Maricopa Association of Governments Regional Transportation Plan
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Performance Audit Maricopa Association of Governments Regional Transportation Plan November 2016 Submitted To: Debra Davenport, Auditor General Office of the Auditor General 2910 N. 44th Street, Suite 410 Phoenix, AZ 85018 Submitted By: 455 Capitol Mall•Suite 700•Sacramento, California•95814•Tel 916.443.1300•www.secteam.com November 23, 2016 The Honorable Andy Biggs, President The Honorable David Gowan, Speaker Arizona State Senate Arizona House of Representatives Members of the Arizona Legislature The Honorable Doug Ducey, Governor State of Arizona Mr. Dennis Smith, Executive Director Mr. John Halikowski, Director Maricopa Association of Governments Arizona Department of Transportation Mr. Scott Smith, Chief Executive Officer Mr. Roc Arnett, Chairman Valley Metro Citizens Transportation Oversight Committee Transmitted herewith is a report, A Performance Audit of the Maricopa Association of Governments Regional Transportation Plan. This audit was conducted by the independent firm Sjoberg Evashenk Consulting under contract with the Auditor General and was in response to the requirements of Arizona Revised Statutes (A.R.S.) §28-6313. Responses to the audit can be found at the end of the audit report. As outlined in their responses: The Maricopa Association of Governments agrees with all of the findings and plans to implement or implement in a different manner all of the recommendations directed to it. The Arizona Department of Transportation agrees with all but three of the findings and plans to implement or implement in a different manner all but one of the recommendations directed to it. Valley Metro agrees with all of the findings and plans to implement or implement in a different manner all of the recommendations directed to it. In addition, to comply with A.R.S. §28-6313(E), a representative for the Citizens Transportation Oversight Committee (CTOC) indicated that CTOC will provide a written response to the Maricopa Association of Governments Transportation Policy Committee th 2910 NORTH 44 STREET • SUITE 410 • PHOENIX, ARIZONA 85018 • (602) 553-0333 • FAX (602) 553-0051 November 23, 2016 Page -2- within 45 days after the audit report is released indicating whether it agrees or disagrees with the findings and whether the recommendations should be implemented, be implemented with modification, or not be implemented. Sincerely, Debbie Davenport Auditor General DD:ka cc: The Honorable Michele Reagan, Arizona Secretary of State Citizens Transportation Oversight Committee Members Maricopa Association of Governments Regional Council Members Maricopa Association of Governments Transportation Policy Committee Members Maricopa County Board of Supervisors State Transportation Board Members Valley Metro Rail, Inc. Board of Directors Valley Metro Regional Public Transportation Authority Board of Directors Attachment Table of Contents Table of Contents....................................................................................................... i Acronym List ............................................................................................................. ii Executive Summary ................................................................................................... 1 Introduction and Background ..................................................................................... 5 Scope and Methodology .......................................................................................... 11 Chapter 1: Regional Efforts and Progress Since 2011 Audit ........................................ 13 Chapter 2: Freeway Performance ............................................................................. 29 Chapter 3: Arterial Street Performance ..................................................................... 47 Chapter 4: Transit Performance ............................................................................... 59 Chapter 5: Multimodal Systems Management and Operations .................................... 77 Chapter 6: Conclusion and Recommendations ........................................................... 93 Appendix A: Audit Scope and Methodology ............................................................... 95 Appendix B: Local Jurisdiction Survey Results ......................................................... 101 Appendix C: Planned Prop 400 Projects for Phase III 7/1/2015 through 6/30/2020 ... 105 Response to Audit Recommendations: Maricopa Association of Governments ........... 109 Response to Audit Recommendations: Arizona Department of Transportation ........... 115 Response to Audit Recommendations: Valley Metro ................................................ 119 SJOBERGEVASHENK i MAG RTP Audit-2016 [THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK FOR REPRODUCTION PURPOSES] SJOBERGEVASHENK ii MAG RTP Audit-2016 Acronym List AADT – Average Annual Daily Traffic AASHTO – American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials ADOT – Arizona Department of Transportation ATM – Active Traffic Management BRT – Bus Rapid Transit CTOC – Citizens Transportation Oversight Committee DMS – Dynamic Message Sign FAST Act – Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act FHWA – Federal Highway Administration FTA – Federal Transit Administration GPL – General Purpose Lane HOVL – High Occupancy Vehicle Lane MAG – Maricopa Association of Governments MAP-21 – Moving Ahead with Progress for the 21st Century MCDOT – Maricopa County Department of Transportation PMBOK – Project Management Body of Knowledge Prop 400 – Proposition 400, passed in 2004 RPTA – Regional Public Transportation Authority RTP – Regional Transportation Plan US DOT – United States Department of Transportation SJOBERGEVASHENK iii MAG RTP Audit-2016 [THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK FOR REPRODUCTION PURPOSES] SJOBERGEVASHENK iv MAG RTP Audit-2016 Executive Summary Recognizing the continued need for transportation and transit improvement projects in the region, Maricopa County voters passed Proposition 400 (Prop 400) authorizing a 20-year continuation of a countywide, half-cent sales tax in November 2004. With the passage of Prop 400, voters added a significant investment in rail projects, new and improved freeways, street improvement programs, and bus transit features to address regional needs through projects specified and developed as part of the long-range Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). Statutes enacted by Prop 400’s passage included provisions for a performance audit of the RTP every five years focused on project expenditure impacts in relieving congestion and improving mobility, as well as federal criteria related to light rail transit including ridership and costs and whether changes to the overall transportation system are warranted. This report provides the results of the second performance audit of the Prop 400 program focused on project expenditures and activities during the five-year period between fiscal years 2010-2011 and 2014- 2015 as well as planned activities for fiscal years 2015-2016 through 2019-2020. Audit Results When voters passed Prop 400 in 2004 authorizing additional funding of the RTP, the plan included a variety of transportation choices from new freeways, arterial streets, bus routes, and light rail lines to funding for technology that can be used to optimize the capital construction investments. As such, the transportation and transit entities in Maricopa County have a variety of options at their disposal to address congestion challenges and transportation needs. Yet, it is important to note, that there is no one solution or correct combination of strategies to address a region’s transportation needs. Transportation planners, operators, and engineers must work collaboratively with the public to consider and implement the best strategies and techniques as determined through technical study, deliberation, oversight, and public input. Since the prior audit in 2011, the RTP partners—namely, the Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG), Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT), and Valley Metro,1 and local jurisdictions—have planned and implemented many strong activities and strengthened existing processes related to performance measures, project management and delivery, and intelligent transportation system technology and monitoring—although additional improvements could further enhance practices. For instance, the RTP partners have solidified a strong performance- based infrastructure to better track and report performance. Additionally, performance data generally reveals results that are comparable to or better than peers across the country related to congestion, travel time, crashes, pavement and bridge condition, on-time performance, and transit operating metrics. With the Prop 400 program halfway through its 20-year duration, the RTP partners have completed many projects and made strides since fiscal year 2004-2005 when the sales tax was 1 Regional Pubic Transportation Authority and Valley Metro Rail, Inc. are together referred to as Valley Metro for purposes of this audit. SJOBERGEVASHENK 1 MAG RTP Audit-2016 Maricopa County Regional Transportation Plan 2016 Prop 400 Performance Audit extended. We found that most projects reviewed were on schedule—or had reasonable delays that were documented—and were within budget. Moreover, project management techniques used by the RTP partners on freeway, arterial streets, and transit projects aligned with industry best practices. Further, while most RTP projects are specific to individual transportation modes, the RTP partners have also undertaken activities toward moving people