pertaining to labels in rural and ADA ridership report, as well as minor typos in minutes. Also commended GMT for training YouTube channel. Consent Agenda approved without abstention or opposition. 5 5. VTrans Update Received $26.7 million in CRRSSA funds. This is in addition to $13.3 million received in the spring of 2020. Ross MacDonald instructed by VTrans to add $5 million in funding for capital, which will likely allow the State to assist GMT with the purchase of additional cutaway buses. o Five or six buses will likely be purchased. o This week, VTrans is releasing an RFP and a scope for an electrification plan. o Commissioner Dimitruk: Will statewide funding allow providers to remain fare-free for FY22? Ross MacDonald: Yes, for 5311 (Rural) service. Cannot speak for 5307 (Urban) service. Commissioner Derenthal: Would fare-free service continue on the rural side, while fares are reinstated on the urban side? Ross MacDonald: This would be a decision for GMT’s Board of Commissioners. Commissioner Waninger: Would the capital purchases be 100 percent funded as well? Ross MacDonald: They will not; local match obligations would still apply. 6 6. General Manager Report – Updates and Opportunity for Questions (continued on next page). Kim Wall will be providing an update on CRRSSA funding, and any associated potential impacts. GMT has a service modification plan in the event of any Inauguration-related protests at the Vermont State House. o Jon Moore provided updates regarding staffing-related service suspensions. With additional candidates in the recruitment process, GMT hopes to reinstate suspended service once it can be reliably staffed. Due to low ridership, these service reductions should not affect capacity. GMT will be receiving $2.48 million in 5307 (Urban) CRRSSA funds and a $1.5 reduction in State operating funds. This may present an issue with regards to local match requirements. CRRSSA Presentation: Potential Impacts on Local-Match Funding Even with additional CRRSSA and COVID-19 relief funding, GMT is still projecting a local- match deficit of $555,962 for FY22. Commissioner Dimitruk: Would like to see VTrans not reduce GMT’s State operating funding by as much. Ross MacDonald: While the state is working to provide as much assistance as possible, it likely would not be feasible for VTrans to cover GMT’s local-match deficit. Commissioner Derenthal: Does the local match include urban fares? Jon Moore: It excludes cash fare but includes unlimited-access revenue. Commissioner Kaynor: Given that GMT is currently fare-free, why are unlimited-access fares being factored into the budget? Jon Moore: For budgetary reasons, fare-collection is set to resume in FY22. o Commissioner Kaynor indicated curiosity about the possibility of GMT obtaining revenue similar to that of the unlimited-access program without reinstating fare- collection. Commissioner Wallis: What are GMT’s options for closing the local-match deficit? Jon Moore: GMT may be able to increase urban assessments. Additionally, ADA funding could be shifted to 5307 (Urban) funding. Commissioner Polyte: For local matches, have any towns provided pushback? Jon Moore: Not thus far, though GMT has power of assessment on the urban side. 7 6 General Manager Report – Updates and Opportunity for Questions (continued from previous page). Commissioner Baker: Per the board packet, might some towns also see reduced assessments? Jon Moore: These pertain more to the impact of service cuts related to COVID- 19, in FY21. That remark does not closely relate to FY22. Commissioner Pouech: Hinesburg budget will be finalized January 20, by Australian ballot. GMT local match is not a separate ballot item. Bus Chargers: Contractual Challenge Chargers for Proterra buses were intended, per the original RFP, to be programmable to charge the buses only within specific windows of time; this allows for off-peak charging, when, per an agreement between GMT and the Burlington Electric Department, electricity rates are significantly lower. Due to programming issues and three instances of human error (one being by a Proterra service technician), GMT has seen utility costs increase by $20,000 for FY21, after buses were charged during peak hours. GMT is working to obtain reimbursement from Proterra for these expenses, which Proterra has thus far refused.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Vermont Public Transit Policy Plan
    Vermont Agency of Transportation Vermont Public Transit Policy Plan Final Report Submitted by: KFH Group, Inc. January 2012 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Study Advisory Committee /Vermont Public Transit Advisory Committee Joss Besse, DHCA Director of Community Planning and Revitalization, Secretary Designee representing the Agency of Commerce and Community Development Meredith Birkett, Acting General Manager, Chittenden County Transportation Authority Mollie Burke, Vermont House of Representatives Lee Cattaneo, Community of Vermont Elders Bill Clark, DVHA Provider and Member Relations Director, Secretary Designee representing Vermont Agency of Human Services Mary Grant, Rural Community Transportation, representing VPTA Jim Moulton, Addison County Transit Resources, representing VPTA Randy Schoonmaker, Deerfield Valley Transit Association, representing VPTA Matt Mann, Windham Regional Commission, representing VT Association of Planning and Development Agencies John Sharrow, Mountain Transit, representing private bus operators and taxis Bob Young, Premier Coach, representing Intercity Bus Vermont Agency of Transportation Executive Staff Brian Searles, Secretary of Transportation Sue Minter, Deputy Secretary of Transportation Chris Cole, Director of Policy, Planning and Intermodal Development Lenny LeBlanc, Director of Finance and Administration John Dunleavy, Assistant Attorney General Scott Rogers, Director of Operations Robert Ide, Commissioner of Motor Vehicles Richard Tetreault, Director of Program Development VTrans Working Group Scott Bascom,
    [Show full text]
  • Concord Coach (NH) O Dartmouth Coach (NH) O Peter Pan Bus Lines (MA)
    KFH GROUP, INC. 2012 Vermont Public Transit Policy Plan INTERCITY BUS NEEDS ASSESSMENT AND POLICY OPTIONS White Paper January, 2012 Prepared for the: State of Vermont Agency of Transportation 4920 Elm Street, Suite 350 —Bethesda, MD 20814 —(301) 951-8660—FAX (301) 951-0026 Table of Contents Page Chapter 1: Background and Policy Context......................................................................... 1-1 Policy Context...................................................................................................................... 1-1 Chapter 2: Inventory of Existing Intercity Passenger Services.......................................... 2-1 Intercity Bus......................................................................................................................... 2-1 Impacts of the Loss of Rural Intercity Bus Service......................................................... 2-8 Intercity Passenger Rail.................................................................................................... 2-11 Regional Transit Connections ......................................................................................... 2-11 Conclusions........................................................................................................................ 2-13 Chapter 3: Analysis of Intercity Bus Service Needs............................................................ 3-1 Demographic Analysis of Intercity Bus Needs............................................................... 3-1 Public Input on Transit Needs .......................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • I-89 Commuter Transit Service Study FINAL REPORT April 2017
    I-89 Commuter Transit Service Feasibility Study FINAL REPORT Upper Valley Lake Sunapee Regional Planning Commission April 2017 I-89 Commuter Transit Service Feasibility Study AECOM Table of Contents 1. Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 1 2. Goals and Objectives ................................................................................................................................... 1 3. Previous Studies .......................................................................................................................................... 1 4. Existing Transit Services .............................................................................................................................. 3 4.1 Local Bus Transit ............................................................................................................................... 3 4.2 Commuter Bus Transit ....................................................................................................................... 5 4.3 Intercity Transit .................................................................................................................................. 6 4.4 Rideshare Services ........................................................................................................................... 6 4.5 Park-and-Ride Lots ...........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Smart Location Database Technical Documentation and User Guide
    SMART LOCATION DATABASE TECHNICAL DOCUMENTATION AND USER GUIDE Version 3.0 Updated: June 2021 Authors: Jim Chapman, MSCE, Managing Principal, Urban Design 4 Health, Inc. (UD4H) Eric H. Fox, MScP, Senior Planner, UD4H William Bachman, Ph.D., Senior Analyst, UD4H Lawrence D. Frank, Ph.D., President, UD4H John Thomas, Ph.D., U.S. EPA Office of Community Revitalization Alexis Rourk Reyes, MSCRP, U.S. EPA Office of Community Revitalization About This Report The Smart Location Database is a publicly available data product and service provided by the U.S. EPA Smart Growth Program. This version 3.0 documentation builds on, and updates where needed, the version 2.0 document.1 Urban Design 4 Health, Inc. updated this guide for the project called Updating the EPA GSA Smart Location Database. Acknowledgements Urban Design 4 Health was contracted by the U.S. EPA with support from the General Services Administration’s Center for Urban Development to update the Smart Location Database and this User Guide. As the Project Manager for this study, Jim Chapman supervised the data development and authored this updated user guide. Mr. Eric Fox and Dr. William Bachman led all data acquisition, geoprocessing, and spatial analyses undertaken in the development of version 3.0 of the Smart Location Database and co- authored the user guide through substantive contributions to the methods and information provided. Dr. Larry Frank provided data development input and reviewed the report providing critical input and feedback. The authors would like to acknowledge the guidance, review, and support provided by: • Ruth Kroeger, U.S. General Services Administration • Frank Giblin, U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • LOCALLY COORDINATED TRANSPORTATION PLAN for the Greater Nashua and Milford Region
    LOCALLY COORDINATED TRANSPORTATION PLAN For the Greater Nashua and Milford Region Locally Coordinated Transportation Plan For the Greater Nashua and Milford Region 2020-2024 Adopted: April 15, 2020 LOCALLY COORDINATED TRANSPORTATION PLAN For the Greater Nashua and Milford Region ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Community Input Participants Bridges: Domestic & Sexual Violence Support Servicelink City of Nashua Welfare/Human Services Department Souhegan Valley Transportation Collaborative Front Door Agency Southern NH HIV/AIDS Task Force Gentle Car Rides, LLC Southern NH Services Granite State Independent Living St. John Neumann Day Away Harbor Homes, Inc St. Joseph’s Community Services, Inc. Interested Public Toward Independent Living and Learning, Inc. Keystone Hall Town of Amherst Welfare/Human Services Department Milford Taxi Town of Brookline Welfare/Human Services Department Nashua Center Town of Hollis Welfare/Human Services Department Nashua Soup Kitchen & Shelter, Inc. Town of Hudson Welfare/Human Services Department Nashua Transit System Town of Litchfield Welfare/Human Services Department Opportunity Networks Town of Mason Welfare/Human Services Department Partnership for Successful Living Town of Merrimack Welfare/Human Services Department Pelham Senior Center Town of Milford Welfare/Human Services Department PLUS Company, Inc. Town of Pelham Welfare/Human Services Department SHARE Outreach Town of Wilton Welfare/Human Services Department Steering Committee Nashua Regional Planning Commission Steve Genest, Southern New Hampshire Services Jay
    [Show full text]
  • June 14, 2019 Capital Projects Standing Committee Meeting Agenda
    SANTA CRUZ METROPOLITAN TRANSIT DISTRICT (METRO) CAPITAL PROJECTS STANDING COMMITTEE AGENDA REGULAR MEETING JUNE 14, 2019 – 1:00PM METRO ADMIN OFFICES 110 VERNON STREET SANTA CRUZ, CA 95060 The Capital Projects Standing Committee Meeting Agenda Packet can be found online at www.SCMTD.com and is available for inspection at Santa Cruz Metro’s Administrative offices at 110 Vernon Street, Santa Cruz, California. This document has been created with accessibility in mind. With the exception of certain 3rd party and other attachments, it passes the Adobe Acrobat XI Accessibility Full Check. If you have any questions about the accessibility of this document, please email your inquiry to [email protected] The committee may take action on each item on the agenda. The action may consist of the recommended action, a related action or no action. Staff recommendations are subject to action and/or change by the Board of Directors. COMMITTEE ROSTER Director Ed Bottorff City of Capitola Director Cynthia Mathews City of Santa Cruz Director Bruce McPherson County of Santa Cruz Alex Clifford METRO CEO/General Manager Julie Sherman METRO General Counsel AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT METRO does not discriminate on the basis of disability. Any person who requires an accommodation or an auxiliary aid or service to participate in the meeting, or to access the agenda and the agenda packet, should contact the Executive Assistant, at 831-426-6080 as soon as possible in advance of the Committee meeting. Hearing impaired individuals should call 711 for assistance in contacting Santa Cruz METRO regarding special requirements to participate in the Committee meeting.
    [Show full text]
  • Valley Metro Operations and Capital Committee
    VMOCC Meeting Packet MEETING OF THE Valley Metro Operations and Capital Committee MEETING DATE January 27, 2009 TIME 1:00 p.m. LOCATION MAG Saguaro Room 302 N. 1st Avenue Suite 200 Regional Public Transportation Authority 302 N. First Avenue, Suite 700, Phoenix, Arizona 85003 602-262-7433, Fax 602-495-0411 January 20, 2009 Valley Metro Operations and Capital Committee (VMOCC) MAG – Saguaro Room 302 N. 1st Avenue, Suite 200 Tuesday, January 27, 2009 1:00 p.m. Action Recommended 1. Summary Minutes 1. For action Summary minutes from the December 16, 2008 VMOCC meeting are presented for approval. 2. Regional Fare Policy Program 2. For information Mario Diaz, Chief Marketing Officer, will present a summary of the existing Fare Policy Program and potential changes thereto, along with preliminary input from the fare policy public hearings. 3. 2007 Origins and Destinations Study 3. For action Carol Ketcherside, Deputy Executive Director of Planning, will request the VMOCC accept the 2007 Origins and Destinations Study and forward it to the TMC for consideration. 4. Interactive Voice Response (IVR) System for East Valley 4. For action Dial-a-Ride Contract Award Jim Wright, Acting Deputy Executive Director of Operations, will request the VMOCC to forward to the TMC the recommendation to award a contract to Trapeze for an IVR System in an amount not to exceed $142,616. The supporting information for this agenda can now be found on our website at 1 www.ValleyMetro.org. 5. Transit Life Cycle Program (TLCP) Policy Issues and 5. For information Recommendations and possible action Paul Hodgins, Manager of Capital Programming, will lead a discussion with the VMOCC on the TLCP policy issues and recommendations and solicit the VMOCC comments that will be forwarded to the TMC and Budget and Finance Subcommittee (BFS) for consideration.
    [Show full text]
  • FINAL Transportation RFP 2021
    Newmarket School District -Transportation Services RFP Newmarket School District 186A Main Street Newmarket, NH 03857 603-659-5020 Request for Proposals School Bus Transportation Services Sealed proposals marked “Sealed Transportation Proposal” must be submitted no later than Friday, March 26, 2021 at 3:00 pm to the SAU Office, 186A Main Street, Newmarket, NH 03857. The Newmarket School District reserves the right to accept or reject any and all bids or proposals received or any parts thereof for any reason whatsoever, to waive any informalities in any bid or proposal or in any provision in the request for bids or proposals, to negotiate with any or all proposers, to require a modification of the RFP at any time, and to select the proposer whom, the District, in its sole discretion determines is in the best interests of the District even though the proposer may not submit the lowest bid or proposal. Under no circumstances will the District be responsible for the cost of preparing any bid or proposal. All bids are governmental records subject to public disclosure under the Right-to-Know Law. The District will not accept bids marked confidential in whole or in part. Proposals will be publicly opened at the School Administration Office located at 186A Main Street, Newmarket, New Hampshire. The contents of all proposals will be open to inspection by interested parties at the time of opening or by appointment thereafter. 1 Newmarket School District -Transportation Services RFP Newmarket School District Request for Proposals The Newmarket School District (the “District”) is soliciting proposals from qualified Carriers to provide daily school bus transportation, and transportation for extracurricular activities, through a contract for services with an initial term of five years commencing on July 1, 2021.
    [Show full text]
  • Buses That We Don't Have Current Details For
    Check List - buses that we don't have current details for The main lists on our website show the details of the many thousands of open top buses that currently exist throughout the world, and those that are listed as either scrapped or for scrap. However, there are a number of buses in our database that we don’t have current details for, that could still exist or have been scrapped. The buses listed on this page are those that we need to confirm the location and status of. These buses do not appear on any of our other lists, so if you're looking for a particular vehicle, it could be here. Please have a look at this page and if you can update any of it, even if only a small piece of information that helps to determine where a bus is now, then please contact us using the link button on the Front Page. The buses are divided into lists in Chassis manufacturer order. ? REG NO / LICENCE PLATE CHASSIS BODY STATUS/LAST KNOWN OWNER J2374 ? ? Last reported with JMT in 1960s, no further trace AEC Regent REG NO / LICENCE PLATE CHASSIS BODY STATUS/LAST KNOWN OWNER AUO 90 AEC Regent Unidentified Devon General AUO 91 AEC Regent Unidentified Devon General GW 6276 AEC Regent Brighton & Hove Acquired by Southern Vectis (903) from Brighton Hove and District in 1955. Sold, 1960, not traced further. GW 6277 AEC Regent Brighton & Hove Acquired by Southern Vectis (902) from Brighton Hove and District in 1955, never entered service, disposed of in 1957.
    [Show full text]
  • Public Transportation Needs in New Hampshire
    A snapshot of how public transportation is funded and structured throughout the state. MOBILITY NEEDS in THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE Introduction Public transit is a lifeline to many New Hampshire residents of all ages and demographics. In FTA Mandated ADA Service ADA Paratransit Cost Growth order to maintain the public transit services available in New Hampshire today, signicant Transit agencies throughout the state have been facing Cooperative Alliance for Seacoast Transportation (COAST) increases in public funding are critically needed. The federal funding that New Hampshire’s an increasing need for federally mandated Americans public transit systems rely heavily upon is not keeping pace with the growing demand and with Disabilities Act (ADA) service, especially for dialysis rising service costs. With adequate ongoing support, transit agencies can focus on providing trips. This on-demand service is for people with disabili- reliable transportation service to the region and ensure access for NH’s future generations. ties that keep them from riding the regular xed route bus. COAST, the public transit agency serving the New Hampshire Seacoast, has seen demand for mandated ADA services grow 880% from 2008-2018, and their cost to provide those services increase 744%. Federal alloca- tions of transit funds have not risen accordingly, leaving public transit agencies to bear the burden of these costs. Economic Development & Land Use In order for economic development to continue to thrive in NH, businesses need to be able to oer public transit to potential employees. Employment sites with transit access can leverage this to attract additional workers and address parking needs.
    [Show full text]
  • FY2020 Contractors Manual Section 7 Satisfactory Continuing Control
    7. SATISFACTORY CONTINUING CONTROL PURPOSE OF THIS REVIEW AREA The recipient must ensure that Federal Transit Administration (FTA)-funded property will remain available to be used for its originally authorized purpose throughout its useful life until disposition. QUESTIONS TO BE EXAMINED 1. For FTA-funded real property purchased under an award made on or after December 26, 2014, does the recipient maintain adequate records on the status of real property and submit required reports to FTA? 2. For FTA-funded excess real property purchased under an award made before December 26, 2014, did the recipient prepare and update an excess property inventory and utilization plan? 3. Did the recipient follow FTA requirements for incidental use of real property? 4. Has the recipient made appropriate efforts to use, lease, or dispose of idle facilities? 5. Is FTA-funded real property used solely for its originally authorized purpose? 6. If the recipient disposed of FTA-funded real property since the last Comprehensive Review, were FTA requirements followed? 7. Does the recipient have flood insurance for any FTA-funded buildings located in areas that has been identified as having special flood hazards and in which the sale of flood insurance has been made available under the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968? 8. Does the recipient maintain control over FTA-funded equipment? 9. Was equipment withdrawn from use and disposed of in accordance with 2 CFR 200 and FTA requirements? 10. Are bus fleets managed in accordance with FTA requirements for spare ratios and contingency fleets? 11. Does the rail fleet management plan meet FTA requirements? 12.
    [Show full text]
  • Improving Public Transportation Access to Large Airports (Part 2)
    77 CHAPTER 5 LESSONS LEARNED FROM SUCCESSFUL RAIL SYSTEMS OVERVIEW FOUR ELEMENTS IN A SUCCESSFUL AIRPORT RAIL SYSTEM Chapter 4 summarized the results of a review of 14 suc- cessful airport ground access systems, each of which was able This chapter will focus on the rail projects that form the to capture more than 20 percent of the market of air travelers principal mode of most of the successful systems described to public transportation. Chapter 5 examines the attributes in Chapter 4 by describing the characteristics associated with achieved in the implementation of the successful system that the success of these rail projects. This chapter will explore can be of use to the U.S. practitioner considering the develop- the importance of four elements of a total strategy, drawing ment of systems with both rail and bus services. This chapter examples from the systems described in Chapter 4. These four examines the characteristics of the rail component of the total elements are: ground access strategies used in the 14 successful systems. The focus of the chapter is on the attributes of rail service that are 1. Service to downtown and the metropolitan area; associated with high mode shares to rail systems. The actual 2. Service to national destinations beyond the metropoli- method by which these attributes can be achieved in the U.S. tan area; experience may be different from the methods used in Europe 3. Quality of the rail connection at the airport, or the and Asia. airport–railway interface; and 4. Baggage-handling strategies and off-site facilities.
    [Show full text]