Agenda - Thursday, August 1, 2019 - Granicus

BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING

Thursday, August 1, 2019

5:30 PM

PLEASE NOTE CHANGE IN MEETING LOCATION

VTA Auditorium 3331 North First Street San Jose, CA 95134

AGENDA

To help you better understand, follow, and participate in the meeting, the following information is provided:

▪ Persons wishing to address the Board of Directors on any item on the agenda or not on the agenda are requested to complete a blue card located at the public information table and hand it to the Board Secretary staff prior to the meeting or before the item is heard.

▪ Speakers will be called to address the Board when their agenda item(s) arise during the meeting and are asked to limit their comments to 2 minutes. The amount of time allocated to speakers may vary at the Chairperson's discretion depending on the number of speakers and length of the agenda. If presenting handout materials, please provide 25

copies to the Board Secretary for distribution to the Board of Directors.

▪ The Consent Agenda items may be voted on in one motion at the beginning of the meeting. The Board may also move regular agenda items on the consent agenda during Orders of the Day. If you wish to discuss any of these items, please request the item be removed from the Consent Agenda by notifying the Board Secretary staff or completing a blue card at the public information table prior to the meeting or prior to the Consent Agenda being heard.

AGENDA

BOARD OF DIRECTORS Thursday, August 01, 2019

Page 2 of 7

▪ Disclosure of Campaign Contributions to Board Members (Government Code Section 84308)

In accordance with Government Code Section 84308, no VTA Board Member shall accept, solicit, or direct a contribution of more than $250 from any party, or his or her agent, or from any participant, or his or her agent, while a proceeding involving a license, permit, or other entitlement for use is pending before the agency. Any Board Member who has received a contribution within the preceding 12 months in an amount of more than $250 from a party or from any agent or participant shall disclose that fact on the record of the proceeding and shall not make, participate in making, or in any way attempt to use his or her official position to influence the decision. A party to a proceeding before VTA shall disclose on the record of the proceeding any contribution in an amount of more than $250 made within the preceding 12 months by the party, or his or her agent, to any Board Member. No party, or his or her agent, shall make a contribution of more than $250 to any Board Member during the proceeding and for three months following the date a final decision is rendered by the agency in the proceeding. The foregoing statements are limited in their entirety by the provisions of Section 84308 and parties are urged to consult with their own legal counsel regarding the requirements of the law.

▪ All reports for items on the open meeting agenda are available for review in the Board Secretary’s Office, 3331 North First Street, San Jose, California, (408) 321-5680, the Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday prior to the meeting. This information is available on our website, www.vta.org, and also at the meeting. Any document distributed less than 72-hours prior to the meeting will also be made available to the public at the time of distribution. Copies of items provided by members of the public at the meeting will be made available following the meeting upon request.

In accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, VTA will make reasonable arrangements to ensure meaningful access to its meetings for persons who have disabilities and for persons with limited English proficiency who need translation and interpretation services. Individuals requiring ADA accommodations should notify the Board Secretary’s Office at least 48-hours prior to the meeting. Individuals requiring language assistance should notify the Board Secretary’s Office at least 72-hours prior to the meeting. The Board Secretary may be contacted at (408) 321-5680 or *e-mail: [email protected] or (408) 321-2330 (TTY only). VTA’s home page is on the web at: www.vta.org or visit us on Facebook at: www.facebook.com/scvta. (408) 321-2300: 中文

/ Español / 日本語 / 한국어 / tiếng Việt / Tagalog.

NOTE: THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS MAY ACCEPT, REJECT OR MODIFY

ANY ACTION RECOMMENDED ON THIS AGENDA.

70 West Hedding St., San Jose, California is served by bus line 58 and Light Rail. (*61 Southbound last trip is at 8:55 pm for this location.) For trip planning information, contact our Customer Service Department at (408) 321-2300 between the hours of 6:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Monday through Friday and 7:30 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. on Saturday. Schedule information is also available on our website, www.vta.org.

http://www.vta.org/

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=d&source=s_d&saddr=&daddr=70+W+Hedding+St,+San+Jose,+CA+95110&geocode=FY70OQIdWuW7-Cmda4BNfsuPgDHnRbS0n3yDaQ&hl=en&mra=ls&dirflg=r&ttype=dep&date=04%2F22%2F10&time=9:18am&noexp=0&noal=0&sort=&sll=37.35259,-121.903782&sspn=0.01

http://www.vta.org/

AGENDA


Page 3 of 7

1. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL

1.1. ROLL CALL

1.2. Pledge of Allegiance

1.3. Orders of the Day

2. AWARDS AND COMMENDATION

2.1. INFORMATION ITEM - Recognize Eddie Calsadillas, Office and Timekeeping Technician, North Yard Office; Pale Toa Eva Jr., Coach Operator, Cerone Operations; Abdi Alaghmandan, Substation Maintainer, Way, Power, and Signal Department; as Employees of the Third (3rd) Quarter of 2019; and Debbie Polm, Transit Division Supervisor, Chaboya Operations, as Supervisor of the Third (3rd) Quarter of 2019.

2.2. ACTION ITEM - Adopt a resolution of appreciation for retiring VTA staff:

• Carolyn Gonot, Chief Planning & Engineering Officer

• Inez Evans, Chief Operating Officer

3. PUBLIC COMMENT

This portion of the meeting is reserved for persons desiring to address the Board of Directors on any item within the Board’s jurisdiction. Speakers are limited to 2 minutes. The law does not permit Board action or extended discussion of any item not on the agenda except under special circumstances. If Board action is requested, the matter can be placed on a subsequent agenda. All statements that require a response will be referred to staff for reply in writing.

4. PUBLIC HEARINGS

There are no public hearings.

5. COMMITTEE REPORTS

5.1. Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC) Chairperson’s Report. (Verbal Report) (No Report)

5.2. Policy Advisory Committee (PAC) Chairperson’s Report. (Verbal Report) (No Report)

5.3. Standing Committee Chairpersons’ Report. (No Report)

5.4. Policy Advisory Board Chairpersons’ Report. (Verbal Report)

AGENDA


Page 4 of 7

6. CONSENT AGENDA

6.1. ACTION ITEM - Approve the Board of Directors Regular Meeting Minutes of June 6, 2019.

6.2. ACTION ITEM - Approve the Board of Directors Regular Meeting Minutes of June 21, 2019.

6.3. ACTION ITEM - Authorize the General Manager to dedicate a sidewalk and utility easement to the City of Santa Clara (City) in connection with the Santa Clara Pedestrian Underpass Project (SCPUP).

6.4. ACTION ITEM - Authorize the General Manager to enter into an extension of the Exclusive Negotiations Agreement (ENA) for the Tamien Station TOD site between VTA and UrbanCo Tamien LLC for three additional months so that it expires November 8th, 2019 in order to complete legal documentation and subsequently execute a Lease Option Agreement (LOA) based on the business terms and conditions approved by the Board of Directors in March of 2019.

6.5. ACTION ITEM - Authorize the General Manager to extend the Exclusive Negotiations Agreement (ENA) for the Santa Clara Caltrain Station Park and Ride Lot between VTA, the City of Santa Clara and Republic Metropolitan (Developer), for up to twelve months after the current expiration date of August 5, 2019 conditioned upon a deadline for the proposed terms and conditions for a Transit-Oriented Development project on VTA’s property being presented to the Board of Directors at its November meeting, and the subsequent execution by Developer of a Development Agreement (DA) or Lease Option Agreement (LOA) by February 5, 2020. The General Manager may extend either of these deadlines, up to a 12 month maximum extension period for the ENA, upon a determination that substantial progress has been made and that additional time is needed to negotiate the terms and conditions of a proposed agreement(s).

6.6. ACTION ITEM - Adopt the Regionally Significant Projects for inclusion in the update to Metropolitan Transportation Committee (MTC) and Association of Bay Area Governments’ (ABAG’s) Plan Bay Area 2050.

6.7. INFORMATION ITEM - Receive a report on the July 1, 2019 Transit Service Changes.

AGENDA


Page 5 of 7

7. REGULAR AGENDA

7.1. ACTION ITEM - Authorize the General Manager to approve and formally adopt a successor labor agreement negotiated between the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) and American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) Local 101.

7.2. ACTION ITEM - Authorize the General Manager to approve and formally adopt a successor labor agreement negotiated between the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) and Transportation Authority Engineers and Architects (TAEA) Local 21.

7.3. ACTION ITEM - Approve the criteria of the 2016 Measure B Bicycle/Pedestrian Capital Projects Competitive Grant Program.

7.4. ACTION ITEM – Authorize the General Manager to:

1) Execute a contract amendment with TransCore, LP for the Electronic Toll System (“ETS”) Integration Services for the Silicon Valley Express Lanes (SVEL) Program:

• Increasing the amount by $60,000,000 bringing the contract value to $64,416,624.

• Extending the period of service until December 31, 2027.

2) Execute Task Orders under this contract up to the Board approved amount.

7.5. ACTION ITEM - Authorize the General Manger to execute a contract amendment with PGH Wong Engineering, Inc. (Wong), for construction management services through project completion and post-completion activities for the Silicon Valley Berryessa Extension (SVBX) Project in the amount of $5,628,750; and increasing the total agreement value to $74,000,000.

7.6. ACTION ITEM - Authorize the General Manager to amend the Contract S16250 in the amount of $8,400,000 with BKF Engineers (BKF) to perform final design for Eastridge to BART Regional Connector (EBRC), resulting in a new total authorized contract amount of $22,819,983.

7.7. ACTION ITEM - Authorize the General Manager to execute a firm fixed price contract with Protran Technology, a division of Harsco Rail, in the amount of $2,169,234.69 to procure and install the Roadway Worker Warning System (RWWS) and associated equipment for VTA.

7.8. ACTION ITEM - Confirm the discontinuation of Route 65 service per the 2019 New Transit Service Plan, as adopted on May 2, 2019.

7.9. INFORMATION ITEM - Receive an update on the Caltrain Business Plan. (Verbal Report) (Caltrain Staff)

AGENDA


Page 6 of 7

8. OTHER ITEMS

8.1. General Manager Report. (Verbal Report)

8.1.A. INFORMATION ITEM - Receive an update on the VTA Block. (Verbal Report)

8.1.B. INFORMATION ITEM - Receive Government Affairs Update. (Verbal Report)

8.1.C. INFORMATION ITEM - Receive Silicon Valley Rapid Transit (SVRT) Program Update.

8.2. Chairperson’s Report. (Verbal Report)

8.3. ITEMS OF CONCERN AND REFERRAL TO ADMINISTRATION

8.4. INFORMATION ITEM - Unapproved Minutes/Summary Reports from VTA Committees, Joint Powers Boards (JPB), and Regional Commissions

8.4.A. VTA Standing Committees

8.4.B. VTA Advisory Committees

8.4.C. VTA Policy Advisory Boards (PAB)

8.4.D. Joint Powers Boards and Regional Commissions

8.5. Announcements

AGENDA


Page 7 of 7

9. CLOSED SESSION

9.1. Recess to Closed Session

A. Conference with Labor Negotiators [Government Code Section 54957.6]

VTA Designated Representatives Bob Escobar, Negotiator Inez Evans, Chief Operating Officer Sylvester Fadal, Director of HR, Procurement and Contracts Department Raj Srinath, Deputy General Manager/Chief Financial Officer

Employee Organizations Amalgamated Transit Union, Local 265 American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees Local 101 (AFSCME) Transportation Authority Engineers & Architects Association Local 21 (TAEA)

B. Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation [Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1)]

Name of Case: Santa Clara Valley Transportation, et al. v. California Public Employees’ Retirement System (Office of Administrative Hearings No.: 2018070291)

C. Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation [Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(2)] Significant Exposure to Litigation No. of Potential Cases: 3 (plus others similarly situated)

9.2. Reconvene to Open Session

9.3. Closed Session Report

10. ADJOURN

Date: June 4, 2019 Current Meeting: August 1, 2019 Board Meeting: August 1, 2019

BOARD MEMORANDUM TO: Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority Board of Directors

THROUGH: General Manager, Nuria I. Fernandez

FROM: Director of Human Resources Procurement & Contract, Sylvester Fadal SUBJECT: Employees and Supervisor of the Qtr for the 3rd Qtr of 2019

FOR INFORMATION ONLY

BACKGROUND:

Employees and Supervisor of the Third (3rd) Quarter:

Eddie Calsadillas, Office and Timekeeping Technician at the North Yard Office, is the Administration Award Winner for the 3rd Quarter. Mr. Calsadillas has worked for VTA for over two years. In that time, he has excelled in the various responsibilities assigned to him. Mr. Calsadillas has proven himself to be a quick learner, a team player, and someone who is willing to help his coworkers whenever needed. The management at North Yard appreciate that he shows initiative in learning and developing his timekeeping skills and as such, expect great things from him in his future with VTA. Congratulations to Eddie Calsadillas, Administration Employee of the 3rd Quarter.

Pale Toa Eva Jr., Coach Operator at Cerone Operations, is the Transportation Award Winner for the 3rd Quarter. Mr. Eva has been an Operator at VTA for over 15 years. Throughout his tenure with the organization, he has shown a high degree of integrity in his job performance. He has a positive attitude and helps foster a great work environment at Cerone. Mr. Eva takes pride in his job, enjoys interacting with his passengers, and provides exemplary customer service to both the public and his coworkers. The team from Cerone is happy to see such a deserving employee receive this recognition. Congratulations to Pale Toa Eva Jr., Transportation Employee of the 3rd Quarter.

Abdi Alaghmandan, Substation Maintainer in the Way, Power, and Signal Department, is the Maintenance Award Winner for the 3rd Quarter. Last month marked Mr. Alaghmandan’s 18-year anniversary as a VTA employee. He is a hard worker who cares about getting his job done correctly. Whenever he sees a problem, he comes up with a solution while maintaining a calm

2.1

Page 2 of 2

and collected demeanor. Mr. Alaghmandan has proven himself to be quite resourceful when it comes to recycling and repairing parts, and his coworkers often consult him because they know they can rely on his expertise and quick troubleshooting skills. Congratulations to Abdi Alaghmandan, Maintenance Employee of the 3rd Quarter.

Debbie Polm, Transit Division Supervisor at Chaboya Operations, is the Supervisory Award Winner for the 3rd Quarter. After serving as a VTA employee for over 23 years, Ms. Polm retired this past June. During her time with VTA, she upheld a strong commitment to excellence in her work and served as an outstanding role model for her staff by effectively handling issues that arose. Ms. Polm was dedicated to fulfilling her responsibilities, remained mindful of the needs of the Chaboya yard, and coached numerous Operators to perform to the highest of standards. The team at Chaboya is happy to see such a deserving employee receive this recognition. Congratulations to Debbie Polm, Supervisor of the 3rd Quarter.

Prepared By: Office of Diversity and Inclusion Memo No. 6735

2.1

Adopt a Resolution of Appreciation

for retiring VTA staff:

Carolyn Gonot, Chief Planning &

Engineering Officer

and

Inez Evans, Chief Operating Officer

WILL BE FORWARDED UNDER SEPARATE COVER

2.2


Thursday, June 6, 2019

MINUTES


The Regular Meeting of the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority’s (VTA) Board of Directors (Board) was called to order by Chairperson O’Neill at 4:30 p.m. in the Board of Supervisors’ Chambers, County Government Center, 70 West Hedding Street, San José, California.

1.1. ROLL CALL

Attendee Name Title Status Marie Blankley Alternate Board Member Absent Larry Carr Board Member Present Magdalena Carrasco Board Member Present Cindy Chavez Vice Chairperson Present David Cortese Board Member Present Dev Davis Alternate Board Member Absent Lan Diep Board Member Present Susan Ellenberg Alternate Board Member Absent Adrian Fine Alternate Board Member Absent Glenn Hendricks Alternate Board Member Present Chappie Jones Board Member Present Sam Liccardo Board Member Present John McAlister Board Member Present Howard Miller Alternate Board Member Present Teresa O'Neill Chairperson Present Raul Peralez Board Member Present Rob Rennie Board Member Present Rich Tran Board Member Present Jeannie Bruins Ex-Offcio Member Present

A quorum was present.

* Alternates do not serve unless participating as a Member.


The Pledge of Allegiance commenced.

6.1

MINUTES

BOARD OF DIRECTORS Thursday, June 06, 2019

Page 2 of 18


Chairperson O'Neill noted staff request to remove Closed Session Items #2.1.C and #2.1.E from the agenda. M/S/C (Liccardo/Hendricks) to accept the Orders of the Day.

RESULT: ACCEPTED – Agenda Item #1.3 MOVER: Sam Liccardo, Board Member SECONDER: Glenn Hendricks, Alternate Board Member AYES: Carr, Chavez, Hendricks (Alt.), Liccardo, McAlister, O’Neill,

Peralez, Rennie NOES: None ABSENT: Carrasco, Cortese, Diep, Jones

Board Member Cortese arrived at the meeting at 4:36 p.m.

2. CLOSED SESSION

2.1. Recessed to Closed Session at 4:36 p.m.

A. Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation [Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1)]

Name of Case: Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority v. Montague Parkway Associates, LP (Santa Clara County Superior Court Case No.: 112CV220334)

B. Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation

[Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1)]

Name of Case: Cheung v. Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority, et al. (Santa Clara County Superior Court Case No. 17-CV-314496)

C. (Removed from the Agenda.)

Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation [Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1)]

Name of Case: Momi v. City of San Jose, et al. (Santa Clara County Superior Court Case No. 17-CV-318467)

D. Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation

[Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1)]

Name of Case: Marquez v. Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority, et al. (Santa Clara County Superior Court Case No. 17-CV-311003)

6.1

MINUTES


Page 3 of 18

E. (Removed from the Agenda.)

Conference with Real Property Negotiators [Government Code Section 54956.8]

Property: Proposed Transit-Oriented Development on Santa Clara Caltrain Station Park & Ride Lot, on the VTA-owned parcel at APN 230-08-061, also known as 500 Benton Street/Railroad Avenue, Santa Clara, CA

Agency Negotiators: Ron Golem, Director, Real Estate & Transit-Oriented Development; Jessie O'Malley Solis, Manager of Transit-Oriented Development

Negotiating Parties: Robert Mendelsohn, Republic Metropolitan, LLC

Under Negotiation: Terms and conditions of ground lease

F. Conference with Labor Negotiators [Government Code Section 54957.6]

VTA Designated Representatives Bob Escobar, Negotiator Raj Srinath, Deputy General Manager/Chief Financial Officer Inez Evans, Chief Operating Officer

Geoff Holland, Employee Relations Supervisor

Employee Organization Amalgamated Transit Union, Local 265

Board Member Jones arrived at the meeting at 4:39 p.m. Board Member Tran arrived at the meeting at 5:00 p.m. Board Member Diep arrived at the meeting at 5:16 p.m.

2.2. Reconvened to Open Session at 5:30 p.m.


A. Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation [Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1)]

Name of Case: Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority v. Montague Parkway Associates, LP (Santa Clara County Superior Court Case No.: 112CV220334) Evelynn Tran, General Counsel, noted no reportable action was taken during closed session.

6.1

MINUTES


Page 4 of 18

B. Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation [Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1)]

Name of Case: Cheung v. Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority, et al. (Santa Clara County Superior Court Case No. 17-CV-314496)

General Counsel Tran noted no reportable action was taken during closed session.

D. Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation [Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1)]

Name of Case: Marquez v. Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority, et al. (Santa Clara County Superior Court Case No. 17-CV-311003) General Counsel Tran noted no reportable action was taken during closed session.

F. Conference with Labor Negotiators [Government Code Section 54957.6]

VTA Designated Representatives Bob Escobar, Negotiator Raj Srinath, Deputy General Manager/Chief Financial Officer Inez Evans, Chief Operating Officer

Geoff Holland, Employee Relations Supervisor

Employee Organization Amalgamated Transit Union, Local 265

General Counsel Tran noted no reportable action was taken during closed session.


3.1. Retiree's Recognition June 2019

The Board recognized Joyce Warner-Manina, Electronic Technician, for 31 years of distinguished public service with VTA. The following retirees were unable to attend, but were recognized for their public service with VTA: 1) Ronald Angell, Coach Operator, for 31 years of distinguished public service; and 2) April Jones, Parts Clerk, for 30 years of distinguished public service.

3.2. Cristo Rey Corporate Work Study Program Intern Commendation

The Board recognized the following Cristo Rey San José Jesuit High School student interns for their outstanding contributions to VTA: Ramon Alcantar; Victoria Ascencio; Alexis Martinez; Bianca Martinez; and Pedro Ramirez.

6.1

MINUTES


Page 5 of 18

The following interns were unable to attend the meeting, but were recognized for their outstanding contributions to VTA: Cristian Cardenas; Maria Lopez; Jazmine Lozano; and Kyle Martinez.

Public Comment

Tessa Woodmansee, Interested Citizen, expressed her dissatisfaction on the open meeting process and provided suggestions for improvement.

Vice Chairperson Chavez left her seat at 5:39 p.m.

4. PUBLIC COMMENT

Ms. Woodmansee expressed concern on climate change and offered suggestions on transit infrastructure.

Monica Mallon, Interested Citizen, encouraged the Board to consider the public comments on the proposed budget and expressed concern on the impact of reduced bus service.

Bruce Roberts, Interested Citizen, expressed concern on Access Paratransit service and called for improved bus service to the Santa Clara Kaiser Hospital.

Board Member Cortese returned to his seat at 5:43 p.m. Board Member Carrasco arrived at the meeting at 5:44 p.m. Vice Chairperson Chavez returned to her seat at 5:45 p.m.

Andrew Boone, Interested Citizen, advocated for allocating more funding to bus service and expressed concern on projects that increase highway capacity.

Board Member Carrasco left her seat at 5:47 p.m.

Alexis Achilleoudis, Interested Citizen, commented about a transportation infrastructure concept.

Rose Villegas, Interested Citizen, commented about her claim against VTA.

5. PUBLIC HEARINGS

There were no Public Hearings.


6.1. Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC) Chairperson's Report

CAC Chairperson Marty Schulter provided a brief overview of the May 8, 2019, CAC meeting and the proposed on-boarding program for new members.

Board Member Carrasco took her seat at 5:56 p.m.

6.1

MINUTES


Page 6 of 18

6.2. Policy Advisory Committee (PAC) Chairperson's Report

PAC Chairperson Glenn Hendricks provided an overview of the May 8, 2019, PAC meeting and noted the June 13, 2019, PAC meeting has been cancelled.

Board Member Carrasco left her seat at 5:58 p.m.

6.3. Standing Committee Chairpersons' Report

Chairperson O’Neill noted the Standing Committee Chairpersons’ Reports were included in the Board Members’ reading folders and placed on the public table.

6.4. Policy Advisory Board Chairpersons' Report

Chairperson O’Neill noted the Policy Advisory Board Chairperson’s Report was included in the Board Members’ reading folders and placed on the public table.

7. CONSENT AGENDA

Board Member Liccardo noted his recusal from Agenda Item #7.9 - Montague Pedestrian Overcrossing Contract (C18231F); Agenda Item #7.10 - Light Rail Track Intrusion Prevention Contract; Agenda Item #7.11 - I-680 Soundwalls Contract (Final Design and ROW Engineering Services); and Agenda Item #7.13 - Berryessa Extension Project DB11002F (C700) Design-Build Contract, Modify and Redistribute Incentive Budget.

Public Comment Simon Oh, Interested Citizen, referenced Agenda Item #7.3 - Citizens Advisory Committee Appointments, and congratulated the appointees. Ms. Woodmansee referenced Agenda Item #7.4 - FY2019/20 TDA3 Project Priorities; Agenda Item #7.5 - 2018 Congestion Management Program Monitoring and Conformance Report; and Agenda Item #7.7 - Fiscal Year 2019 Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Grants, and expressed concern on climate change, advocated for greener transportation options, and suggested funding strategies for projects.

Board Member Carrasco took her seat at 6:02 p.m.

Roland Lebrun, Interested Citizen, referenced Agenda Item #7.7 - Fiscal Year 2019 FTA Grants, and commented on funding pertaining to FTA Section 5307 and FTA Section 5537 programs. Aboubacar Ndiaye, Interested Citizen, referenced Agenda Item #7.10 - Light Rail Track Intrusion Prevention Contract; Agenda Item #7.12 - FY 2019 VTA Transit Fund Budget Augmentation; Agenda Item #7.13 - Berryessa Extension Project DB11002F (C700) Design-Build Contract, Modify and Redistribute Incentive Budget; and Agenda Item #7.15 - Fast Transit Program Speed and Reliability Toolbox, and noted opportunities to increase efficiency and sustainability and reduce service delivery cost.

6.1

MINUTES


Page 7 of 18

7.1. Workshop Meeting Minutes of April 19, 2019

M/S/C (Peralez/Carr) to approve the Board of Directors Workshop Meeting Minutes of April 19, 2019.

7.2. Regular Meeting Minutes of May 2, 2019

M/S/C (Peralez/Carr) to approve the Board of Directors Regular Meeting Minutes of May 2, 2019.

7.3. Citizens Advisory Committee Appointments

M/S/C (Peralez/Carr) to ratify the appointments to the Citizens Advisory Committee.

7.4. FY2019/20 TDA3 Project Priorities

M/S/C (Peralez/Carr) to adopt Resolution No. 2019.06.11 approving the project priorities for the FY 2019/20 Countywide Transportation Development Act (TDA) Article 3 program.

7.5. 2018 Congestion Management Program Monitoring and Conformance Report

M/S/C (Peralez/Carr) to adopt the 2018 Monitoring and Conformance Findings in Compliance with State Congestion Management Legislation.

7.6. Fiscal Years 2020 & 2021 Congestion Management Program Work Program

M/S/C (Peralez/Carr) to approve the Congestion Management Work Program and budget for Fiscal Years 2020 and 2021.

7.7. Fiscal Year 2019 FTA Grants

M/S/C (Peralez/Carr) to 1) authorize the General Manager to submit Federal Fiscal Year 2019 grant applications and execute grant agreements with the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) for Section 5307 Urbanized Area Formula, Section 5337 Fixed Guideway and High Intensity Motorbus, and Section 5339 Bus and Bus Facilities funds; and 2) adopt Resolution No. 2019.06.12 authorizing the filing of applications with the Federal Transit Administration for Federal transportation assistance authorized by 49 U.S.C. chapter 53, title 23 United States Code, and other Federal statutes administered by the Federal Transit Administration.

7.8. Establishment of a Trust for the excess Employee Pension Contribution

Withholdings not accepted by CalPERS

M/S/C (Peralez/Carr) to 1) adopt Resolution No. 2019.06.13 to establish a trust for the funds held by the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) for the excess employee pension contribution withholdings not accepted by CalPERS; and 2) authorize the General Manager to transfer to a Trust all assets held by the general fund pertaining to the excess employee pension contribution withholdings not accepted by CalPERS.

6.1

MINUTES


Page 8 of 18

7.9. Montague Pedestrian Overcrossing Contract (C18231F)

M/S/C (Peralez/Carr) on a vote of 11 ayes and 1 recusal, to authorize the General Manager to execute a contract in the amount of $11,224,530 with the lowest responsive and responsible bidder, DMZ Builders, for the construction of the Montague Pedestrian Overcrossing Contract (C18231F). Board Member Liccardo recused.

7.10. Light Rail Track Intrusion Prevention Contract

M/S/C (Peralez/Carr) on a vote of 11 ayes and 1 recusal, to authorize the General Manager to execute a contract with George Bianchi Construction, Inc., the lowest responsive and responsible bidder, in the amount of $4,664,059 for the construction of the Light Rail Track Intrusion Prevention contract. Board Member Liccardo recused.

7.11. I-680 Soundwalls Contract (Final Design and ROW Engineering Services)

M/S/C (Peralez/Carr) on a vote of 11 ayes and 1 recusal, to authorize the General Manager to execute a contract amendment with BKF Engineers in the amount of $737,850 for a total contract value of $939,801 and extend the contract term to December 31, 2020 to complete final design services for the I-680 Soundwalls Project. Board Member Liccardo recused.

7.12. FY 2019 VTA Transit Fund Budget Augmentation

M/S/C (Peralez/Carr) to augment the FY 2019 VTA Transit Fund Operating Budget by $60 million to enable VTA to fully fund both the FY 2018 and FY 2019 set-aside for the local share of capital.

7.13. Berryessa Extension Project DB11002F (C700) Design-Build Contract, Modify and

Redistribute Incentive Budget

M/S/C (Peralez/Carr) on a vote of 11 ayes and 1 recusal, to authorize the General Manager to change contract scope and payment provisions related to incentives payments for Contract DB11002F (C700) Line, Track, Stations and Systems contract in the amount of $10,050,000 to make such remaining unpaid amounts available to fund contract changes to various SVBX construction contracts in a cumulative amount not to exceed $10,050,000, with no additional contingency. Board Member Liccardo recused.

7.14. Financial Recommendations Work Plan M/S/C (Peralez/Carr) to receive the work plan for the Board-adopted financial recommendations.

7.15. Fast Transit Program Speed and Reliability Toolbox M/S/C (Peralez/Carr) to receive information on the Fast Transit Program tools for improving speed and reliability.

6.1

MINUTES


Page 9 of 18

7.16. Scope of Work - Annual Financial Audit FY 2019 M/S/C (Peralez/Carr) to review and receive the scope of work for Annual Financial Audit Services for Fiscal Year 2019.

RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS] – Agenda Items #7.1 – 7.8, 7.12, 7.14 – 7.16 MOVER: Raul Peralez, Board Member SECONDER: Larry Carr, Board Member AYES: Carr, Carrasco, Chavez, Cortese, Diep, Jones, Liccardo, McAlister, O'Neill,

Peralez, Rennie, Tran NOES: None

RESULT: APPROVED [11 TO 0] – Agenda Items #7.9, 7.10, 7.11, 7.13 MOVER: Raul Peralez, Board Member SECONDER: Larry Carr, Board Member AYES: Carr, Carrasco, Chavez, Cortese, Diep, Jones, McAlister, O'Neill, Peralez,

Rennie, Tran RECUSED: Liccardo NOES: None

8. REGULAR AGENDA

Administration and Finance Committee

8.1. Approval of Biennial Budget for Fiscal Years 2020 and 2021

Carol Lawson, Deputy Director of Finance, provided a brief presentation entitled Biennial Budget Fiscal Years 2020 and 2021. Public Comment

Mr. Ndiaye asked about an update to the budget after resolution of labor negotiations.

Board Member Liccardo left his seat at 6:14 p.m. The following Interested Citizens urged the Board to prioritize funding for more bus service:

• Tessa Woodmansee • Monica Mallon • Eugene Bradley • Andrew Boone

Board Member Liccardo returned to his seat at 6:21 p.m.

6.1

MINUTES


Page 10 of 18

M/S/C (Jones/Liccardo) to adopt Resolution No. 2019.06.14 approving the Fiscal Years 2020 and 2021 Biennial Budget for the period July 1, 2019 through June 30, 2021.

RESULT: ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS] – Agenda Item #8.1 MOVER: Chappie Jones, Board Member SECONDER: Sam Liccardo, Board Member AYES: Carr, Carrasco, Chavez, Cortese, Diep, Jones, Liccardo, McAlister,

O'Neill, Peralez, Rennie, Tran NOES: None

8.2. CalPERS Resolutions for Health Plans

Board Member McAlister left his seat at 6:23 p.m.

Chairperson O’Neill introduced the item.

M/S/C (Chavez/Carr) to adopt the CalPERS Health Contract Resolution Nos. 2019.06.15 through 2019.06.22 changing the designated pricing region for the employer contribution from “Bay Area” to “Region 1.” These resolutions are effective January 1, 2020 and apply to employees and retirees represented by Transportation Authority Engineers and Architects Association (TAEA) Local 21; Service Employees International Unions (SEIU) Local 521; American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) Local 101; and Non-Represented Employees.

RESULT: ADOPTED [11 TO 0] – Agenda Item #8.2 MOVER: Cindy Chavez, Vice Chairperson

SECONDER: Larry Carr, Board Member AYES: Carr, Carrasco, Chavez, Cortese, Diep, Jones, Liccardo, O'Neill, Peralez,

Rennie, Tran ABSENT: McAlister

8.3. Eastridge to BART Regional Connector: Capitol Expressway Light Rail Project

Final Second Supplemental Environmental Impact Report

Ken Ronsse, Deputy Director of Rail & Facilities, and Christina Jaworski, Senior Environmental Planner, provided a presentation entitled Eastridge to BART Regional Connector – Capitol Expressway Light Rail.

Board Member Peralez left his seat at 6:49 p.m.

Members of the Board and staff discussed project impacts, ridership, schedule, and future development plans.

6.1

MINUTES


Page 11 of 18

Upon query of Chairperson O’Neill, Nuria I. Fernandez, General Manager and CEO, noted an analysis of the technological alternatives for light rail would be presented to the VTA Capital Program Committee at a future meeting.

Board Member Peralez returned to his seat at 7:06 p.m. Public Comment

The following Interested Citizens expressed support for the project:

• Carl Guardino, CEO of Silicon Valley Leadership Group • Sylvia Arenas, City of San Jose Council Member • Matt Savage • Sunil Sharma • Steve Bennette • Laura Arechiga • Sandra Rodriguez • Aboubacar Ndiaye • Andres Solomonoff, concern on alternative technology • Andres Quintero • Josue Garcia • Ernesto • Anurag Pal, Assembly Member Kansen Chu’s office • Hugo Marquez • Tessa Woodmansee • Council Member Arenas spoke on behalf of Johnny Khamis, City of San Jose

Council Member • Lupe Rosales • Christina Rosales

Vice Chairperson Chavez left her seat at 7:15 p.m.

Vice Chairperson Chavez returned to her seat at 7:17 p.m. Mr. Lebrun noted an alternative piling method and suggested a project design alternative.

Board Member Cortese left his seat at 7:31 p.m.

Board Member Tran left his seat at 7:33 p.m.

Board Members Cortese and Tran returned to their seats at 7:38 p.m. Mr. Bradley noted opportunity for promoting light rail through a partnership with Raging Waters.

6.1

MINUTES


Page 12 of 18

Members of the Board expressed general support of the project and noted their concerns on the significant and unavoidable impacts. They thanked staff for their work and the community for their advocacy and provided the following comments: 1) continue to look for ways to improve project cost-benefit, ridership projections, and transit performance; 2) importance of a robust community outreach and communication effort, especially on the negative impacts; and 3) ensure vibrations would not damage historical landmarks.


Board Member Peralez returned to his seat at 7:50 p.m.

M/S/C (Chavez/Liccardo) to approve the changes to the Eastridge to BART Regional Connector: Capitol Expressway Light Rail Project (hereafter referred to as “Project”, or “proposed changes to the approved project”) through the following actions: 1. Certify that the Final Second Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR-2):

a. Meets the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); b. Represents the independent judgment of the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) as the Lead Agency; and

c. Was presented together with any comments received during the public review process to the VTA Board of Directors for review and consideration.

2. Adopt: a. Findings; b. Facts in Support of Findings; c. Statement of Overriding Considerations; and d. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.

3. Amend the Project as described in the Final SEIR-2.

RESULT: ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS] – Agenda Item #8.3 MOVER: Cindy Chavez, Vice Chairperson

SECONDER: Sam Liccardo, Board Member AYES: Carr, Carrasco, Chavez, Cortese, Diep, Jones, Liccardo, McAlister,

O'Neill, Peralez, Rennie, Tran NOES: None

8.4. Santa Clara Station Exclusive Negotiation Period Update

Ron Golem, Director of Real Estate & Joint Development, and Jessie O’Malley-Solis, Manager of Transit-Oriented Development, provided a presentation of the VTA proposed alternative.

Board Members Carrasco, Cortese, Diep, McAlister, and Tran left their seats at 8:31 p.m., and a Committee of the Whole was declared.

6.1

MINUTES


Page 13 of 18

General Counsel Tran noted the recusals of Vice Chairperson Chavez and Board Members Carrasco and Liccardo.

Board Member Tran returned to his seat at 8:33 p.m.

Board Member Cortese returned to his seat at 8:35 p.m. and a quorum was established.

Board Member McAlister returned to his seat at 8:38 p.m.

Bob Mendelsohn, President, Republic Metropolitan, provided a presentation of the developer proposal. A robust discussion ensued, concerning affordability, ridership forecasts, and the type of housing that could be incorporated.

Board Member Diep returned to his seat at 8:58 p.m.

Board Member Jones left the meeting at 9:17 p.m.

Board Member Rennie left his seat at 9:21 p.m.

Chairperson O’Neill left her seat at 9:22 p.m.

Board Member Rennie returned to his seat at 9:23 p.m.

Chairperson O’Neill returned to her seat at 9:24 p.m.

Board Member Cortese left his seat at 9:28 p.m.

Board Member Cortese returned to his seat at 9:30 p.m.


Board Member Peralez returned to his seat at 9:34 p.m.

Ex-officio Member Bruins left her seat at 9:37 p.m. Public Comment

Mr. Ndiaye expressed support of the staff option. Members of the Board discussed the direction to staff, focusing on workforce housing and enhancing ridership and community benefit. M/S/C (McAlister/Carr) on a vote of 8 ayes and 3 recusals, to direct staff to continue Exclusive Negotiations with Republic Metropolitan, LLC, for a Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) project on VTA-owned land at the Santa Clara Caltrain Station Park and Ride Lot, and asked staff to obtain guidance from the City of Santa Clara. Staff would return to the Board at a future meeting to present a proposal for an alternative. Vice Chairperson Chavez, Board Member Carrasco, and Board Member Liccardo recused.

6.1

MINUTES


Page 14 of 18

RESULT: ADOPTED AS AMENDED [8 TO 0] – Agenda Item #8.4 MOVER: John McAlister, Board Member SECONDER: Larry Carr, Board Member AYES: Carr, Cortese, Diep, McAlister, O'Neill, Peralez, Rennie, Tran ABSENT: Jones RECUSED: Carrasco, Chavez, Liccardo

8.5. Amendment of Sheriff's Office Contract with VTA

Vice Chairperson Chavez, Board Member Carrasco, and Ex-officio Bruins returned to their seats at 9:54 p.m.

Angelique Gaeta, Chief of System Safety & Security, provided a brief staff report.

General Counsel Tran stated on behalf of Directors Chavez and Cortese that they have a non-interest in this particular item. She noted that: 1) the Directors are not recusing themselves and are allowed to vote on the item; and 2) the Directors are Supervisors on the Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors, the other party to this contract; they receive a salary; in addition, they receive a per diem for attending VTA meetings. M/S/C (Peralez/Diep) to authorize the General Manager/CEO to execute a contract amendment to the existing contract with the County of Santa Clara - Office of the Sheriff to extend the term of the current contract for a period of six (6) months, from July 1, 2019 through December 31, 2019; and, to increase the approved contract amount by $8,219,136 for a new total contract amount not to exceed $74,400,742.

RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS] – Agenda Item #8.5 MOVER: Raul Peralez, Board Member SECONDER: Lan Diep, Board Member AYES: Carr, Carrasco, Chavez, Cortese, Diep, McAlister, O'Neill, Peralez,

Rennie, Tran ABSENT: Jones, Liccardo

9. OTHER ITEMS

9.1. General Manager’s Report


Nuria I. Fernandez, General Manager and CEO, provided a report, highlighting the following:

6.1

MINUTES


Page 15 of 18

• “Movers and Shakers Bike Ride” on Bike to Work Day; • Testing of VTA’s redesigned webpage at http://beta.vta.org; • VTA’s Summer Youth Pass; and • Bay Area Metro Award for the Joint Workforce Investment Development

Apprenticeship Program.

Board Member Peralez returned to his seat at 10:02 p.m. Ms. Fernandez introduced Inez Evans, Chief Operating Officer, and Mr. Ronsse who provided a brief presentation on Phase 2 of the Overhead Contact System (OCS) Rehabilitation Construction Project.

Board Member Carr left his seat at 10:06 p.m. Board Member Carr returned to his seat at 10:08 p.m.

Board Member Peralez suggested staff could work with his office on outreach efforts concerning the OCS rehabilitation project. Ms. Fernandez introduced Scott Haywood, Transportation Planning Manager, who provided a brief update on Faster Bay Area.

Members of the Board provided the following comments: 1) ensure fair share to Santa Clara County; 2) ensure ongoing operations funding; 3) establish clear goals over list of projects; 4) requested an update at the June 21st Board meeting; 5) suggested staff reach out to local agencies through the Technical Advisory Committee; 6) consider better integration of projects at corridor-level; and 7) consider reopening the Port of Alviso.

Public Comment

Omar Chatty, Interested Citizen, suggested including crimes by undocumented immigrants in the public safety data and urged support for funding of the Pacheco Pass environmental document. Mr. Lebrun provided the following comments: 1) expressed dissatisfaction on VTA’s beta site; 2) asked about contractor who installed the OCS between Santa Clara and St. James stations; and 3) expressed concern on the timing of the proposed Faster Bay Area measure and the Caltrain sales tax measure.

9.1.A. Government Affairs Update

Ms. Fernandez noted that the Government Affairs Update was included in the Board Members’ reading folders and placed on the public table.

6.1

http://beta.vta.org/

MINUTES


Page 16 of 18

9.1.B. Silicon Valley Rapid Transit (SVRT) Program Update

Jorge Martinez, Silicon Valley Berryessa Extension (SVBX) Project Manager, Bechtel, provided an update on Phase 1 of VTA's BART Silicon Valley Extension Project. Dennis Ratcliffe, Deputy Director, SVRT/BART Capital Program, provided an update on Phase 2 of VTA's BART Silicon Valley Extension Project.

Board Member Peralez left the meeting at 10:52 p.m.

Ms. Fernandez noted the preliminary Ridership Report of May 2019 and the Public Safety Data for May 2019 was included in the Board Members’ reading folders and placed on the public table.

9.2. Chairperson's Report

Chairperson O'Neill provided a report, highlighting: 1) VTA’s 2018-2019 Leadership Academy Graduation on May 7, 2019; 2) the Joint VTA/BART Working Committee meeting on May 31, 2019; and 3) noted upcoming Board regular meeting on June 21, 2019. Ad Hoc Board Enhancement Committee Chairperson McAlister provided a brief overview of the May 29, 2019, inaugural meeting, noting: 1) Alternate Board Member Hendricks was elected as committee vice chair; and 2) next steps.


There were no Items of Concern and Referral to Administration.

9.4. Unapproved Minutes/Summary Reports from VTA Committees, Joint Powers

Boards (JPB), and Regional Commissions

9.4.A. VTA Standing Committees

• Congestion Management Program & Planning (CMPP) Committee - The May 16, 2019, Minutes were accepted as contained in the Agenda Packet.

• Administration & Finance (A&F) Committee - The May 16, 2019, Minutes were accepted as contained in the Agenda Packet.

• Safety, Security, and Transit Planning & Operations (SSTP&O) Committee - The May 17, 2019, Cancellation Notice was accepted as contained in the Agenda Packet.

• Capital Program Committee - The May 23, 2019, Cancellation Notice was accepted as contained in the Agenda Packet.

• Governance and Audit (G&A) Committee - The June 6, 2019, Cancellation Notice was accepted as contained in the Agenda Packet.

6.1

MINUTES


Page 17 of 18

9.4.B. VTA Advisory Committees

• Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) - The May 8, 2019, Minutes were accepted as contained in the Agenda Packet.

• Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC) and 2000 Measure A Citizens Watchdog Committee (CWC) - The May 8, 2019, Minutes were accepted as contained in the Agenda Packet.

• Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee (BPAC) - The May 8, 2019, Minutes were accepted as contained in the Agenda Packet.

• Committee for Transportation Mobility and Accessibility (CTMA) - The May 9, 2019, Minutes were accepted as contained in the Agenda Packet.

• Policy Advisory Committee (PAC) - The May 9, 2019, Minutes were accepted as contained in the Agenda Packet.

9.4.C. VTA Policy Advisory Boards (PAB)

• Eastridge to BART Regional Connector PAB (formerly Downtown East Valley PAB) - There was no report.

• State Route 85 Corridor PAB - There was no report.

• Diridon Station Joint Policy Advisory Board - The May 17, 2019, Minutes were accepted as contained in the Agenda Packet.

9.4.D. Joint and Regional Commissions

• Caltrain Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board – The June 6, 2019, Summary Notes were accepted as contained on the dais.

• Capitol Corridor Joint Powers Authority - There was no report.

• Dumbarton Rail Corridor Policy Committee - There was no report.

• Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) - There was no report.

• Sunol Smart Carpool Lane Joint Powers Authority - There was no report.

• Sunol SR 152 Mobility Partnership - There was no report.

9.5. Announcements

Ms. Fernandez announced Chris Augenstein, Deputy Director of Planning & Programming, and Jim Unites, Deputy Director of Transit Planning & Capital Development, will be retiring at end of June 2019.

6.1

MINUTES


Page 18 of 18

10. ADJOURN

On order of Chairperson O’Neill and there being no objection, the meeting was adjourned at 11:03 p.m.

Respectfully submitted, Michelle Oblena, Board Assistant VTA Office of the Board Secretary

6.1



MINUTES


The Regular Meeting of the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority’s (VTA) Board of Directors (Board) was called to order by Chairperson O’Neill at 9:03 a.m. in the Board of Supervisors’ Chambers, County Government Center, 70 West Hedding Street, San José, California.

1.1. ROLL CALL

Attendee Name Title Status Marie Blankley Alternate Board Member Absent Larry Carr Board Member Absent Magdalena Carrasco Board Member Present Cindy Chavez Vice Chairperson Absent David Cortese Board Member Absent Dev Davis Alternate Board Member NA Lan Diep Board Member Present Susan Ellenberg Alternate Board Member Present Adrian Fine Alternate Board Member NA Glenn Hendricks Alternate Board Member Present Chappie Jones Board Member Present Sam Liccardo Board Member Present John McAlister Board Member Present Howard Miller Alternate Board Member Present Teresa O'Neill Chairperson Present Raul Peralez Board Member Present Rob Rennie Board Member Present Rich Tran Board Member Present Jeannie Bruins Ex-Offcio Member Present

* Alternates do not serve unless participating as a Member.



The Pledge of Allegiance commenced.

6.2

MINUTES


Page 2 of 8

Board Member Carrasco arrived and took her seat at 9:04 a.m.


Chairperson O’Neill requested placing Agenda Item #7.2. Diridon Integrated Station Concept Plan Update, on the Consent Agenda.

M/S/C (Liccardo/Jones) to accept the Orders of the Day.

RESULT: ACCEPTED – Agenda Item #1.3 MOVER: Sam Liccardo, Board Member SECONDER: Chappie Jones, Board Member AYES: Carrasco, Diep, Jones, Liccardo, McAlister, O’Neill, Peralez,

Rennie, Tran NOES: None ABSENT: Carr, Chavez, Cortese


2.1. Resolution of Appreciation for Retiring VTA Staff

M/S/C (Rennie/Diep) to adopt Resolution of Appreciation No. 2019.06.23 for Chris Augenstein upon his retirement as the Director of Planning and Programming.

RESULT: Adopted– Agenda Item #2.1 MOVER: Rob Rennie, Board Member SECONDER: Lan Diep, Board Member AYES: Carrasco, Diep, Jones, Liccardo, McAlister, O’Neill, Peralez,


M/S/C (Jones/Carrasco) to adopt Resolution of Appreciation No. 2016.06.24 for James “Jim” Unites upon his retirement as the Deputy Director, Transit Planning and Capital Development.

RESULT: Adopted– Agenda Item #2.1 MOVER: Chappie Jones Board Member SECONDER: Magdalena Carrasco, Board Member AYES: Carrasco, Diep, Jones, Liccardo, McAlister, O’Neill, Peralez,


6.2

MINUTES


Page 3 of 8

3. PUBLIC COMMENT

Blair Beekman, Interested Citizen, commented about policies related to autonomous vehicles and bicyclists.

Andrew Boone, Interested Citizen, commented about the following: 1) his candidacy for San Jose District 6; 2) housing goals; 3) Board’s structure and priorities; and 3) Santa Clara County Civil Grand Jury Report.

Alternate Board Member Ellenberg arrived and took her seat at 9:13 a.m.

Roland Lebrun, Interested Citizen, commented about the impacts of capital expenditures for Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) to San Jose Phase I and Phase II to VTA.

Monica Mallon, Interested Citizen, commented about the following: 1) the need for more bus service; 2) congestion relief; 3) the need for better coordination between the various transit agencies to provide seamless connections.

Eugene Bradley, Silicon Valley Transit Users, commented about the following: 1) Santa Clara County Civil Grand Jury report; 2) VTA’s current challenges; 3) declining ridership; and 4) Board’s duties.

4. PUBLIC HEARINGS

There were no Public Hearings.


There were no Committee Reports.

6. CONSENT AGENDA

Public Comment

Mr. Boone referenced Agenda Item #7.2., Diridon Integrated Station Concept Plan Update, and commented about the following: 1) BART’s potential location at the Diridon station; 2) preservation of the Diridon station; 3) the need for safe and accessible roads for bicyclists; 4) VTA’s focus on highway expansion versus progress for bicyclists roadways. Howard Miller, Interested Citizen, referenced Agenda Item #7.2. and expressed concern that he does not see the heavily used drop-off zone in front of the Diridon station on the conceptual plans for the new station. Mr. Beekman referenced Agenda Item #7.2. and commented about the following: 1) plans for the new Diridon station; and 2) High Speed Rail. Mr. Lebrun referenced Agenda Item #7.2. and commented about the following: 1) Diridon station designs; 2) various design plans for downtown San Jose from corporations including Google.

6.2

MINUTES


Page 4 of 8

Upon inquiry of Board Member Liccardo in reference to Agenda Item #6.1., Resolution supporting use of Regional Low Carbon Transit Operations Program funds to VTA’s Electric Bus Purchase, Marcella Rensi, Deputy Director of Grants & Fund Allocation, responded about the time frame, VTA’s commitment, and the potential funding sources.

6.1. Resolution supporting use of Regional Low Carbon Transit Operations

Program funds to VTA’s Electric Bus Purchase

M/S/C (Jones/McAlister) to adopt Resolution No. 2019.06.25 to apply Fiscal Year 2018 - 2019 population-based Low Carbon Transit Operations Program (LCTOP) funds to the VTA Zero Emission Bus Purchase.

6.2. Project Sponsor Resolution for Caltrans Sustainable Planning Grant

M/S/C (Jones/McAlister) to adopt Resolution No. 2019.06.26 authorizing the General Manager to file and execute funding agreements and other necessary documents with the State of California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) in order to receive Sustainable Communities Planning Grant Program funds to prepare the Bicycle Superhighway Phase 1: Central Bikeway Feasibility Study and Alternatives Analysis.

7.2. Diridon Integrated Station Concept Plan Update

M/S/C (Jones/McAlister) to receive an update on the Diridon Station Concept.

RESULT: APPROVED– Consent Agenda Items #6.1-6.2, 7.2 MOVER: Chappie Jones, Board Member SECONDER: John McAlister, Board Member AYES: Carrasco, Diep, Ellenberg, Jones, Liccardo, McAlister, O’Neill,

Peralez, Rennie, Tran NOES: None ABSENT: Carr, Chavez

7. REGULAR AGENDA

7.1. BART Silicon Valley Operations & Maintenance Agreement Overview

Nuria I. Fernandez, General Manager/CEO, provided opening remarks regarding the BART Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Agreement and next steps, noting she was eager to get it finalized prior to the implementation of BART service.

Carolyn Gonot, Chief Planning & Engineering Officer; Raj Srinath, Deputy General Manager/CFO; Michael Smith, Finance Debt & Investment Manager; and Victor A. Pappalardo, Senior Assistant Counsel, provided a presentation entitled BART Silicon Valley Operations & Maintenance (O&M) Agreement Overview.

6.2

MINUTES


Page 5 of 8

Members of the Committee and staff engaged in discussion about the following: 1) how VTA compares to other counties as it relates to extensions and processes; 2) any distinction between BARTs trains and the ones VTA purchased; 3) maintenance responsibility for the vehicles VTA purchased; 4) flow of funds model for receiving, holding and disbursement of funds; 5) various BART lines that will travel to San Jose; 6) clarification on the comprehensive agreement; 7) opportunities to amend the O&M agreement in the future, noting it would require a separate agreement; 8) examples that will require a joint approval between BART and VTA as it relates to funds; 9) any foreseen disputes around the O&M cost model; 10) an independent review of the BART cost model to ensure transparency; 11) when and how a surcharge would be implemented; 12) binding or non-binding dispute resolution process; and 13) importance of transparency.

Ms. Fernandez reported that the VTA purchased and/or BART purchased trains will not have any distinction, however once service begins, BART is committed to operating the newer vehicles along the extension to San Jose as they are slowly implemented into the entire BART system.

Public Comment

Mr. Bradley offered the following comments: 1) VTA’s lean; and 2) inquired about contingency plans if a recession occurs.

Mr. Lebrun commented about the following: 1) parking at the new BART stations; 2) farebox recovery; 3) BARTs capital projects; and 4) incentives for using Clipper card at the new BART stations; 4) suggestions for separating from BART.

Mr. Beekman commented about the following: 1) funding sources for the BART extension project; and 2) partnerships as it relates to funding.

On order of Chairperson O’Neill and there being no objection, the Board of Directors received the BART Silicon Valley Operations & Maintenance Agreement Overview

7.2. (Removed from the Regular Agenda and placed on Consent Agenda).

Receive an update on the Diridon Station Concept.

8. OTHER ITEMS

8.1. General Manager Report

Nuria I. Fernandez, General Manager/CEO, provided a report about the Faster Bay Area.

6.2

MINUTES


Page 6 of 8

Public Comment

Ms. Mallon commented about the following: 1) advocated for more focus on transit service; and 2) seamless transfers amongst the various agencies.

Mr. Boone opposed Faster Bay Area and suggested stopping highway expansion projects and focusing on buses and bicyclists.

Mr. Beekman commented about the following: 1) transferring from BART to VTA Express buses; 2) highways and automobiles not being sustainable; and 3) support for Mr. Boones comments.

Mr. Bradley commented about the following: 1) the need to focus on better bus service; 2) reducing traffic congestion; and 3) stopping highway expansions.

Keith May, Interested Citizen, commented about the following: 1) the purpose of public transit; 2) bus route 22; 3) operating transit on late evenings would entice more people to ride; and 4) the need for more mass transit.

Members of the Committee and staff discussed the following: 1) outreach efforts by the coalition; 2) timeframe for getting on the ballot for the 2020 election; 3) concerns about rushing the process since it is time sensitive; 4) when the Board will receive the full project category list; 5) various groups that make up the coalition; 6) region wide measure; 7) transit super highways that could be along highway; 8) addressing public perception as it relates to road expansions; 9) estimated funds for Santa Clara County; and 10) how high speed rail will be included as it relates to this measure.

Ms. Fernandez and Scott Haywood, Transportation Planning Manager, informed the Board that VTA is not the lead agency for this measure. They noted staff will use every opportunity to provide updates to the Board as VTA receives the them.

8.2. Chairperson's Report

Chairperson O’Neill provided a report, highlighting the following: 1) release of the Santa Clara County Civil Grand Jury report on their investigation into the operation and governance of VTA; 2) noted VTA’s next steps is to review and respond within 90 days to the Civil Grand Jury’s findings and recommendations; and 3) VTA’s next regular Board of Directors meeting is on August 1, 2019, at VTA River Oaks in the Auditorium.

Public Comment

Mr. Beekman commented about the following: 1) fracking; 2) public’s involvement as it relates to VTA; and 3) how VTA is spending funds.


There were no Items of Concern and Referral to Administration.

6.2

MINUTES


Page 7 of 8

8.5. Announcements

There were no Announcements.

9. CLOSED SESSION

Public Comment

Mr. Lebrun commented about the following: 1) funds for BART; 2) the increased cost of living in the Bay Area for VTA employees; and 3) support for VTA operators.

9.1. Recessed to Closed Session at 11:44 a.m.


VTA Designated Representatives Bob Escobar, Negotiator Raj Srinath, Deputy General Manager/Chief Financial Officer Inez Evans, Chief Operating Officer Geoff Holland, Acting Manager Employee Relations

Employee Organizations Amalgamated Transit Union, Local 265

9.2. Reconvened to Open Session 11:58 a.m.



VTA Designated Representatives Bob Escobar, Negotiator Raj Srinath, Deputy General Manager/Chief Financial Officer Inez Evans, Chief Operating Officer Geoff Holland, Acting Manager Employee Relations

Employee Organizations Amalgamated Transit Union, Local 265

Evelynn Tran, General Counsel, noted no reportable action was taken during closed session.

6.2

MINUTES


Page 8 of 8

10. ADJOURNMENT

On order of Chairperson O’Neill and there being no objection, the meeting was adjourned at 11:59 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Theadora Abraham, Board Assistant VTA Office of the Board Secretary

6.2

Date: July 22, 2019 Current Meeting: August 1, 2019 Board Meeting: August 1, 2019



FROM: Deputy GM/Chief Financial Officer, Raj Srinath SUBJECT: Dedication of Sidewalk and Utility Easement for the Santa Clara Pedestrian

Underpass Project

Policy-Related Action: No Government Code Section 84308 Applies: No

ACTION ITEM

RECOMMENDATION:

Authorize the General Manager to dedicate a sidewalk and utility easement to the City of Santa Clara (City) in connection with the Santa Clara Pedestrian Underpass Project (SCPUP) as depicted in the attached Exhibit A.

BACKGROUND:

Pursuant to the VTA Administrative code, only the Board of Directors may convey or dedicate a VTA property interest to another party. In 2017, VTA constructed the SCPUP, which extended a new undercrossing and approach ramp for pedestrian and cyclists connecting transit patrons from Brokaw Road to the Santa Clara Caltrain Station, Altamont and Capitol Corridor platforms and El Camino Real. In partnership with the City and the Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board (PCJPB), VTA delivered this project that shortens the transit connection to these regional commuter rail lines and supports development of Coleman Avenue corridor and San Jose airport area.

DISCUSSION:

As part of the design, the SCPUP required a new electrical connection with Silicon Valley Power, the City’s electric utility provider, to power the lighting within the undercrossing and ramp. The location of this new electrical surface vault and pedestal lies adjacent to the Brokaw Road sidewalk on VTA property. In order for the City to maintain these aboveground fixtures, which include conduits, conductors and service boxes, VTA staff proposes to grant a 733 square-

6.3

Page 2 of 2

foot utility easement to the City.

In addition, the SCPUP’s pedestrian ramp extends to Brokaw Road. PCJPB maintains a majority of the ramp, however a small portion of the newly constructed city sidewalk also encroaches onto VTA property. VTA staff proposes to grant an approximate 185 square foot sidewalk easement on the portion of VTA property that the City maintains adjacent to Brokaw Road.

ALTERNATIVES:

If the Board chooses to not grant these easements to the City, VTA staff may have to incorporate these rights and responsibilities into the Construction and Maintenance Agreement with the City and PCJPB.

FISCAL IMPACT:

There are no fiscal impacts resulting from this Agreement. The ongoing maintenance of the undercrossing and ramp are the responsibility of PCJPB except for the areas within the easements being proposed which will be maintained and operated by the City. The dedication of these rights helps provide permanent transit connections from the surrounding community to VTA’s regional transportation partner agencies.

Prepared by: Ron Golem and Kevin Balak Memo No. 7036 ATTACHMENTS:

• Memo 7036 Exhibit A SCPUP - Board Map (PDF)

6.3

6.3.a

Balak_K

Rectangle

Balak_K

Polygonal Line

Balak_K

Stamp

Balak_K

Stamp

Balak_K

Stamp

Balak_K

Polygonal Line

Balak_K

Stamp

Balak_K

Stamp

Balak_K

Stamp

Balak_K

Stamp




FROM: Deputy GM/Chief Financial Officer, Raj Srinath SUBJECT: Tamien Station Exclusive Negotiations Agreement Extension

Policy-Related Action: No Government Code Section 84308 Applies: Yes

ACTION ITEM

RECOMMENDATION:

Authorize the General Manager to enter into an extension of the Exclusive Negotiations Agreement (ENA) for the Tamien Station TOD site between VTA and UrbanCo Tamien LLC for three additional months so that it expires November 8th, 2019 in order to complete legal documentation and subsequently execute a Lease Option Agreement (LOA) based on the business terms and conditions approved by the Board of Directors in March of 2019.

BACKGROUND:

The Tamien Station TOD site does not have any Federal interest and is not subject to review and concurrence by the Federal Transit Administration.

In May 2018 VTA staff provided an informational update to the Board highlighting development program revisions including shared transit parking and an increase in the number of affordable units from 88 units in the original proposal to 135 units, with deeper affordability.

Urban Co Tamien LLC subsequently submitted a Planned Development Zoning application with the City of San Jose in July of 2018 for the larger project. Urban Co Tamien LLC, the City of San Jose and VTA staff have held an additional community meeting updating the neighborhood and transit customers on process and next steps. The Planned Development Zoning application is on track for San Jose City Council hearing in August/September 2019.

In March of 2019, the Board approved the final business terms for the LOA.

6.4

Page 2 of 2

Revised projected development milestone dates are as follows:

DISCUSSION:

VTA staff and Urban Co Tamien LLC have diligently worked together to negotiate legal language for the LOA that would contractually obligate VTA to sign a ground lease after Urban Co Tamien LLC satisfies the contingencies in the LOA, including final permit approvals and closing project financing. Urban Co Tamien LLC has been a cooperative negotiation partner with continued funding of VTA’s expenses for third party expenses. Drafting of the LOA as the first new development-related agreement by VTA in many years has required additional time from staff to complete.

The draft schedule below highlights projected milestones for the extended ENA period. The three-month extension will allow for final legal documentation of the LOA and form Ground Lease between VTA and UrbanCo Tamien LLC.

August-- October 2019 LOA/Form of Ground Lease documentation October 2019 Execution of LOA

ALTERNATIVES:

The VTA Board of Directors could extend the ENA for a different time period. If the Board takes no action to extend the ENA, the ENA will expire on August 5, 2019.

FISCAL IMPACT:

An extension of the ENA to reach agreement on LOA terms and conditions is not expected to result in any additional expense to VTA. The subsequent LOA and associated Ground Lease Agreement would result in significant Ground Lease proceeds for VTA over the life of the lease.

Prepared by: Ron Golem & Jessie O'Malley Solis Memo No. 7035 ATTACHMENTS:

• Memo 7035 Attach A (PDF)

6.4

Attachment A

Tamien ENA Extension

List of Consultant(s)/Contractor(s)

Firm Name Name Role Location

UrbanCo Tamien LLC

The Core Companies Chris Neal Affordable Developer San Jose, CA

Republic Urban Properties

Michael Van Every Market Rate Developer San Jose, CA

Sub- Consultants

Blach Construction James Woodbury Contractor San Jose, CA

HMH Engineering Ray Hashimoto Civil Engineering, Landscape

San Jose, CA

Studio T-Square Sara Liss-Katz Oakland, CA

6.4.a

Bonifacio_A

Typewritten Text

Architect

Bonifacio_A

Typewritten Text

Bonifacio_A

Typewritten Text

Bonifacio_A

Typewritten Text




FROM: Deputy GM/Chief Financial Officer, Raj Srinath SUBJECT: Santa Clara Caltrain Station Exclusive Negotiations Agreement Extension


ACTION ITEM

RECOMMENDATION:

Authorize the General Manager to extend the Exclusive Negotiations Agreement (ENA) for the Santa Clara Caltrain Station Park and Ride Lot between VTA, the City of Santa Clara and Republic Metropolitan (Developer), for up to twelve months after the current expiration date of August 5, 2019 conditioned upon a deadline for the proposed terms and conditions for a Transit-Oriented Development project on VTA’s property being presented to the Board of Directors at its November meeting, and the subsequent execution by Developer of a Development Agreement (DA) or Lease Option Agreement (LOA) by February 5, 2020. The General Manager may extend either of these deadlines, up to a 12 month maximum extension period for the ENA, upon a determination that substantial progress has been made and that additional time is needed to negotiate the terms and conditions of a proposed agreement(s).

BACKGROUND:

In February 2018, VTA and the City of Santa Clara and Developer entered into an ENA with the Developer, and subsequently approved the Developer’s exercise of an option for an ENA extension through August 2019. City and VTA staff worked with the Developer to identify design and programmatic changes pursuant to the direction provided by the Board of Directors and City of Santa Clara staff that would result in an improved project. At the June 2019 VTA Board meeting, staff provided an update on the status of the negotiation. The Board directed staff to work to provide both onsite affordable housing per VTA’s Affordable Housing Policy and a mix of uses that is transit-oriented to increase ridership.

6.5

Page 2 of 2

Figure 1: Location of the Santa Clara Caltrain Park and Ride Lot (Developer ENA Site)

Sources: Google, VTA; 2019 DISCUSSION:

The City of Santa Clara recently authorized a 12-month extension of the ENA. The Developer recently presented to VTA and the City a revised approach that would place a 100% affordable housing development on the VTA-owned parcel, and a student housing development on the City-owned parcel. Both developments would include ground floor commercial uses. Staff believes this approach has the potential to implement the direction provided by the Board of Directors. Staff recommends an ENA extension with deadlines, due to the 18 months already spent on the original ENA. The projected milestones for the extended ENA period are:

November 7, 2019 Board approval of terms and conditions for DA/LOA February 5, 2020 DA/LOA document executed August 4, 2020 Maximum extension for ENA

ALTERNATIVES:

The VTA Board of Directors could extend the ENA for a different time period. If the Board takes no action to extend the ENA, the ENA will expire on August 5, 2019.

FISCAL IMPACT:

An extension of the ENA to reach agreement on DA/LOA terms and conditions is not expected to result in any additional expense to VTA. The subsequent DA/LOA and associated Ground Lease Agreement would result in Ground Lease proceeds for VTA over the life of the lease.

Prepared by: Ron Golem & Jessie O'Malley Solis Memo No. 7034 ATTACHMENTS:

• Memo 7034 Attachment A (PDF)

6.5

6.5.a




FROM: Chief Planning and Engineering Officer, Carolyn M. Gonot SUBJECT: Regionally Significant Projects Submission

Policy-Related Action: No Government Code Section 84308 Applies: No

ACTION ITEM

RECOMMENDATION:

Adopt the Regionally Significant Projects for inclusion in the update to Metropolitan Transportation Committee (MTC) and Association of Bay Area Governments' (ABAG's) Plan Bay Area 2050.

BACKGROUND:

The Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) and the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) have begun updating the Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS). The RTP/SCS is a state-mandated, integrated long-range transportation, land-use and housing plan that supports a growing economy, provides housing and transportation choices, and reduces transportation-related pollution in the San Francisco Bay Area. The current RTP/SCS is known as Plan Bay Area 2040. The updated plan will be called Plan Bay Area 2050 (PBA 2050). Included in PBA 2050 will be a list of transportation projects that will be implemented over the life of the plan.

One of the first tasks for MTC is to model non-exempt regionally significant projects that will potentially be included in the new plan for air quality conformance. Regionally significant projects are defined as projects that significantly change the capacity of the roadway or transit system or have a total cost that exceeds $250 million.

6.6

Page 2 of 3

DISCUSSION:

In March 2019, MTC requested the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) to provide a list of regionally significant transportation projects that should be considered for PBA 2050. MTC asked that this information be provided by August 2019.

To address MTC’s request, VTA worked with Member Agencies to identify any updates to the list of regionally significant projects contained in the last regional plan and to identify any new projects from local planning initiatives. All suggested updates received from Member Agencies have been included in a final list of projects that is contained in Attachment A.

MTC will model these projects along with project lists received from other Bay Area counties for air quality conformance. Based on these results, MTC will begin compiling a draft list of regionally significant projects for PBA 2050. It is anticipated that the modeling results will be available later this year.

MTC will update the list of non-regionally significant projects in fall 2019. The non-regionally significant projects are small streetscape improvements, minor local streets and roads projects, signal timing, and bicycle and pedestrian projects. VTA will be actively participating in this process and will continue to coordinate project updates on behalf of Member Agencies.

ALTERNATIVES:

The Board may include additional projects and/or delete projects from the draft list.

FISCAL IMPACT:

There is no fiscal impact to the submission of the project list. Advisory Committee Comments

Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) Comments

The TAC received the report on the Regionally Significant Projects. The TAC had questions related to the process that MTC is embarking on for Plan Bay Area 2050. There was some confusion regarding the meaning of regionally significant in terms of what MTC will address in Plan Bay Area. Staff noted that the project list is not a guarantee for inclusion in Plan Bay Area rather the effort will allow MTC to model impacts for Plan Bay Area setting the stage for the preferred scenario. TAC also showed some interest in having more projects reflective of the multimodal nature of certain projects. City of San Jose and Palo Alto reiterated the interest for having those projects that support the transit system and the bike network, such as Caltrain Station Improvements and the Bicycle Superhighway. There was interest in adding more projects to the list as it would represent a comprehensive list of projects for modeling and remove those projects that are no longer being pursued. The TAC approved the project list to go to the Board, with additions based on the comments from the TAC.

6.6

Page 3 of 3

Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee (BPAC) Comments

The BPAC received the report on the Regionally Significant Projects. The BPAC had questions on the significance of this submission of projects versus a comprehensive project list. The BPAC had some concern that there were not enough bicycle and transit projects on the list as there were a lot of highway projects. Staff explained that many bicycle, pedestrian, and complete streets type projects do not meet the definition of regionally significant as it pertains to the purpose of modeling for MTC’s Plan Bay Area. BPAC moved the list forward for the Board for adoption with the request for the VTA Board to consider including more transit projects, such as grade separations and bicycle improvements for submission in to the process.

Prepared by: John Sighamony Memo No. 7033 ATTACHMENTS:

• PROJECT LIST RTP 2050 Regionally Significant Attachment A_072019 (PDF)

6.6

Attachment A - PBA 2050 Regionally Significant Projects

TitleTotal Project

CostSponsor

Plan Bay

Area 2040

ID

Affordable Fare Program $44 VTA 17-07-0007

BART Silicon Valley Extension - San Jose (Berryessa) to Santa

Clara$5,581 VTA 17-07-0012

Implement El Camino Rapid Transit Project $24 VTA 17-07-0013

Alviso Wetlands Doubletrack $200 ACE 17-07-0021

Bus Stop Improvements $47 VTA 17-07-0056

Frequent Core Bus Network - 15 minutes $658 VTA 17-07-0057

Implement Stevens Creek Rapid Transit Project $151 VTA 17-07-0059

North First Street light rail speed Improvements $12 VTA 17-07-0060

Extend Capitol Expressway light rail to Eastridge Transit

Center - Phase II$453 VTA 17-07-0061

Extend light-rail transit from Winchester Station to Route 85

(Vasona Junction)$347 VTA 17-07-0062

Mineta San Jose International Airport APM connector -

planning and environmental$50 Multi Agency 17-07-0063

Caltrain Station and Service Enhancements $750 JPB 17-07-0065

Future Transit Corridor Studies $5 VTA 17-07-0066

Mtn View Transit Center Improvements $150 Mtn View New

Fast Transit Implementation $120 VTA New

High Capacity Transit Corridors $200 VTA New

Downtown Coordinated Area Plan and Transit Center

Improvements$300 Palo Alto New

Diridon Station Improvements Planning and Engineering$200 VTA/San Jose New

Systemwide LRT Grade Separation Program $7,500 VTA New

Downtown San Jose Subway $1,400 VTA New

SR 87 Technology-based Corridor Improvements $43 VTA 17-07-0009

Hwy. Transportation Operations System/Freeway

Performance Initiative Phase 1 & 2$58 VTA 17-07-0010

Environmental Studies for SR-152 New Alignment $30 VTA 17-07-0022

US 101/Zanker Rd./Skyport Dr./Fourth St. Interchange

Improvements$149 Multi Agency 17-07-0023

Lawrence/Stevens Creek/I_280 Interchange $120 Multi Agency 17-07-0024

I-280/Winchester Blvd Interchange Improvements $100 Multi Agency 17-07-0025

I-280/Wolfe Road Interchange Improvements $92 Multi Agency 17-07-0026

US 101/Mabury Rd./Taylor St. Interchange Improvements $76 Multi Agency 17-07-0027

I-280 Mainline Improvements from County line to Sunnyvale $60 Multi Agency 17-07-0028

I-280/Saratoga Avenue Interchange Improvements $54 Multi Agency 17-07-0029

I-280 Northbound Braided Ramps between Foothill

Expressway and SR 85$51 Multi Agency 17-07-0030

US 101 Southbound/Trimble Rd./De La Cruz Blvd./Central

Expressway Interchange Improvements$54 Multi Agency 17-07-0031

I-680/ Alum Rock/ McKee Road Interchange Improvements $43 Multi Agency 17-07-0032

SR 237/Mathilda Ave. and US 101/Mathilda Ave. Interchange

Improvement$45 Multi Agency 17-07-0033

US 101 Interchanges Improvements: San Antonio Rd. to

Charleston Rd./Rengstorff Ave.$38 Multi Agency 17-07-0034

US 101/Buena Vista Ave. Interchange Improvements $38 Multi Agency 17-07-0035

SR 85 Northbound to Eastbound SR 237 Connector Ramp and

Northbound SR 85 Auxiliary Lane$38 Multi Agency 17-07-0036

SR 85/El Camino Real Interchange Improvements $27 Multi Agency 17-07-0037

US 101/Blossom Hill Rd. Interchange Improvements $27 Multi Agency 17-07-0038

US 101/Old Oakland Rd. Interchange Improvements $27 Multi Agency 17-07-0039

US 101/Shoreline Blvd. Interchange Improvements $16 Multi Agency 17-07-0040

SR 237/Great America Parkway WB Off- Ramps

Improvements$14 Multi Agency 17-07-0042

SR 237/El Camino Real/Grant Rd. Intersection Improvements $6 Multi Agency 17-07-0043

Double Lane Southbound US 101 off-ramp to Southbound SR

87$3 Multi Agency 17-07-0044

Widen Calaveras Blvd. overpass from 4 to 6 lanes $92 Multi Agency 17-07-0051

Other County Program: Safety, Security, Noise $54 Multi Agency 17-07-0064

SR 17 Corridor Congestion Relief in Los Gatos $50 Multi Agency 17-07-0067

237 WB Additional Lane from McCarthy to North First $52 Multi Agency 17-07-0068

US 101/SR 25 Interchange $185 Multi Agency 17-07-0069

Envision Highway Minor Projects $60 Multi Agency 17-07-0079

I-280/Bird Interchange Improvements $9 Multi Agency New

I-280/De Anza Blvd. Interchange Improvements $65 Multi Agency New

I-280/Leigh Ave./Leland Ave. Interchange Improvements $103 Multi Agency New

I-280/San Tomas Expressway New Interchange $54 Multi Agency New

I-680 Auxiliary Lanes (Berryessa Rd. to McKee Rd.) $22 Multi Agency New

I-680 Auxiliary Lanes (Capitol Expwy. to Berryessa Rd.) $22 Multi Agency New

I-680/Berryessa Rd. Interchange Improvements $43 Multi Agency New

TRANSIT

HIGHWAY

6.6.a


I-680/Calaveras Blvd. Interchange Improvements $32 Multi Agency New

I-680/Capitol Ave. Interchange Improvements $9 Multi Agency New

I-680/Capitol Expwy./Jackson Ave. Interchange Improvements $54 Multi Agency New

I-680/Hostetter Rd. Interchange Improvements $11 Multi Agency New

I-680/Jacklin Rd. Interchange Improvements $3 Multi Agency New

I-680/King Rd. Interchange Improvements $43 Multi Agency New

I-680/Montague Expwy. Interchange Improvement $32 Multi Agency New

I-880/Montague Expwy. Interchange Improvement $19 Multi Agency New

Northbound I-280 Connector from Stevens Creek Blvd. $54 Multi Agency New

South County US 101 Ramp Metering $78 Multi Agency New

SR 237 Eastbound Auxiliary Lanes: Mathilda Ave. to Fair Oaks

Ave.$8 Multi Agency New

SR 237 Westbound On-Ramp at Middlefield Rd. $5 Multi Agency New

SR 237 Westbound to Southbound SR 85 Connector Ramp

Improvements (Including SR 85 Auxiliary Lanes between El

Camino Real and SR 237)

$47 Multi Agency New

SR 237 Westbound/Eastbound Auxiliary Lanes (Coyote Creek

to N. First St, and N. First St. to Zanker Rd.)$76 Multi Agency New

SR 85/I-280/Homestead Rd. Interchange Improvements $32 Multi Agency New

SR 87/Capitol Expressway/Narvaez Ave. Interchange

Improvements$43 Multi Agency New

US 101/Ellis Street $25 Multi Agency New

US 101/SR 237 $150 Multi Agency New

SR 237/Maude $20 Multi Agency New

SR 237/Java Drive $50 Multi Agency New

SR 237/Carribbean Drive/Lawrence Expressway $70 Multi Agency New

US 101/Moffett Blvd. Interchange Improvements $81 Multi Agency New

US 101/Montague Expwy. Interchange Improvements $64 Multi Agency New

US 101/I-880 Interchange Project $1,000 Multi Agency New

I-680 Soundwalls (Capitol to Mueller and Jackson to

Hostetter)$17 Multi Agency New

I-280 Soundwalls $7 Multi Agency New

SR 85 Soundwalls $18 Multi Agency New

US 101/Hellyer Ave. Interchange Improvements $19 Multi Agency New

SR 85 to SR 280 HOT Direct Connector $80 Multi Agency New

SR 85 Express Lanes: US 101 (South San Jose) to Mountain

View$195 VTA 17-07-0074

US 101 Express Lanes: Whipple Ave. in San Mateo County to

Cochrane Road in Morgan Hill$502 VTA 17-07-0075

Santa Clara County Express Lanes Operations and

Maintenance$720 VTA 17-07-0076

I-880 Express Lanes: SR-237 to US-101 $27 VTA 17-07-0081

SR-87 Express Lanes: I-880 to SR-85 $41 VTA 17-07-0082

I-680 Express Lanes: SR-237 to US-101 $43 VTA 17-07-0083

I-280 Express Lanes: US-101 to Magdalena Avenue $29 VTA 17-07-0084

Santa Clara County Express Lanes - Environmental and Design

Phase for Future Segments$200 VTA 17-07-0085

Envision Expressway (Tier 1 Expressway Plan) Major and

Minor Projects$887 County 17-07-0078

Widen Montague Expressway between Trade Zone and I-680$17 County New

Hale/Santa Theresa Avenue Extension (Phase 2) $9 Morgan Hill New

Additional Local Road Preservation/Rehab $1,500 VTA 17-07-0004

Widen San Tomas Expressway to 8 Lanes from Stevens Creek

Blvd to Campbell Ave$45 Campbell 17-07-0087

South Bascom Complete Streets $33 San Jose 17-07-0089

Widen Brokaw Bridge over Coyote Creek $29 San Jose 17-07-0090

Widen Oakland Road from 4-lanes to 6-lanes between U.S.

101 and Montague Expressway$25 San Jose 17-07-0091

East Whisman across barrier connection between Ravendale

and Ferguson (under SR 237)$20 Mtn View New

Reversible Transit Lane on Shoreline Boulevard $15 Mtn View New

10th Street Bridge Widening $22 Gilroy New

Couplet Conversion in Downtown San Jose $41 San Jose New

Chynoweth Ave/Thornwood Dr Extension (Almaden Expwy to

Winfield Blvd)$21 San Jose New

King Rd Expansion over Penitencia Creek $10 San Jose New

Calaveras Blvd. Complete Streets $80 Milpitas New

Quarry Road Extension to Caltrain Station $4 Palo Alto New

Lawrence Station Area Plan Improvements $18 Sunnyvale New

Bascom Ave Complete Streets (County/San Jose/Campbell) $70 Multi Agency New

Caltrain Grade Separations (Measure B) $900 Multi Agency 17-07-0002

Caltrain Grade Separation @ Auzerais $150 San Jose New

Caltrain Grade Separation @ Branham $40 San Jose New

Caltrain Grade Separation @ Skyway $43 San Jose New

Caltrain Grade Separation @ Virginia Street $150 San Jose New

LOCAL STREETS

GRADE SEPARATIONS

EXPRESSWAYS

EXPRESS LANES

6.6.a


Chynoweth Ave/Monterey Rd/UPRR Grade Separation Project $43 San Jose New

Mary Avenue Grade Separation Over US 101 and SR 237 $90 Sunnyvale New

Caltrain Grade Separations (Tennant and Dunne) $80 Morgan Hill New

SR 85 Corridor Improvements - reserve amount $400 VTA 17-07-0058

Bicycle Superhighway Program $800 Multi Agency New

$29,658

OTHER

6.6.a




FROM: Chief Operating Officer, Inez Evans SUBJECT: Transit Service Changes - July 1, 2019


BACKGROUND:

VTA implements transit service changes quarterly in January, April, July, and October. Major service changes are typically planned for implementation in July to coincide with each fiscal year, while minor service changes are planned for each quarter. Major service changes must be submitted to the VTA Board of Directors for review and approval. For Title VI compliance purposes, all major service changes also require that VTA staff perform a Service Equity Analysis.

The following modifications are considered “major” service changes as adopted by the VTA Board of Directors:

▪ Establishment of a new transit line or service. ▪ Elimination of a transit line or service. ▪ Route change that impacts 25 percent or more of a line’s route miles. ▪ Span of service or frequency changes affecting 25 percent or more of a line’s revenue

vehicle hours. ▪ Series of changes on a single route which are included in the annual transit service plan

and cumulatively meet any of the above criteria. ▪ Proposed changes that are anticipated to be controversial with a particular community or

interested parties based on public feedback. ▪ Systemwide change concurrently affecting five percent or more of the total system

revenue hours.

Service change proposals that do not meet the criteria for major service changes are handled at the staff level and are still subject to an appropriate level of community review and comment.

6.7

Page 2 of 2

DISCUSSION:

In May, the VTA Board of Directors approved the 2019 Transit Service Plan, for implementation coincident with the introduction of BART service at Milpitas and San Jose / Berryessa stations in late 2019. In the interim, quarterly transit service changes, such as this one, focus on adjustments to VTA's current service to improve schedules and connections.

The following service changes will take effect on Monday, July 1, 2019: Major Service Changes

No major service changes.

Minor Service Changes

1. Express 180 and 181: New bus stops will be added at Warm Springs Boulevard & Mission Court in Fremont.

2. The following bus routes will have weekday schedule adjustments to improve

running times, on-time performance, transfers, and operator layovers: 26, 37, 40, 47, 54, 55, 58, 60, 70, 71, 77, 181, 522.

3. The following bus routes will have Saturday schedule adjustments to improve

running times, on-time performance, transfers, and operator layovers: 40, 70, 181, 522.

4. The following bus routes will have Sunday schedule adjustments to improve

running times, on-time performance, transfers, and operator layovers: 40, 181, 522.

Prepared By: Jay Tyree Memo No. 6740

6.7

Successor labor agreement negotiated between VTA and AFSCME


7.1

Successor labor agreement negotiated between VTA and TAEA


7.2




FROM: Deputy GM/Chief Financial Officer, Raj Srinath SUBJECT: 2016 Measure B Bicycle/Pedestrian Capital Projects Competitive Grant

Program Criteria

Policy-Related Action: Yes Government Code Section 84308 Applies: No

ACTION ITEM

RECOMMENDATION:

Approve the criteria of the 2016 Measure B Bicycle/Pedestrian Capital Projects Competitive Grant Program. BACKGROUND:

On November 8, 2016, the voters of Santa Clara County approved by over a two-thirds margin Measure B, a 30-year, ½ cent sales tax measure supporting transportation projects and service in nine program categories. Per 2016 Measure B, the intent of the Bicycle & Pedestrian Program Category is: “To fund bicycle and pedestrian projects of countywide significance identified by the cities,

County, and VTA. The program will give priority to those projects that connect to schools,

transit, and employment centers; fill gaps in the existing bike and pedestrian network; safely

cross barriers to mobility; and make walking or biking a safer and more convenient means of

transportation for all county residents and visitors. Bicycle and pedestrian educational

programs, such as Safe Routes to Schools, will be eligible for funding.”

The VTA Board of Directors adopted the 2016 Measure B Bicycle & Pedestrian Program Category Guidelines at their October 5, 2017, meeting. The guidelines are designed to direct the implementation of the Bicycle & Pedestrian Program Category and advise how the program category funds should be allocated. With the approval of the Bicycle & Pedestrian Program Guidelines, the VTA Board of Directors directed staff to create a competitive grant program for bicycle and pedestrian capital projects.

7.3

Page 2 of 7

In spring and summer 2018, VTA staff worked with the Bicycle & Pedestrian Advisory Committee (BPAC), the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) and the TAC’s Capital Improvement Program Working Group (CIPWG) to develop the details of the competitive grant program. The capital projects competitive grant program was brought to the BPAC and TAC as a 10-year grant program at their June and August 2018 meetings, respectively.

Development of the proposed criteria occurred with input from the CIPWG throughout 2018 and early 2019. Robust discussions occurred at each of the CIPWG meetings, yielding comprehensive proposed criteria for the grant program consisting of the following six base criteria and three bonus point categories:

• Connections to/serves schools, transit or employment centers

• Gap Closure/Crosses Barriers

• Safety

• ADA Access or Convenience/Comfort

• Project Readiness/Project Delivery

• Non-2016 Measure B Contribution Three bonus categories: 1) Community support; 2) Populations with specific needs; and 3) High-quality design/improvements.

Input on the proposed criteria was solicited and received from the BPAC at their February 2019 meeting. That input resulted in the proposed criteria being updated to incorporate the following:

• Add ‘Projected Usage’ as a bonus criterion • Clarify that Criteria #1 is not limited to new connections • Award points for projects that address Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) access

under Criteria #4, ADA Access or Convenience/Comfort.

Staff then brought the criteria to the April 2019 TAC, BPAC and Policy Advisory Committee (PAC) meetings as an action item, with hope that the criteria would move to the May 2019 Board of Directors meeting for approval. Robust discussion at the TAC meeting resulted in the TAC requesting that staff take the criteria back to the CIPWG to clarify questions about elements of specific criterion as well as clarify the role of the bonus points. Staff agreed to take the criteria back to the CIPWG for fine tuning and return to the TAC, BPAC and PAC at a later date for approval. (See committee discussions for more information.)

At the April BPAC meeting, staff discussed with BPAC what transpired at the TAC meeting earlier that day and explained the reasons for the TAC’s decision. Moderate discussion occurred with BPAC members with comments and suggestions being offered to address the TAC requests. (See committee discussions for more information.)

This item was deferred at the April PAC meeting, and the PAC did not hear this item.

7.3

Page 3 of 7

DISCUSSION:

Staff separated the comments/requests from the April TAC and BPAC meetings into two categories: those requiring clarification and those that required review and/or revision. Those that were determined to require review and/or revision with the CIPWG are discussed below. (See committee discussions section for more information.) All comments/concerns were given to CIPWG members prior to their next meeting so that all parties had the same information. Staff worked with the CIPWG at their April, May and June 2019 meetings to address the comments/requests by the TAC. Discussions with CIPWG resulted in changes in the proposed criteria as described below. The updated proposed criteria and corresponding points can be found on Attachment A. Bonus categories TAC requested clarification on the purpose of the bonus categories. Robust discussion determined that the bonus categories should be used solely as tie breakers and not as additional points. Continued discussion resulted in the following three original bonus categories being incorporated into the base criteria:

• Community Support - new Criterion #7 • Current or Projected Usage - new Criterion #8 • Targets Populations with Specific Needs - new Criterion #9

The fourth bonus category - High Quality Design/Improvements - was removed all together, as the CIPWG agreed that the scoring of this category was too subjective. Tie Breaker A tie breaker will be used to rank a project higher than another project if the scores are identical. The proposed tie breaker is Geographic Distribution. If two projects have the same score, the project in the geographic area with fewer awarded 2016 Measure B bicycle/pedestrian capital projects - for the current call for projects - will be ranked higher. Criterion #3 - Safety TAC requested that the criterion consider the installation of new and/or separated facilities a proven/demonstrated countermeasure to address a safety issues on an existing facility. Discussion with the CIPWG at their April meeting resulted in no change to the criterion. Consensus was achieved that the project sponsor, after identifying the safety issue being addressed, needs to make the case that the installation of new and/or separated facilities would address that safety issue. CIPWG discussed various data sources that can be used to make the support the project sponsor’s case. Criterion #6 - Non-2016 Measure B Contribution

7.3

Page 4 of 7

TAC requested that the scoring of this criterion be changed to assign more points to projects providing more than a 20% non-2016 Measure B contribution. Discussion with the CIPWG resulted in a change in the scoring distribution, with the most points being awarded to projects providing more than 30% in non-2016 Measure B contribution. The criterion reflects the updated distribution.

New Criterion #7 - Community Support Points are awarded for this criterion if the project is developed through a collaborative planning process that included broad partnerships among a variety of stakeholders (e.g. documents community input/outreach including local BPAC).

New Criterion #8 - Current or Projected Usage When it was identified as a bonus category, TAC requested that the threshold for the usage be increased for each point category. As noted above, this bonus category was added to the base criteria. Clarification on how the original point distribution was determined was discussed with the CIPWG, and agreement was reached on the need to determine new thresholds for point distribution. This criterion endeavors to quantify how many existing or projected users the project will benefit. Points are awarded for this criterion if projected or existing users are identified using a defensible, quantifiable methodology.

New Criterion #9 - Targets Populations with Specific Needs Points are awarded for this criterion if a project serves a Community of Concern as identified by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC). If fifty percent or more of the project limits are located within a half-mile of a Community of Concern, as defined by MTC at the time of the call for projects or a projects, or if a project connects directly to a Community of Concern, as defined by MTC at the time of the call for projects or a projects, the project will be awarded points. The MTC definition and a map of Communities of Concerns can be found here: <https://mtc.maps.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=1501fe1552414d569ca747e0e23628ff>

Next steps

Once the criteria are approved by the TAC, BPAC and PAC, they will be presented to and heard by the VTA Board of Directors for approval. This approval is anticipated in August 2019.

After approval by the VTA Board of Directors, staff will complete the guidelines for the application process and issue a call for projects. The call for projects is expected to occur in fall 2019.

ALTERNATIVES:

7.3

Page 5 of 7

The Board of Directors can request staff to further refine the criteria and choose not to approve the criteria at this time. Additional delays in approval of the grant program criteria will delay the call for projects which will delay funding for 2016 Measure B Bicycle/Pedestrian eligible capital projects.

FISCAL IMPACT:

There is no fiscal impact to VTA associated with the approval of the 2016 Measure B Bicycle/Pedestrian Capital Projects Competitive Grant Program criteria as the FY20 and FY21 allocations for this subcategory have already been approved. Future funding for the competitive grant program will be approved by the Board of Directors with the approval of the biennial budget. ADVISORY COMMITTEE DISCUSSION/RECOMMENDATION:

The Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) heard this item at their April 10, 2019 meeting. Much discussion was had on which projects were eligible for 2016 Measure B funds under this competitive grant program, and staff confirmed that the cost to construct all of the eligible projects far surpasses the $250 million of 2016 Measure B funds allocated to the Bicycle/Pedestrian program category. TAC members requested that the grant program be clear on what projects were eligible. Discussion was also had on the difference between the criteria and the bonus points. Staff stated that the bonus points could be used to differentiate projects should they have the same score. TAC member asked why the bonus points could not just become criteria and have points adjusted accordingly.

In addition to the general questions, there were comments on specific criterion. These comments are as follows:

1. Criterion #1: Connections to/serves schools/transit/employment centers

a. Request to make this criterion for ‘new’ connections - Staff responded that the criterion was initially for ‘new’ connections, but removed ‘new,’ based on comments made by the Bicycle Pedestrian Advisory Committee in February as well as discussions with the Capital Improvements Program Working Group (CIPWG). Staff also responded that ‘new’ connections are captured in Criterion #2 - Gap Closure/Crosses Barriers.

2. Criterion #2: Gap Closure/Crosses Barriers

a. Request to consider upgrades to a facility or improvements to a substandard facility as gap closure - Staff responded that this criterion is for new gap closures and upgrades to an existing facility can be captured in Criterion #4 - ADA Access or Convenience/Comfort

b. Comment that this criterion is the same as Criterion #1 - Connections to/serves schools/transit/employment centers. - Staff responded that this criterion is for new gap closures, but that if a project provides a connection to schools/transit/employment center and includes a new gap closure, it is possible to get points for both criteria.

7.3

Page 6 of 7

3. Criterion #3: Safety

a. Request to consider the installation of new and/or separated facilities a proven/demonstrated safety countermeasure

4. Criterion #5: Project Readiness/Project Delivery

a. Request clarification on whether projects currently under construction qualify for these funds. - Staff responded that projects currently under construction do not qualify for the capital projects competitive grant program funds.

b. Request clarification on whether cost overruns qualify for these funds. - Staff responded that a jurisdiction could apply to the competitive grant program for cost overruns, provided the project is eligible for 2016 Measure B funds, but that there is no guarantee that the project would be awarded funds.

5. Criterion #6: Non-2016 Measure B Contribution

a. Request a method to assign more points to projects bringing in more than 20% non-2016 Measure B contribution. Example given was to cap the max score at 15 and provide an additional five points for projects bringing in more than 20% non-2016 Measure B contribution.

6. Bonus category -Projected/Existing Usage

a. Request to increase the threshold/raise the bar on usage requirements for each point category.

In light of the discussion around the bonus categories vs. criteria and the requests to review comments on the specific criteria, the TAC unanimously recommended not to move the criteria forward but that the criteria be taken back to the CIPWG for additional tweaking and return to the TAC for action at a future date.

As the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) requested that this item not move forward until further discussion and review with the Capital Improvement Program Working Group (CIPWG), the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee (BPAC) heard this as an information item at their April 10, 2019 meeting. Staff discussed with BPAC the comments and requests made by the TAC to move this item back to the CIPWG for additional discussion. (See TAC discussion for detail.)

BPAC members provided the following comments/recommendations on the criteria:

• Since the bonus categories were not developed from the language of the measure, they should be used as tie breakers.

• If a project addresses ADA access issues and is on/adjacent to a Caltrans facility, they may qualify for 2010 Caltrans ADA mitigation funds. As such, project sponsors should be required to apply for these funds to help fund the completion of the project.

7.3

Page 7 of 7

• Should include criteria to encourage projects that utilize underutilized trails/service roads/access roads along waterways in the county.

• Requested the definition of Criterion #4 - Convenience/Comfort. Staff provided the description as stated in the criteria.

• Asked how projects that rebuild non-ADA compliant overcrossings/undercrossing to current ADA standards would fare against other projects. Staff stated that all else equal, they would fare less well than a new overcrossing/undercrossing.

• Requested the definition of Criterion #3 - Safety. Staff provided the description as state in the criteria.

• To address the TAC request that separated bikeways be considered a proven/demonstrated countermeasure, one member stated that separated facilities should not automatically be considered a proven/demonstrated countermeasure. A separate member disagreed stating that separated facilities should be considered a countermeasure as many people do not feel safe cycling without being separated from motor vehicles.

The Policy Advisory Committee (PAC) did not hear this item at their April 11, 2019 meeting. This item was deferred per request from the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) and will return to the PAC at a later meeting. (See TAC comments for detail.)

The Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) heard this item at their July 10, 2019 meeting. Clarification on the tie breaker, Geographic Location, was requested. Staff clarified that Geographic Location is defined as the literal location of the project in Santa Clara County, and that it is not defined by jurisdictions.

Upon completion of discussion, the TAC unanimously recommended this item for approval.

The Bicycle & Pedestrian Advisory Committee (BPAC) heard this item at their July 10, 2019 meeting. After discussions on the frequency of service for Criterion #1 - Connections to transit and the differences in the point values for the new criteria, the BPAC recommended this item for approval with the following amendment: Increase points for Criterion #9 -Targets Populations with Specific Needs to 10 points.

Prepared by: Jane Shinn Memo No. 6912 ATTACHMENTS:

• MT6912_AttachmentA_BikePedCapCriteria_062819 (PDF)

7.3

Rev. 06.27.19

Page 1 of 7

2016 Measure B Bike/Ped Capital Projects Competitive Grant Criteria

Screening Criteria

2016 Measure B Eligible

o Identify source of eligibility

Attachment A of 2016 Measure B

Countywide Bicycle Plan, etc.

Complete Streets Reporting Requirement Attached

Grant request ≥ $50,000

Criteria Max Points

1. Connections to/Serves Schools, Transit or Employment Centers

20

2. Gap Closure/Crosses Barriers 20

3. Safety 20

4. ADA Access or Convenience/Comfort 20

5. Project Readiness/Project Delivery 10

6. Non‐2016 Measure B Contribution 10

7. Community Support 5

8. Current or Projected Usage 10

9. Targets Populations with Specific Needs

5

TOTAL 120

Tie Breaker – Geographic Distribution

7.3.a

Rev. 06.27.19

Page 2 of 7

Criteria #1 – Connections to/serves schools, transit, or employment centers

Does the project provide connections to schools, transit or employment centers within required biking

or walking distance?

Points awarded if:

Bicycles: Any point of project is within 1 ½ miles actual biking distance

Pedestrians: Any point of project is within ½ mile actual walk distance

Point Distribution:

Can receive a maximum of 20 points

o Points are not additive. Projects will be scored within the “HIGH,” “MEDIUM,” or “LOW”

point range based on its highest category destination

o Example: If the project scores in the HIGH category for all three elements, 20 points can

be received.

Points

Schools (K‐12) Combined Enrollment

# of Jobs (w/n actual bike/ped distance)

Transit (Frequency of Service)

High 15 ‐ 20

≥ 1501 ≥ 2000 Connects to >1 Frequent transit route or regional rail service

Med 8 ‐ 14

301 ‐ 1500 501 ‐ 1999 Connects to 1 Frequent transit route or regional rail service

Low 1 ‐ 7

≤ 300 ≤ 500 Connects to local transit service

Other:

School is K‐12; Colleges & universities can be captured in the ‘# of Jobs’ element

Employment center is defined by number of jobs

Transit is defined as: ‘Transportation by a conveyance that provides regular and continuing

general or special transportation to the public, but does not include school bus, charter, or

sightseeing transportation.’

o FTA: https://www.transit.dot.gov/about/regional‐offices/region‐9/there‐fta‐dictionary

Frequent transit route as defined by VTA:

o 15 minute or better frequency from 6:30a to 6:30p, M through F

Local transit route as defined by VTA

o All non‐frequent routes

Regional rail service is defined as:

o Caltrain

o ACE

o Capital Corridor

o BART

7.3.a

Rev. 06.27.19

Page 3 of 7

Criteria #2 – Gap Closure/Crosses Barriers

Does the project provide for a continuous bicycle or pedestrian travel‐way where there was

previously none?

Points awarded if:

Project builds new bicycle or pedestrian infrastructure where there is currently no

infrastructure;

o e.g. Closes gaps in sidewalk; completes trail segments; constructs new bike/ped bridge

or undercrossing; provides dedicated space for bicyclist on roadway where there is

currently shoulder less than 4 feet.

OR ‐ Project builds a new bicycle or pedestrian connection across a major barrier (waterway,

railway, freeway, expressway).

o Facilities provided must be dedicated

e.g. Class I, II, or IV bikeways; sidewalk

Point Distribution:


o High: 9‐13pts

75% or more of the project cost is for gap closure

o Med: 4‐8pts

25% ‐ 74% of the project cost is for gap closure

o Low: 1‐3pts

Less than 25% of the project cost is for gap closure

o 5 pts: Project builds a new bicycle or pedestrian connection across a major barrier

o 2 pts: Project is identified as an ABC in Appendix 6.1 of the 2018 Countywide Bicycle

Plan or see https://gis.vta.org/bikeplan/

Criteria #3 – Safety

Does the project make bicycling or walking safer?

Definition of Safety: Potential for reducing the number and/or rate or the risk of pedestrian and bicyclist

fatalities and injuries, including the identification of safety hazards for pedestrians and bicyclists.

Points awarded if:

Project demonstrates improved safety for bicyclists and/or pedestrians

Point Distribution:


High: 15‐20pts

o Project will address a demonstrated safety issue using proven/demonstrated

countermeasure

Med: 8‐14pts

7.3.a

Rev. 06.27.19

Page 4 of 7

o Project will improve a situation with safety issues

Low: 1‐7pts

o Project will generally improve safety issues; Has potential to reduce exposure/risk of

conflicts between motor‐vehicles and bikes/peds

Other:

Project sponsor to provide narrative describing safety issue/s that project will address

Criteria #4 – ADA Access or Convenience/Comfort

Does the project address Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) access issues or make bicycling or

walking more convenient or comfortable?

Points awarded if:

Project upgrades an existing facility to meet current Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)

requirements; OR

Project provides a shorter route, reduces pedestrian or bicyclist delay, and/or upgrades existing

bike/ped infrastructure to lower‐stress infrastructure

Point Distribution:


o High: 15‐20pts

75% or more of the project cost is to upgrade existing facility to meet current

ADA requirements; or

Project significantly reduces delay, provides a shorter route, and/or decreases

current level of traffic stress by two or more factors

o Med: 8‐14pts

25% ‐ 74% of the project cost is to upgrade existing facility to meet current ADA

requirements; or

Project moderately reduces delay, provides a moderately shorter route, and/or

decreases current level of traffic stress by less than two factors

o Low: 1‐7pts

Less than 25% of the project cost is to upgrade existing facility to meet current

ADA requirements; or

Project provides minimal reductions in delay, minimally shorter route, and/or

does not change current level of traffic stress.

Other

Project sponsor will identify if the project addresses an ADA issue or convenience/comfort.

A level of traffic stress analysis is not required. However, a project that provides the analysis to

substantiate reductions in traffic stress may receive the maximum points versus those projects

that do not.

References to tools/methods to measure level of traffic stress will be included on the

application.

7.3.a

Rev. 06.27.19

Page 5 of 7

Though this criterion overlaps some with criterion #2, Gap Closure/Crosses Barrier, criterion #2

is specific to new facilities/infrastructure where none exist. It is possible for a project to receive

points for both criterion #2 and criterion #4.

Criteria #5 – Project Readiness/Project Delivery

How close is the project to being delivered?

Points awarded if:

Project has any of the following phases completed.

Points are additive.

Point Distribution:


Categorical Exclusion or Categorical Exemption

Not Categorical Exclusion or Categorical Exemption

Phase Points Phase Points

Design Complete 5 ENV Complete 4

ROW Complete 5 Design Complete 3

ROW Complete 3

Criteria #6 – Non‐2016 Measure B Contribution

How much non‐2016 Measure B contribution is the project sponsor providing?

Points awarded if:

The project sponsor pledges/provides more than the required 10% non‐2016 Measure B

contribution

Point Distribution:

10pts: Provides ≥ 30% non‐2016 Measure B contribution

7pts: Provides 20% ‐ 29% non‐2016 Measure B contribution




0pts: Provides the minimum 10% non‐2016 Measure B contribution

Other:

If the project sponsor states that they will provide a higher percentage of matching funds, they

will be required to provide the matching percentage.

7.3.a

Rev. 06.27.19

Page 6 of 7

If project costs increase and are anticipated to be over budget, 2016 Measure B funds will not

be increased. Project sponsor is responsible for cost overruns.

If the project is anticipated to be delivered under budget, 2016 Measure B funds will be reduced

in proportion to project sponsor’s contribution

Criteria #7 ‐ Community Support

Is the project supported by the community?

Points awarded if:

Project is developed through a collaborative planning process that included broad partnerships

among a variety of stakeholders (e.g. documents community input/outreach including local

BPAC)

Point Distribution:


Criteria #8 – Usage

How many existing or projected users will the project benefit?

Points awarded if:

Projected or existing users are identified using a defensible, quantifiable methodology

o Project sponsors using projections must provide documentation and justification

Point Distribution:


Projects scored on the mode that the project serves

Projects that serve both modes scored on the “Total” number of bicyclists and pedestrians

served

Points Two‐way peak hour volume

Bicyclists Pedestrians Total

High 10 points >50 >100 >150

Medium 5‐9 pts 25‐50 50‐100 75‐150

Low 1‐4 pts <25 <50 <75

7.3.a

Rev. 06.27.19

Page 7 of 7

Criteria #9 ‐ Targets a Community of Concern

Does a project serve a Community of Concern?

Points awarded if:

50% or more of the project limits is located within ½ mile of a Community of Concern (as

defined by MTC at the time of the call for projects).

The project connects directly to a Community of Concern (as defined by MTC at the time of the

call for projects).

MTC definition/map of Communities of Concern:

https://mtc.maps.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=1501fe1552414d569ca747e0e23628ff

Point Distribution:


Other:

Map identifying the project and relationship to the COC required

The project sponsor must articulate the benefit of the project to the COC

Tie Breaker

Geographic Distribution

If two projects have the same score, the project in the geographic area with fewer awarded

2016 Measure B bicycle/pedestrian capital projects – for the current call for projects ‐ will be

ranked higher.

7.3.a




FROM: Chief Planning and Engineering Officer, Carolyn M. Gonot SUBJECT: Silicon Valley Express Lanes Electronic Toll Systems Integrator - Contract

Amendment #2


ACTION ITEM

RECOMMENDATION:

1) Authorize the General Manager to execute a contract amendment with TransCore, LP for the Electronic Toll System (“ETS”) Integration Services for the Silicon Valley Express Lanes (SVEL) Program:

• Increasing the amount by $60,000,000 bringing the contract value to $64,416,624. • Extending the period of service until December 31, 2027

2) Authorize the General Manager to execute Task Orders under this contract up to the

Board approved amount.

BACKGROUND:

The VTA Board of Directors (“Board”) approved the Silicon Valley Express Lanes (SVEL) Program at its December 11, 2008 meeting. The SVEL Program implements a roadway pricing system on the SR 237/I-880 and the US 101/SR 85 corridors to utilize unused capacity in carpool lanes to:

1. Provide congestion relief through more effective use of existing roadways;

2. Provide commuters with a new mobility option; and

3. Provide a new funding source for transportation improvements including public transit.

7.4

Page 2 of 3

This memorandum covers the US 101/SR 85 corridor express lanes work Phases 3 through 5 (See Attachment A). The Electronic Toll System (ETS) for the express lanes requires a designed solution for operations and maintenance covering the entire express lanes program.

On August 4, 2017, after a competitive consultant selection process for a System Integrator, VTA executed a Master Task Order Contract Agreement with TransCore, LP (TransCore) and issued Task Order #1 as a time and materials contract not to exceed $210,251 to provide civil design collaboration services for Phase 3 of the SVEL Program. This task order includes meeting with VTA staff and our civil design consultant to discuss, review and provide comments on the civil infrastructure plans, specifications, and contract terms to ensure a complete understanding of the proposed civil construction work for integration of the ETS for the Phase 3 project.

On September 7, 2017, the Board received an update on the SVEL ETS integration services, which explained the Request for Proposal process, the hiring of TransCore as the ETS consultant using a Master Task Order Contract Agreement and identifying the issuance of task orders to complete the ETS scope for the US 101/SR 85 express lanes corridor.

On February 1, 2018, the Board granted authority to the General Manager to execute Task Orders #2A and #2B with TransCore in the amount of $4,206,373 for the design and development of the ETS for the US 101/SR 85 Express Lanes Phase 3 Project.

DISCUSSION:

In order to continue the implementation of the SVEL project through Phases 3 to 5, additional funding is needed to continue the integration services work by TransCore. This additional $60 million will complete this work for the projected phases of the work.

In addition, staff is required to obtain Board approval for each individual task order in the contract with TransCore. This process requires staff to return to the Board for each task order approval. This adds additional time, resources and cost to each task order before the ETS work starts. Several task orders are anticipated through the year 2027 as funding becomes available. In order to proceed with the work more efficiently, staff is recommending the General Manager be authorized to approve the task orders per the Board’s authorized expenditure level.

These task orders will be negotiated with TransCore based on an independent cost estimate and reported to the Board as they are issued.

Based on projected project schedules for Phases 3, 4, and 5, the anticipated task orders will have TransCore under contract up to the year 2027. Extension of the contract beyond 2027, if necessary, will be brought to the VTA Board for approval.

CONTRACT SUMMARY:

Vendor Name: TransCore, LP Original Contract Amount: $ 210,251 Contract Number: S16214 Prior Modifications: $ 4,206,373

7.4

Page 3 of 3

Original Contract Term:

7/31/2024 Amount Requested: $ 60,000,000

Extended Contract Term:

12/31/2027 Total Amount Incl. Request:

$ 64,416,624

Procurement Type: Firm Fixed Price Funding Sources: VTA & State (STIP and SB1)

SBE Goal: N/A DBE Goal: N/A

The competitive consultant selection process that resulted in the contract with TransCore enabled VTA to have a system integrator for the entire SVEL Program on the US 101/SR 85 corridor.

Because the funding is secured incrementally, the work has been broken into phases through the capital project phases. As shown in the above Contract Summary, the initial contract amount is $210,251 The contract was increased by $4,206,373 by Board action. The requested additional $60 million will cover the remaining tasks with secured or programmed funds to complete TransCore’s work for Phases 3, 4 and 5 on the US 101/SR 85 corridor through the end of 2027.

ALTERNATIVES:

The Board could direct staff to bid the additional work through a competitive bid process. This would result in additional cost and delay to the project. It could also result in the selection of a different consultant that would lose the benefit of continuity with the system integrator of the area wide project.

FISCAL IMPACT:

This action will authorize up to an additional $60 million covering up to December 31, 2027 for the design, implementation and maintenance of the ETS for the SVEL Program for a total not to exceed amount of $64,416,624. Appropriation for expenditures through June 30, 2021 is included in the FY20 Adopted VTP Highway Improvement Program Fund Capital Budget and the Silicon Valley Express Lanes Program Fund. Appropriation for the remainder of the contract period will be included in subsequent Biennial Budgets.

SMALL BUSINESS ENTERPRISE (SBE) PARTICIPATION:

Based on identifiable subcontracting opportunities, there was no assigned SBE goal for the contract.

Prepared by: Charmaine Zamora - Project Manager Memo No. 7002 ATTACHMENTS:

• 7002_Attachment A_SVEL Map 20190625 (PDF) • 7002_Attachment_B_Consultant_List_20190617 (DOCX)

7.4

·|}þ732

!"#$680!"#$880

!"#$280·|}þ78

·|}þ58

·|}þ58

·|}þ71

(/101US

SUNNYVALE

MOUNTAINVIEW

LOS ALTOS

PALOALTO

SANTA CLARA

SAN JOSE

MILPITAS

CAMPBELL

LOS GATOS

SARATOGA

CUPERTINO

MORGAN HILLDunne Avenue

(/101US

S I L I C O N VA L L E Y E X P R E S S L A N E S

0 2.5 51.25Miles ©

HOV Lane to HOV Lane Connector

Phase 5

Freeways and Express LanesPhase 2 (Under Construction)Phase 3 (Under Construction)

Phase 1 (In Operation)

Phase 4

Future Phases FreewaysSAN JOSEAll other jurisdictions

ATTACHMENT A7.4.a

ATTACHMENT B

Silicon Valley Express Lanes Electronic Toll Systems Integration Services

Consultant List

FIRM NAME NAME ROLE LOCATION

TransCore Chris Hall Prime Nashville, TN

Crosstown Electrical & Data, Inc.

Joshua Ferras Sub-Consultant Irwindale, CA

Neteon Technologies Hans Chu Sub-Consultant Somerset, NJ

NorCal General Construction Corp.

Kenny Phan Sub-Consultant San Jose, CA

TJKM Transportation Consultants

Atul Patel Sub-Consultant Pleasanton, CA

7.4.b




FROM: Acting Chief - BART Delivery Program, Dennis Ratcliffe SUBJECT: BART Silicon Valley Rapid Transit Program: Construction Management

Services Contract No. S12015F Amendment with PGH Wong Engineering, Inc.


ACTION ITEM

RECOMMENDATION:

Authorize the General Manger to execute a contract amendment with PGH Wong Engineering, Inc. (Wong), for construction management services through project completion and post-completion activities for the Silicon Valley Berryessa Extension (SVBX) Project in the amount of $5,628,750; and increasing the total agreement value to $74,000,000.

BACKGROUND:

VTA and the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District (BART) are extending the BART system approximately 16-miles into Santa Clara County in two phases. Phase I, Silicon Valley Berryessa Extension (SVBX) Project, is an approximate 10-mile extension from the Warm Springs Station in Fremont, Alameda County and is nearing completion.

With VTA support, BART Integration Testing (Phase 3) and safety certification activities have begun. Once the system safety certification is approved, passenger service can commence, which is anticipated in December 2019, consistent with the current FTA schedule.

A number of Board Actions occurred to award and amend the Wong contract as shown in the table below. In December 2011, the Board approved execution of a contract to Wong in the amount of $27.000 million to provide construction management services on the SVBX Project. Subsequent to this action, several changes in the SVBX Project schedule and other implementation details required increases in the level of effort for the services provided by Wong. In November 2015, the Board authorized $17.500 million to provide continued

7.5

Page 2 of 3

construction management services and in October 2017, the Board authorized $18.475 million to provide funding due to the extended duration of the Project, and an increase in requested support services and closeout activities.

DISCUSSION:

Recent impacts of system modifications, changes to the systems testing approach and plan, scope resolution, and project completion assessment, require an extension of time and increase in requested services required to support the Project. Services to be provided by Wong during this extended period include inspection and documentation of all systems installation and testing, final contractor documentation coordination, and Project Record Drawing services. As a result, the contract was amended by $2.771 million in June 2019, providing funding through October 2019. This Board action is required to issue an amendment to the contract to approve increased funding to support services throughout the extended duration of the Project startup, and through foreseeable closeout activities following the start of passenger service.

Board Action Scope of Services Amount Authorized (millions)

Amount Contracted (millions)

12/8/2011 SVBX Construction Management Services - Award

$27.000 $27.000

11/15/2015 Extended and Increase in SVBX Construction Management Services

$17.500 $17.500

7/30/2017 Extended SVBX Construction Management Services

15%* $2.625

10/5/2017 Extended and Increase SVBX Construction Management Services

$18.475 $18.475

6/15/2019 Extended SVBX Construction Management Services

15%* $2.771

8/01/2019 Extended and Increase SVBX Construction Management Services

$5.629 $5.629

8/01/2019 Total $74.000 * Authorized by VTA Administrative Code

Under the recommended amendment, Wong will have continued responsibility to provide construction management services for the C700 Line, Track, Systems, and Stations Contract, and the campus construction contracts, during the construction, testing, and turnover of the SVBX Project. In addition, Wong will provide technical support for the finalization of the Project Record Drawings. The recommended contract amendment will provide approximately 40,000 hours of professional services, with an estimated value of $5,628,750, bringing the total agreement value to $74,000,000. Additionally, the contract term will be extended to December 2020, supporting closeout activities following the start of passenger service. Costs associated with this amendment are included in the SVBX Project Budget and as such, the recommended action will

7.5

Page 3 of 3

not change the SVBX Project budget. The Wong team includes sub-consultants. Company names and details are included in Attachment A.

ALTERNATIVES:

Although the Board could decide to not approve the execution of this contract amendment and ask staff to re-procure some or all of the planned SVBX activities, there are no practical alternatives to the recommended action that would not adversely impact VTA’s ability to complete the SVBX Project in a timely manner.

FISCAL IMPACT:

This action will authorize an additional $5,628,750 for services for the SVBX Project through December 2020. Appropriation for the anticipated expenditures is included in the FY20 Adopted 2000 Measure A Transit Improvement Program Fund Capital Budget. This recommended action will not change funding already allocated to the overall Project budget. This contract is funded by a combination of State Traffic and Congestion Relief Program (TCRP) fund, Measure A funds, and FTA New Starts funds.

DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS ENTERPRISE (DBE) PARTICIPATION:

The advertised DBE goal was 18%, PGH Wong committed 21% DBE content in its proposal, and has achieved 22.1% DBE utilization to date. Based on the identifiable subcontracting opportunities, a DBE goal of 18% was established for this action. Wong has committed to meeting this goal.

Prepared by: John Vukasin, SVBX Project Controls Manager Memo No. 7044 ATTACHMENTS:

• Attachment A PGH Wong (PDF)

7.5

Silicon Valley Rapid Transit-Amendment to Program Services Contract with PGH Wong Engineering, Inc.

Contract No. S12015F

Contractor Firm Contractor Role Name Location PGH Wong Engineering, Inc.

Prime Consultant Peter G. H. Wong 182 2nd Street Suite 500 San Francisco, CA 94105 415-566-0800

Cornerstone Transportation Consulting, Inc. (DBE)

• Document Control • Field Engineering

Resources As Needed

Ming Ng 44 Montgomery Street Suite 3360 San Francisco, CA 94104 415-705-7800

Harris & Associates • C700 LTSS Utility Site Representation

Glenn Suitor 1401 Willow Pass Rd Suite 500 Concord, CA 94520 925-827-4900

Keish Environmental (DBE)

• Environmental Support

Rachael Keish 6768 Crosby Ct San Jose, CA 95129 408-592-0233

Ninyo & Moore • Materials Testing • Hazardous Materials

Testing

Terence K. Wang 1956 Webster Street Suite 400 Oakland, CA 94612 510-633-5640

Safework, Inc. (DBE)

• Construction Safety/Security Management

• UPRR Operations & Safety Coordination

Rebecca Jones 1104 Corporate Way Suite 219 Sacramento, CA 95831 916-361-7900

Lockwood, Andrews & Newnam, Inc. (w/ Colmena Engineering, Inc. as DBE sub)

• Project Record Drawings Preparation

Tim Schmidt 1436 California Circle Milpitas, CA 95035 214-215-0176

FW Associates (DBE) • Administrative support Ed Wong 68 12th Street Suite 300 San Francisco, CA 94103 415-861-0286

7.5.a




FROM: Chief Planning and Engineering Officer, Carolyn M. Gonot SUBJECT: Eastridge to BART Regional Connector - Final Design and Engineering

Services Contract Amendment


ACTION ITEM

RECOMMENDATION:

Authorize the General Manager to amend the Contract S16250 in the amount of $8,400,000 with BKF Engineers (BKF) to perform final design for Eastridge to BART Regional Connector (EBRC), resulting in a new total authorized contract amount of $22,819,983.

BACKGROUND:

The Eastridge to BART Regional Connector (EBRC) project will extend 2.4 miles of Light Rail line from the existing Alum Rock Station to the Eastridge Transit Center. Light rail will operate primarily in the center of Capitol Expressway with new stations at Story Road and the Eastridge Transit Center. The location of the project is shown in Exhibit A.

This project is currently in the final engineering phase using the scope that was approved by the Board in June 2019 that includes an aerial structure for the entire extension alignment and other geometry changes to improve the project. Prior to this action, in May 2017, the Board approved a contract with BKF Engineers (BKF) in the amount of $14,100,000 for the preparation of final design of the light rail alignment that was approved at the time.

In August 2018, the BKF contract was amended by $319,983 to perform additional environmental studies and support the supplemental environmental impact report that was ultimately approved by the Board in June 2019.

7.6

Page 2 of 3

DISCUSSION:

The current BKF design work for the EBRC project is based on the alignment that was identified in May 2017 when the engineering contract was initiated. With the approval of the project changes in June 2019, the engineering effort is increased to include:

1. Revision to the roadway geometry along the corridor, especially near Story Road and at intersections.

2. Addition of structure design for nearly half of the corridor. This includes additional geotechnical investigation and special foundation design near sensitive receptors and PG&E overhead lines.

3. More comprehensive construction staging plans to address the traffic during construction. 4. Refinement of several components, including:

a. Revision to Story Station structures to meet current fire and safety codes, b. Changes at Eastridge to adhere to (California Public Utilities Commission

(CPUC) safety recommendations and to use solar panels for a portion of the power needs, and

c. Increased traction power and signal design to allow reverse train running and to accommodate reduced headway required to integrate light rail with the future BART service.

The above changes to the project scope result in substantial increase to the engineering effort and design deliverables. This amendment in the amount of $8,400,000 will allow for the completion of final construction documents and bid support services for the approved scope of work through March 2021. The contract history is as follows:

Board Action

Scope of Services Amount Authorized (millions)

Amount Contracted (millions)

05/04/2017 EBRC Final Design Award $14.10 $14.10 08/09/2018 Increased Design Services $0.32* $0.32 08/01/2019 Increase Design Services $8.40 $8.40 8/01/2019 Total $22.82 * Authorized by VTA Administrative Code

ALTERNATIVES:

The VTA Board could choose not to proceed with amending the contract. That action would jeopardize the ability to advance the project as there would be no feasible solution to complete the engineering for the approved project.

7.6

Page 3 of 3

FISCAL IMPACT:

This action will authorize up to $8,400,000 to complete design and engineering services for the EBRC project. Appropriation for this expenditure is included in the FY20 adopted 2000 Measure A Transit Improvement Program Fund Capital Budget. The contract will be funded by a combination of Measure A funds and SB1 local partnership program grant (State).


Based on identifiable subcontracting opportunities, a Small Business Enterprise (SBE) goal of 5.92 % has been established for this contract. BKF has committed to 23.7 % SBE participation on this contract.

Prepared by: Ven Prasad, Engineering Group Manager Memo No. 7041 ATTACHMENTS:

• 7041 _Exhibit A_Location (PDF) • 7041 Exhibit B_SubConsultants (PDF)

7.6

Exhibit A Location Map

Eastridge to BART Regional Connector

7.6.a

EXHIBIT B

Eastridge to BART Regional

Connector

Sub Consultant List

FIRM NAME NAME ROLE LOCATION BKF Engineers (Prime)

Natalina Bernardi Vice President San Jose, CA

HNTB Corporation Darlene Gee Vice President San Jose, CA

Biggs Cardosa Associates Roy Schnabel Principal San Jose, CA

FMG Architects Claudia Guadagne President Oakland, CA

Apex Strategies Eileen Goodwin Principal Santa Cruz, CA

Sierra Engineering Group Jesus Sierra President Fremont, CA

Lamoreaux Associates Steve Lamoreaux Vice President San Jose, CA

YEI Engineers Patrick Mallillin Principal San Jose, CA

Alliance Engineering Consultants

Kenneth Ngai Principal Santa Clara, CA

Callander Associates

Brian Fletcher Principal San Jose, CA

Lerch Bates & Associates Ron Welts Regional Manager Emeryville, CA

PARIKH Consultants Gary Parikh President San Jose, CA

GeoCon Consultants Rick Day Principal Livermore, CA

V&A Consulting Engineers Glenn Wilson Western Regional Manager

Oakland, CA

ICF Mike Davis Principal San Francisco, CA

Hexagon Transportation Consultants

Gary Black President San Jose, CA

7.6.b

Date: July 25, 2019 Current Meeting: August 1, 2019 Board Meeting: September 5, 2019



FROM: Chief Operating Officer, Inez Evans SUBJECT: Roadway Worker Warning System


ACTION ITEM

RECOMMENDATION:

Authorize the General Manager to execute a firm fixed price contract with Protran Technology, a division of Harsco Rail, in the amount of $2,169,234.69 to procure and install the Roadway Worker Warning System (RWWS) and associated equipment for VTA.

BACKGROUND: Providing protection to workers on the light rail right-of-way through various means, ensuring that the safety of our employees, contractors and the public remains VTA’s highest priority. VTA’s Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) and extensive Roadway Worker Protection (RWP) training program specify how employees and contractors conduct work on the light rail system to ensure their safety and the safety of the public. All employees and contractors who conduct work on the right-of-way must attend RWP training, demonstrate the ability to properly set-up and operate work zones, and pass a test indicating they are familiar with the safety rules of working on VTA’s light rail system.

As a result of fatalities and major incidents that have occurred on transit properties throughout California, the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) mandates in General Order 175A Section 6.3.f that transit agencies install an early warning alarm technology for the purpose of protecting roadway workers. These technology-based systems utilize radio and/or Global Positioning System (GPS) data to warn train operators and roadway workers when a train is approaching a work-zone. In addition to existing RWP SOPs, this technology-based system will provide another layer of safety to the workers and will warn work crews when a train approaches, often before the flagger or Employee-in-Charge can visually see the train. This

7.7

Page 2 of 3

is particularly important in areas with limited visibility, such as the Diridon Station Tunnel.

In 2012, VTA was one of the first transit agencies in California to conduct a preliminary real-world test of the Roadway Worker Warning System (RWWS). During these tests, the technology that was installed failed to deliver consistent warning times to staff on the right-of-way, and VTA deemed the technology too immature for implementation. Since these early tests, RWWS technology has matured extensively and is being implemented across California to meet GO 175A requirements. As technology reached maturity in 2017, VTA pursued funding for the RWWS. In mid-2018, VTA began the Request for Proposals (RFP) process for the RWWS, including an extensive real-world testing requirement for each offeror to ensure successful system performance in VTA’s unique operating environment.

DISCUSSION:

The recommended RWWS will provide an advanced warning to the Light Rail Vehicle (LRV) operator and the railway worker. The LRV operator will have a warning device mounted on the dash inside the operating cab. This device warns the operator as they approach workers on the right-of-way. Similarly, wayside workers will have a device worn on their arm that audibly and visually gives them an advanced warning of an approaching train. The system uses radio communication to provide a minimum 15 seconds warning before the train arrives at the workers location. The workers then move to a place of safety before the train’s arrival. Once all workers are in the place of safety, the train can proceed through the work zone.

VTA received four proposals for the RWWS. Two proposals were rejected because they did not meet the technical requirements of the solicitation. VTA tested the remaining two RWWS proposals in early 2019, utilizing a performance-based approach to scoring each system on a variety of factors. The testing was completed at night after revenue service. Both systems were installed onto VTA light rail vehicles and tested on VTA’s right-of-way. Simulated work zones were set up across the VTA light rail system and staff, along with CPUC observers, indicated the performance of each system. Following extensive discussions with VTA staff and review from key stakeholders in the Operations, Maintenance, Training and Safety and Compliance Departments, the Protran system was selected as meeting VTA’s requirements. The Protran system is a proven technology installed by other rail transit agencies in California and offers the safety technology-based approach to warning roadway workers of an approaching LRV.

CPUC granted VTA a 2-year extension until November 7, 2019 to implement an early warning alarm technology. The RWWS implementation involves installing components onto VTA’s light rail vehicles and in certain locations on the right-of-way. While Protran has demonstrated that the installation of the LRV and wayside equipment can be done in a timely manner upon award of the Contract, Protran must procure certain components having lead times up to eight (8) weeks. In anticipation of the November 7, 2019 deadline for implementation of the RWWS, VTA is aggressively pursuing approval and implementation of this system in order to meet the General Order regulations. Failure to implement this system prior to November 7, 2019 may result in findings and citations from the CPUC or other regulatory action, up to and including

7.7

Page 3 of 3

the inability to conduct work while tracks are in-service or the closure of the light rail system for maintenance activities.

ALTERNATIVES:

The technology-based Roadway Worker Protection System is required by CPUC General Order (GO) 175A. VTA has no other alternative but to implement a technology-based system to remain compliant with CPUC regulations. VTA received an extension until November 7, 2019 to implement this system.


Based on review of the scope, no Small Business Enterprise (SBE) goal has been set.

FISCAL IMPACT:

This action will authorize up to $2,169,234.69 for a firm fixed-price contract to procure and install the Roadway Worker Warning System (RWWS). Appropriation for this expenditure is included in the FY2020 Adopted VTA Transit Fund Capital Budget.

Prepared by: Daniel Hecht Memo No. 7052

7.7

Government Section Code 84308

Attachment _A__

ROADWAY WORKER WARNING SYSTEM

List of Contractor(s)

(Board Memo #7052)

Firm Name Name Role Location

Protran Technology, a

Division of Harsco Rail

Allen Branham

Vice President – NA

Region & Global

Contracting

3440 Toringdon

Way, Suite 100

Charlotten, NC

28777

mcGraw_A

Text Box

7.7.a




FROM: Chief Operating Officer, Inez Evans SUBJECT: Route 65 Ridership Campaign Results

Policy-Related Action: Yes Government Code Section 84308 Applies: No

ACTION ITEM

RECOMMENDATION:

Confirm the discontinuation of Route 65 service per the 2019 New Transit Service Plan, as adopted on May 2, 2019. BACKGROUND:

At its May 2019 meeting, the VTA Board adopted the final 2019 New Transit Service Plan for implementation in late 2019, coincident with the opening of the BART extension to Berryessa. The final plan included the discontinuation of Route 65 due to low ridership, which generated considerable feedback in the community engagement process. As a condition of the service plan’s adoption, the Board directed staff to work with the Route 65 community to market the service in an attempt to increase its ridership, then report the results back to the Board.

DISCUSSION:

Route 65 (Kooser & Meridian - 13th & Hedding) is a local bus route that operates on weekdays only. The service spans from 5:45 a.m. to 7:57 p.m., and arrives every 45 minutes during peak hours and every 60 minutes during midday hours. Major destinations along this route include San Jose State University, San Jose City College, Diridon Station, Joyce Ellington Library, Northside Community Center, and Princeton Plaza. The route also serves residents of Downtown San Jose, and the Willow Glen and Cambrian neighborhoods of San Jose.

Since its inception, Route 65 has had low ridership, carrying an average of less than 490 boardings per day since 2009, and ridership has been noticeably declining since mid-2016. While VTA's bus network is experiencing declining ridership systemwide, Route 65's ridership is declining at a faster rate. While systemwide bus ridership (boardings) fell 15% from 2016 to

7.8

Page 2 of 4

today, Route 65 ridership fell 20% over the same period. Similarly, while systemwide bus productivity (boardings per hour) fell 17% from 2016 to today, Route 65 productivity fell 22% over the same period (Attachment A).

Most importantly, in the most recent 12 months (June 2018 to May 2019), Route 65 has averaged 501 boardings per day and 12.2 boardings per hour, well below VTA’s minimum productivity standard of 15 boardings per hour.

While staff considered preserving Route 65 at reduced service levels in the original Next Network plan adopted in 2017, it was ultimately proposed to be discontinued when additional reductions to low ridership (coverage) routes became necessary for the 2019 New Transit Service Plan (Attachment B shows the Route 65 staff analysis that accompanied the May 2 Board action). As a condition of the plan’s adoption, the Board directed VTA staff to engage in marketing efforts the Route 65 community and attempt to increase its ridership and report the results back to the Board in late summer.

Route 65 Marketing Campaign

In collaboration with advocates from the Cambrian and San Jose State University communities, VTA staff developed a broad marketing campaign to engage new riders and increase ridership on Route 65.

VTA staff created various digital and printed collateral for the promotion, including:

• A dedicated campaign landing page (try.vta.org/line65) including route information, major destinations along the route, and information about free fares and how to participate

• Single panel flyer “seat drops” on buses covering Route 65, advertising the promotion and listing/mapping popular destinations along the route

• Direct Mail pieces sent to residents within a ½-mile from bus stops along the route

• Billboards advertising the promotion, placed at five (5) locations along Route 65

• Geofenced digital ads and social media ads targeting residents and commuters within a ½-mile from bus stops along the route

• Online “eblasts” to advocates, community members, elected officials and other stakeholders with messaging about Route 65 and its major destinations

• Two “Try Line 65” commercials featuring two destinations along the route - Hapa’s Brewery and Mesquite & Oak Barbeque

• Direct communication with the Cambrian Community Council and the Northside Community Center to inform members of this ridership campaign

Community advocates involved in the campaign also committed their time and effort in various promotional activities, including:

7.8

Page 3 of 4

• Distribution of the above collateral provided by VTA to channels managed by community members and stakeholders, including senior centers, government offices and libraries, public schools, places of worship, and shopping centers

• Promotion of the campaign's digital collateral on nextdoor.com and social media

• A ridealong to kickoff the Route 65 campaign on June 4, led by San Jose District 9 staff and advocates from the Cambrian community

• Budget proposal to allocate funds to this ridership campaign in the San Jose Mayor’s Budget (though the proposal was ultimately not funded)

Staff will report on other events that take place following the writing of this memo at the August 1 Board meeting.

Fare-Free Rides Promotion

A unique feature of this marketing campaign included offering riders ten free rides on Route 65 during the month of June. New riders were able to claim this promotion by either visiting the Route 65 Campaign landing page (try.vta.org/line65) and filling out a request form, visiting the VTA Downtown Customer Service Center, or by calling VTA Customer Service.

Route 65 Campaign Effectiveness & Ridership Results

The effectiveness of marketing free rides on Route 65 during the month of June was well-received by the community. As of June 26:

• Direct Mail pieces were mailed to 57,324 addresses, all within a ½-mile of bus stops along the route

• The try.vta.org/line65 campaign web page generated visits from 1,750 unique users

• Over 100 new rider email list subscribers were added

• 191 Clipper Cards preloaded for the campaign were registered and 206 EZfare promotional codes were requested. Of those requests, 116 users downloaded the EZfare promotion

o 74 users activated EZfare for their first time on Route 65

o 36 of those users activated EZfare a second time on Route 65

Initial ridership results as of the writing of this memo were not positive, though staff will

present results for the entire campaign to the Board at the August 1 Board meeting. Results will be compared to the same period in previous years to determine if an upward trend was achieved as a result of the campaign. Unless Board action is taken to add Route 65 into the adopted service plan, the service will be discontinued when VTA transitions to the new service in late 2019.

ALTERNATIVES:

7.8

Page 4 of 4

Alternatively, the Board could direct staff to add Route 65 service into the new service plan (at the lower service level as originally adopted in the Next Network service plan). The addition would increase annual service hours by 7,017 at an annual marginal cost of approximately $830,000. A detail map of Route 65 in the new transit service plan is shown in Attachment C.

FISCAL IMPACT:

Confirming the discontinuation of Route 65 per the adopted New Transit Service Plan, as recommended by staff, would have no fiscal impact. However, if the Board decides to add Route 65 to the Plan, the addition would increase annual service hours by 7,017 at an annual marginal cost of approximately $830,000.

Prepared by: Janice Soriano Memo No. 7011 ATTACHMENTS:

• Attachment A - Route 65 Average Weekday Boardings (PDF) • Attachment B - Discussion of Route 65 (PDF) • Attachment C - Route 65 Concept Map (PDF)

7.8

Attachment A: Route 65 Average Weekday Boardings & Boardings per Hour

Page 1

Figure 1. Route 65 Average Weekday Boardings (12-month Rolling Average), 2009-2019

Figure 2. Route 65 Average Weekday Boardings per Hour (12-month Rolling Average), 2014-2019

7.8.a

Attachment B: Discussion of Route 65

Page 1

DISCUSSION OF ROUTE 65 (DOWNTOWN SAN JOSE – LEIGH AVENUE) Route 65 provides service between Kooser & Blossom Hill and Downtown San Jose via Leigh Avenue on weekdays. The route has low ridership and does not meet VTA’s minimum productivity standard (boardings per hour). After proposing to discontinue the route in the Next Network draft plan and receiving community support to retain the route, the Next Network final plan included Route 65 service but at a reduced service level (by discontinuing service north of San Fernando and reducing frequency from every 45 minutes to every 60 minutes).

Due to the need to make additional coverage (low ridership routes) reductions in the 2019 New Transit Service Plan, the draft plan proposed to discontinue the route due to very low ridership and productivity. Although staff again received many comments from community members and San Jose State University students concerned about the loss of Route 65 service, the final plan does not include Route 65 service.

As shown below, Route 65 service does not currently have sufficient ridership to meet VTA’s minimum standard for productivity. Staff projected ridership on the Next Network proposed service on the route to determine whether the revised route would meet VTA’s standard. As shown, ridership would decline due to the reduction in service. Again, the projected service would not have sufficient ridership to meet VTA’s minimum productivity standard. Staff are aware of future developments slated for the corridor and will monitor their progress, with the hope that someday the corridor will develop to a sufficient density to support transit service.

Route 65 Service

Current Service Next Network Service

Kooser & Blossom Hill – Downtown San Jose (13th & Hedding) via Leigh

Kooser & Blossom Hill – Downtown San Jose (6th & San Fernando) via Leigh

Daily Boardings: 535

Daily Service Hours: 41

Boardings per Hour: 13.1

(VTA minimum 15)

Annual Operating Cost: $1.25 million (FY19 marginal)

Daily Boardings: 339

Daily Service Hours: 28

Boardings per Hour: 12.3

(VTA minimum 15)

Annual Operating Cost: $830,000 (FY19 marginal)

7.8.b

Attachment C: Route 65 Concept Map

7.8.c




FROM: Chief Planning and Engineering Officer, Carolyn M. Gonot SUBJECT: Caltrain Business Plan Update


BACKGROUND:

Caltrain provides commuter regional rail service and connects more than 65,000 passengers to job and housing in San Francisco, San Mateo, and Santa Clara counties. Caltrain is in the process of developing their Business Plan, an in-depth technical and policy document that will set the direction for their future. The Caltrain Business Plan is a joint effort with agency partners and communities along the corridor to plan for growth. The Business Plan will help Caltrain develop a better understanding of the region’s future transportation needs and will identify opportunities and strategies for how the Caltrain system can help. Caltrain staff will provide an update on this effort at the August 1, 2019 Board of Directors’ meeting. Prepared By: Board Office Memo No. 7032

7.9




FROM: Acting Chief - BART Delivery Program, Dennis Ratcliffe SUBJECT: Silicon Valley Rapid Transit (SVRT) Program Update


Silicon Valley Berryessa Extension Project

BART assumed jurisdictional control over the completed extension on from VTA June 3, 2019. VTA continues Phase II testing while BART conducts its Phase III testing. To complete Phase II and Phase III testing during this period, VTA and BART share the work area by alternating their work schedules. Generally, with traction power energized for Phase III testing by BART and not-energized for Phase II testing by VTA in the off-hours. Traction power systems are essentially 100% complete, and operating to support BART Phase II testing. VTA continues to work through testing discrepancies to complete Phase II testing. VTA contractors and BART personnel are conducting on-site training. BART has begun hiring Operations and Maintenance Personnel. VTA’s project team has identified a solution for completing the Railroad Intrusion Detection System (RIDS) which has experienced persistent testing discrepancies. The RIDS system detects potential intrusion of freight trains into the BART operating corridor. The proposed solution will replace the one problematic zone of the five zones in the system, is readily available, and will support a timely passenger service date. FTA continues to exercise oversight of Project testing activities, and the combined teams continue to work towards a passenger service date before the end of this year. Phase II Extension Activities

FTA Funding

On June 24th, Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Acting Administrator K. Jane Williams announced that FTA will begin discussions with Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority

8.1.C

Page 2 of 2

(VTA) regarding participation in the Expedited Project Delivery (EPD) Pilot Program. This positions VTA’s BART Phase II extension to obtain a federal funding commitment more quickly than under the traditional capital improvement grant program. VTA’s project team is well underway in preparing the necessary project information to make its formal funding request under the program next year. Engineering

VTA’s General Engineering Consultant MMW JV is mobilized into the project office and has begun the necessary engineering work to inform VTA’s EPD application. The project team continues to meet with Key stakeholders and community groups as project information develops. Planning and Project Coordination

Staff continued coordinating planning and outreach efforts with the City of San José and City of Santa Clara through recurring monthly meetings. Notable areas of coordination include Areas of the Transit Oriented Communities Study and Station Access Studies. Field Investigations Outreach Activities to Date

As the General Engineering Consultant ramps up their engineering effort, additional field investigations are being arranged. General and targeted stakeholder communications continues throughout the project alignment through meetings and distributed information including:

• Construction notices sent to project stakeholders and Community Working Group members with the ask to share the information with their networks; • Door-to-door outreach to stakeholders two-weeks in advance of targeted field work; • 72-hour outreach to stakeholders in advance of targeted field work; • Updating the project website to include the construction map and notices for current and upcoming field work; and • Social media posts about field work.

Planning for Transit Oriented Communities

Staff is currently creating awareness within the community for the Transit Oriented Communities (TOC) Strategy Study’s fall release of recommended strategies, which includes intensive public and stakeholder engagement. During May 2019, staff provided briefings to the Mineta Transportation Institute and Silicon Valley Leadership Group. with presentations to the VTA Board and City Councils in fall of 2019. Communications

As part of VTA’s website redesign, a section of the website will be dedicated to the BART Silicon Valley Program. The layout and information included on the project is based on “user centered” design; meaning that we are building the site/section based on what project website visitors have shared or demonstrated is relevant, intuitive and helpful. Prepared By: Dennis O. Ratcliffe, Deputy Director-SVRT/BART Capital Program Memo No. 6780

8.1.c

mcGraw_A

Typewritten Text

mcGraw_A

Typewritten Text

mcGraw_A

Typewritten Text

mcGraw_A

Typewritten Text

mcGraw_A

Typewritten Text

mcGraw_A

Typewritten Text

mcGraw_A

Typewritten Text

mcGraw_A

Typewritten Text

mcGraw_A

Typewritten Text

mcGraw_A

Typewritten Text

TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE

Wednesday, June 12, 2019

NOTICE OF CANCELLATION

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority Technical Advisory Committee meeting scheduled for Wednesday, June 12, 2019, at 1:30 p.m. has been cancelled. The next meeting of the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority Technical Advisory Committee is scheduled for July 10, 2019, at 1:30 p.m. in Conference Room B-106, Building B, 3331 North First Street, San Jose, California.

Michael Diaresco, Board Assistant VTA Office of the Board Secretary

8.4.b

Technical Advisory Committee (TAC)

Minutes of July 10, 2019


8.4.b

CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE

and

2000 MEASURE A CITIZENS WATCHDOG COMMITTEE

Wednesday, June 12, 2019 & Wednesday, July 10, 2019

NOTICE OF CANCELLATION NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority Citizens Advisory Committee and 2000 Measure A Citizens Watchdog Committee Meetings scheduled for Wednesday, June 12, 2019, and Wednesday, July 10, 2019, at 4:00 p.m. have been cancelled. The next meeting of the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority Citizens Advisory Committee and 2000 Measure A Citizens Watchdog Committee is scheduled for Wednesday, August 7, 2019, at 4:00 p.m. in Conference Room B-106, Building B, 3331 North First Street, San Jose, California. Anita McGraw, Board Assistant VTA Office of the Board Secretary

8.4.b

BICYCLE & PEDESTRIAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE

Wednesday, June 12, 2019


NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority Bicycle & Pedestrian Advisory Committee meeting scheduled for Wednesday, June 12, 2019, at 6:30 p.m. has been cancelled. The next regular meeting of the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority Bicycle & Pedestrian Advisory Committee is scheduled for Wednesday, July 10, 2019, at 6:30 p.m. held at VTA River Oaks Campus, Conference Room B-106, 3331 North First Street, San José, California.

Thalia Young, Board Assistant VTA Office of the Board Secretary

8.4.b

Bicycle & Pedestrian Advisory Committee Wednesday, July 10, 2019

MINUTES

CALL TO ORDER

The Regular Meeting of the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee (BPAC) was called to order at 6:30 p.m. by Chairperson Stallman in Conference Room B-106, Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA), 3331 North First Street, San José, California.

1. ROLL CALL

Attendee Name Title Representing StatusNeil Berman Member City of Morgan Hill PresentKristal Caidoy Member City of Milpitas PresentBarry Chaffin Member City of Monte Sereno PresentSusan Cretekos Member Town of Los Altos Hills PresentPeter Hertan Member Town of Los Gatos PresentErik Lindskog Member City of Cupertino PresentRobert Neff Vice Chairperson City of Palo Alto PresentRafael Rius Member City of Santa Clara AbsentCarolyn Schimandle Member City of Gilroy PresentDavid Simons Member City of Sunnyvale AbsentJim Stallman Chairperson City of Saratoga PresentPaul Tuttle Member City of Campbell PresentGreg Unangst Member City of Mountain View PresentHerman Wadler Member County of Santa Clara PresentVacant Member City of Los Altos n/aVacant Member City of San José n/aJohn Cordes Ex-Officio SV Bicycle Coalition PresentShiloh Ballard Alt. Ex-Officio SV Bicycle Coalition Absent


2. ORDERS OF THE DAY

There were no Orders of the Day.

Member Schimandle arrived and took her seat at 6:32 p.m.

3. PUBLIC PRESENTATIONS

Stacy Smith, Interested Citizen, commented on enforcement of riding bikes on platforms.

Brandon Alvarado, San José BPAC, commented on a recent bicycle fatality in San José.

8.4.b

Bicycle & Pedestrian Advisory Committee Minutes Page 2 of 6 July 10, 2019

4. Committee Staff Report

Lauren Ledbetter, Senior Transportation Planner and Staff Liaison, provided an overview of the written staff report, highlighting the following: 1) Launch of VTA Beta Website; 2) Bay Area Metro Awards; 3) Federal Transit Administration’s (FTA) Expedited Project Delivery pilot program; and 4) Association of Pedestrian and Bicycle Professionals (APBP) Monthly Webinar on July 17, 2019, on “Return on Investment for Active Transportation.”

On order of Chairperson Stallman, and there being no objection, the Committee received the Committee Staff Report.

5. Santa Clara County Staff Report

Ben Aghegnehu, Santa Clara County Associate Transportation Planner, provided an overview of the written staff report, highlighting the following: 1) Interstate 280/Page Mill Road and Foothill Expressway Auxiliary Lane project updates; 2) Eastridge to BART Regional Connector update; 3) Capitol Expressway Intelligent Traffic Systems (ITS) and Sidewalk project update; 4) Silicon Valley Bike Coalition Infrastructure Ride; and 5) Bike Accommodation Guidelines presentations to Sunnyvale and Gilroy BPACs.

On order of Chairperson Stallman, and there being no objection, the Committee received the Santa Clara County Staff Report.

6. Chairperson’s Report

Chairperson Stallman provided a brief report, highlighting the following: 1) Bay Trail 30th anniversary; 2) bike projects; and 3) Silicon Valley Bike Summit.

CONSENT AGENDA

7. Regular Meeting Minutes of May 8, 2019

M/S/C (Wadler/Schimandle) to approve the Regular Meeting Minutes of May 8, 2019. Member Cretekos Abstained.

RESULT: ADOPTED MOVER: Herman Wadler, Member SECONDER: Carolyn Schimandle, Member AYES: Berman, Caidoy, Chaffin, Hertan, Lindskog, Neff, Schimandle,

Stallman, Tuttle, Unangst, Wadler NOES: None ABSTAIN: Cretekos ABSENT: Rius, Simons

NOTE: M/S/C MEANS MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED AND, UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED,

THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.

8.4.b


REGULAR AGENDA

8. Elect the Committee’s Vice Chairperson for the Remainder of 2019

Elaine Baltao, Board Secretary, provided a brief overview of the election process, noting Members Unangst and Wadler expressed interest in becoming Vice Chairperson for the remainder of 2019.

Chairperson Stallman opened the floor for additional nominations for the position of BPAC Vice Chairperson. Member Hertan nominated Member Neff.

Member Wadler withdrew his name for the position of Vice Chairperson.

M/S/C (Hertan/Caidoy) to close the nominations.

RESULT: APPROVED to close nominations MOVER: Peter Hertan, Member SECONDER: Kristal Caidoy, Member AYES: Berman, Caidoy, Chaffin, Cretekos, Hertan, Lindskog, Neff,

Schimandle, Stallman, Tuttle, Unangst, Wadler NOES: None ABSENT: Rius, Simons

On a vote of 10 ayes to 2 noes to elect Member Neff as the BPAC Vice Chairperson for the remainder of 2019. Members Chaffin and Neff opposed.

RESULT: Elected Member Neff AYES: Berman, Caidoy, Cretekos, Hertan, Lindskog, Schimandle, Stallman,

Tuttle, Unangst, Wadler NOES: Chaffin, Neff ABSENT: Rius, Simons

On a vote of 2 ayes to 10 noes to elect Member Unangst as the BPAC Vice Chairperson for the remainder of 2019. Members Berman, Caidoy, Cretekos, Hertan, Lindskog, Schimandle, Stallman, Tuttle, and Wadler opposed.

RESULT: FAILED AYES: Chaffin, Neff NOES: Berman, Caidoy, Cretekos, Hertan, Lindskog, Schimandle, Stallman,

Tuttle, Unangst, Wadler ABSENT: Rius, Simons

NOTE: M/S/F MEANS MOTION SECONDED AND FAILED.

8.4.b


9. Regionally Significant Projects Submission

John Sighamony, Senior Transportation Planner, provided an overview of the staff report.

Public Comment

Monica Mallon, Interested Citizen, expressed concern with the number of highway projects.

Members of the Committee made the following comments: 1) expressed concern about the low number of bicycle and transit projects; and 2) working with Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) Members to add projects to the list.

M/S/C (Neff/Wadler) on a vote of 11 ayes to 0 noes to 1 abstention to recommend that the VTA Board of Directors adopt the Regionally Significant Projects for inclusion in the update to Metropolitan Transportation Committee (MTC) and Association of Bay Area Governments’ (ABAG’s) Plan Bay Area 2050. Further, the Committee recommended the Board add the following: 1) projects to study and implement grade separation; 2) realignment of transit for speed; 3) an aggressive priority program for light rail and buses in downtown San José and along all major commuter corridors; and 4) regionally significant bicycle projects found in the Countywide Bike Plan. Member Hertan abstained.

RESULT: ADOPTED MOVER: Robert Neff, Vice Chairperson SECONDER: Herman Wadler, Member AYES: Berman, Caidoy, Chaffin, Cretekos, Lindskog, Neff, Schimandle,

Stallman, Tuttle, Unangst, Wadler NOES: None ABSTAIN: Hertan ABSENT: Rius, Simons

10. 2016 Measure B Bicycle/Pedestrian Capital Projects Competitive Grant Program Criteria

Jane Shinn, Senior Management Analyst, provided a presentation titled, “2016 Measure B Bicycle/Pedestrian Capital Projects Competitive Grant Program Criteria.”

Public Comment

Mr. Alvarado encouraged the Committee to consider raising the points for Criterion 9 - Targets Populations with Specific Needs.

Members of the Committee had a robust discussion on the following: 1) frequency of transit; and 2) distribution of points for scoring.

8.4.b


M/S/F (Berman/Wadler) on a vote of 4 ayes to 7 noes to 1 abstention to recommend that the VTA Board of Directors approve the criteria of the 2016 Measure B Bicycle/Pedestrian Capital Projects Competitive Grant Program. Further the Committee made the following additions: 1) Criterion 1 - Connections to/Serves Schools, Transit or Employment Centers to use 30 minutes frequency instead of 15 minutes frequency; and 2) add 5 points to Criterion 9 - Targets Populations with Specific Needs. Members Chaffin, Hertan, Lindskog, Neff, Schimandle, Tuttle, and Unangst opposed. Member Caidoy abstained.

RESULT: FAILED MOVER: Neil Berman, Member SECONDER: Herman Wadler, Member AYES: Berman, Cretekos, Stallman, Wadler NOES: Chaffin, Hertan, Lindskog, Neff, Schimandle, Tuttle, Unangst ABSTAIN: Caidoy ABSENT: Rius, Simons

M/S/F (Hertan/Unangst) on a vote of 8 ayes to 4 noes to recommend that the VTA Board of Directors approve the criteria of the 2016 Measure B Bicycle/Pedestrian Capital Projects Competitive Grant Program. Members Stallman, Wadler, Berman, Schimandle opposed.

RESULT: FAILED MOVER: Peter Hertan, Member SECONDER: Greg Unangst, Member AYES: Caidoy, Chaffin, Cretekos, Hertan, Lindskog, Neff, Tuttle, Unangst NOES: Berman, Schimandle, Stallman, Wadler ABSENT: Rius, Simons

M/S/C (Schimandle/Wadler) on a vote of 10 ayes to 1 no to 1 abstention to recommend that the VTA Board of Directors approve the criteria of the 2016 Measure B Bicycle/Pedestrian Capital Projects Competitive Grant Program. Further, the Committee requested that 5 points be added to Criterion 9 - Targets Populations with Specific Needs for a total 10 points. Member Chaffin opposed. Member Berman abstained.

RESULT: APPROVED MOVER: Carolyn Schimandle, Member SECONDER: Herman Wadler, Member AYES: Caidoy, Cretekos, Hertan, Lindskog, Neff, Schimandle, Stallman,

Tuttle, Unangst, Wadler NOES: Chaffin ABSTAIN: Berman ABSENT: Rius, Simons

8.4.b


OTHER

11. Reports from BPAC Subcommittees

Best Practices for Transit Operators Training Chairperson Stallman recommended disbanding the subcommittee.

Across Barrier Connections The subcommittee will provide items at a future meeting.

12. BPAC Work Plan

Ms. Ledbetter provided an overview of the work plan and provided a list of queue items. Ms. Ledbetter noted the September meeting may be a workshop to discuss VTA projects with project manager.

The Committee added the following items to the work plan: 1) Interstate 280/Page Mill Road project update; and 2) State Route (SR) 237 eastbound lane.

On order of Chairperson Stallman, and there being no objection, the Committee reviewed the BPAC Work Plan.

13. ANNOUNCEMENTS

Ex-Officio Member Cordes encouraged Members to consult with their city staff and city BPAC for projects to be submitted for 2016 Measure B funds.

Member Wadler discussed the Tour de Cure, which took place in June 2019.

Vice Chairperson Neff announced that the bicycle and pedestrian bridge from Palo Alto to the East Palo Alto IKEA over Highway 101 opened in May 2019.

Member Unangst informed the Committee about the Bike Coalition Summit in August in the City of Mountain View which will include infrastructure rides.

Chairperson Stallman made the following announcements: 1) state parks always have a camp site available for cyclists; 2) goat head season; and 3) station planning for the SR 85 corridor with a new bus lane will be studied by VTA at the direction of the SR 85 Policy Advisory Board (PAB).

14. ADJOURNMENT

On order of Chairperson Stallman and there being no objection, the meeting was adjourned at 8:28 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Thalia Young, Board Assistant VTA Office of the Board Secretary

8.4.b

POLICY ADVISORY COMMITTEE



NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority Policy Advisory Committee meeting scheduled for Thursday, June 13, 2019, at 4:00 p.m. has been cancelled. The next meeting of the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority Policy Advisory Committee is scheduled for July 11, 2019, at 4:00 p.m. in Conference Room B-106, Building B, 3331 North First Street, San Jose, California.

Michael Diaresco, Board Assistant VTA Office of the Board Secretary

8.4.b

POLICY ADVISORY COMMITTEE

Thursday, July 11, 2019


NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority Policy Advisory Committee meeting scheduled for Thursday, July 11, 2019, at 4:00 p.m. has been cancelled. The next meeting of the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority Policy Advisory Committee is scheduled for August 8, 2019, at 4:00 p.m. in Conference Room B-106, Building B, 3331 North First Street, San Jose, California.

Theadora Abraham, Board Assistant VTA Office of the Board Secretary

8.4.b

COMMITTEE FOR TRANSPORTATION MOBILITY AND

ACCESSIBILITY

Thursday, July 11, 2019


NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority Committee for Transportation Mobility and Accessibility Meeting scheduled for Thursday, July 11, 2019, at 10:00 a.m. has been cancelled. The next meeting of the Committee for Transportation Mobility and Accessibility is scheduled for September 12, 2019, at 10:00 a.m. in Room B-106, VTA River Oaks Campus, Building B, 3331 North First Street, San Jose, California.

Anita McGraw, Board Assistant VTA Office of the Board Secretary

8.4.b

Documents

Agenda - Thursday, August 1, 2019 - Granicus