Related Links

The Regular Meeting of the Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee (BPAC) was called to order at 6:13 p.m. by Chairperson Sullivan in Room B-104, VTA, 3331 North First Street, San Jose, California.

ROLL CALL

Members Present
Eric Anderson
Bob Eltgroth
David Kobayashi
Bill Reisinger
Curt Riffle
David Simons
Jim Stallman
Bart Thielges
Herman Wadler. Jr.
Joseph Walton
John Sullivan, Chairperson

Members Absent
Marc Jensen, Vice Chairperson
Al Slechta
Mahmoud Kamangar

A quorum was present.

John D. Carpenter, Interested Citizen, queried if the Baby Bullet train will have a connectivity to San Jose, and if not is anything being planned for the future and requested an update in the Committee Staff Report.

Member Walton took his seat at 6:15 p.m.

Chairperson Sullivan stated that Staff is aware that there are areas that are not well served by the bus network that is available at this time and that the schedule for the Baby Bullet train will most likely be delayed.

Mike Aro, Service and Operations Planning Deputy Director, stated that staff is working closely with Caltrain on the Baby Bullet train Schedule and that bus stops at individual stations that will not be changing.

Member Simons took his seat at 6:18 p.m.

M/S/C (Walton/Simons) to approve the Minutes of January 7, 2004.   Member Riffle abstained.

Carolyn Gonot, Chief Development Office and Staff Liaison, stated that Member Stallman has been working with staff on the Regional Bicycle & Pedestrian Program, which was adopted by Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) as part of the Regional Transportation Plan Policy Program.  At the present time VTA is in the process of reviewing the Countywide Plan and the update, which is based on investment targets which MTC provides.  The investment target for the next twenty-five years is lower than originally projected a few years ago due to the change in the economy and the growth of the Regional Programs.

Ms. Gonot explained that the Regional Bicycle & Pedestrian Program, which is new, takes $200 million off of the top within the Region.   With the loss of the $200 million, as well as all of the additional Regional Programs, expansions and the shortfalls that have affected the Local Streets and Transit there are no discretionary monies available through State Transportation Program Congestion Mitigation Air Quality (STPCMAQ), which is what VTA uses to fund the bicycle projects or the allocation for the bicycle projects for this County.   The Country's share of the $200 million would be about 50 million.

When MTC provides an investment target, it show monies that are state and federal dollars, typically what are called the Congestion Mitigation Air Quality (CMAQ), of which a portion is earmarked for bicycle projects. At this time there are no CMAQ funding coming down to the Counties.  Santa Clara County over 30 yrs will receive 7 million but it will not show up for a while.

The Congestion Management Agency (CMA) has no desire go in the direction of the Regional Bicycle Programming but supports each County programming the bicycle funding.

There is discussion as to what should be done with the $200 million, whether it is fully competitive at the regional level and if MTC gets the money based on discretion, then Santa Clara County would receive half of what would normally be received. 

Ms. Gonot noted that there has been a lot of discussion regarding trying to get the funding back on population basis or shares back to the counties which with the cycle and programming, the County would get a different amount.   Ms. Gonot also noted that it has been said at the regional level that there is a set of bicycle advocates who want the funding to be regionally competitive. 

Celia Chung, stated that Member Stallman was present at a meeting last week wherein he advised that he would be more supportive of having more CMA/local control the funds rather than having it at the regional competitive level.

Member Anderson queried as to the timing on the programming cycle and Ms. Gonot responded that it is very quick.

Member Walton queried if MTC was to assume region responsibility the projects that already have funding allocated to them what would happen to those projects.   Ms. Gonot responded that the commitment on the 10-year program would be retained and try to deliver all of those projects.   On the 30-year plan, there would be any or very little money specifically for bicycles and what would be set for bicycles would be at the regional level.  Ms. Gonot stated that policies would be need to examined to make sure they would continue.  Ms. Gonot noted that all of the funding for Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) projects is gone at the regional level.

Member Eltgroth requested a presentation from MTC regarding the Regional Bicycle and Pedestrian Program.

Ms. Chung noted that there is a regular regional bike working group that MTC has convened; they have quarterly meeting and that she would be e-mailing the VTA BPAC Committee the particulars.

Member Eltgroth requested slip sheets be provided in future Agenda Packets for the Staff Report and Chairpersons Report. 

On order of Chairperson Sullivan, there being no objection, the Committee Staff Report was received.

Chairperson Anderson reported that the Board of Supervisors requested County Roads and Airport Staff produce a report on pedestrian use on expressways, which will be presented to Board Supervisors Gage and McHugh on Thursday, February 12, 2004,  9:30 a.m. 70 West Hedding Street, San Jose, California.

Chairperson Anderson stated that he has had a chance to review the report and that staff is continuing their justification of pedestrian restriction on the expressways.

On order of Chairperson Anderson, there being no objection, the Chairpersons Report was received.

Ms. Gonot introduced Matthew O. Tucker,VTA's recently appointed Chief Operations Officer.

Mr. Aro distributed the following documents entitled Tasman East/Capitol Extension Map, Existing Light Rail, Proposed Light Rail Operating Plan, Proposed Bus Route Changes, and Description of Bus Rout Changes.

Mr. Aro reported that the Tasman East line will be opening at the end of June 2004 or beginning of July 2004.  The extension starts at the Baypointe Station and extends down to south of Alum Rock Ave and includes the Great Mall Station in Milpitas.  Mr. Aro noted that the 1.75 mile segment between the Baypointe Station and I-880 Station opened in May 2003 is already in operation. 

Mr. Aro referenced to the document entitled Tasman East/Capitol Extension, which outlines the existing service that is currently operating and and the extension.

Mr. Aro call the Committee's attention to existing light rail noting that currently there are three lines currently in operation, which are the Tasman West Line from Mountain View to the I-880 Station traveling east to west, Guadalupe Line from Santa Teresa to I-880 transfer station north, traveling in the median of Highway 87, through Downtown San Jose and down First Street, and the Almaden Shuttle, which operates from Almaden Station to the Ohlone-Chynoweth Station.  Mr. Aro noted that Almaden Shuttle is a 1.2-mile extension primarily serving the Oakridge Shopping Center and the Almaden Valley.

Mr. Aro reported that the Guadalupe Line is operating on 15- minute intervals throughout the weekday and weekends, and the Tasman West Line is operating at 15 minute on peak hours and operating at 30-minute intervals mid-day and weekends.  Due to the economy and with the loss of over 200,000 jobs in the Silicon Valley, the Tasman West Line mid-day service had to be scaled down.

Mr. Aro reviewed the Proposed Light Rail Operating Plan and stated that the original proposal was that the Tasman East line would to be an extension to the Tasman West line.  Due to the operating conditions on the new extension there will be daily multiple trips, whereas Tasman West has peak hour ridership but not during the day.  The new proposal is to try a higher level of service on the new segment, trips to shopping malls, students going to and from school, and employment centers.  Mr. Aro stated that it was best to tie the Guadalupe Line into the new extension and have the Guadalupe line continue up North First Street, provide the transfer at the Baypointe Station and continue on to Alum Rock.  The Tasman West Line will terminate at the Baypointe Station. 

Mr. Aro reviewed proposed bus route changes and reported that on the west side of the rail line the proposal is that the bus routes will be as they are today but once the new rail line is in revenue service, bus routes will be rerouted to serve some of the stations and in many cases, some of the bus routes will terminate at some of the stations.  On the east side of the rail line, most of the lines will be changed into more of a feeder type network which will loop around the East Foothills and bring passengers into the rail line.

Mr. Aro noted that the three major focal points will be the Great Mall Transit Center, which has 10 bus bays, Penetencia Creek Station, and the Alum Rock Station.

Mr. Aro reported that Line 31 will serve the Alum Rock Light Rail Station from Eastridge, Line 300 will be extended to Eastridge, Line 74, which was the predecessor to light rail, will be eliminated, 17 of the bus routes will be modified to integrate with the light rail systems, and three new shuttle routes will be introduced.

Mr. Aro stated that there has been four community meetings to date with a fourth scheduled for Wednesday, February 11, 2004.  Staff will be reporting to all of the Advisory Committees in the month of February 2004, with preliminary plans have already been presented to the Standing Committees.  The next step will be to analyze the information received at the Committee meetings and from the Community meetings, make necessary revisions and bring it back to the Advisory Committees, Standing Committees. The Board will approve this operation plan at their meeting on April 1, 2004.

Member Simons queried if there is a difference between this line and the previous lines in the system such as intersection preemption.  Mr. Aro responded that the line will have the same features as the other three lines except for the elevated section The Great Mall area and priorities on intersections will be the same as North First where the train does get some priority on some of the intersections.  Mr. Aro preemptions cannot interrupt the same cycle twice.

Member de La Beaujardiere queried if consideration has been given in terms of coordinating the actual light rail schedules with the bus schedules.  Mr. Aro responded that schedules at the at the Great Mall Station, Penetencia Creek Station, and Alum Rock Station will be coordinated with bus schedules.

Member Walton queried if the addition of a station at DeAnza College is still being considered.  Mr. Aro responded that it is included in the Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP) but currently there is not funding available.

Member Anderson queried as to the timeline from the new line to Downtown San Jose.  Mr. Aro responded that end-to-end it is an hour and 15 minutes from the Santa Teresa Station to the Alum Rock Station.

On order of Chairperson Sullivan, there being no objection, the Preliminary Tasman East/Capitol Bus Rail Service Integration Plan.

Stephen Flynn, Senion Management Analyst, stated that several months ago Staff, as a result of a comprehensive review of all VTA Advisory Committees, brought a set of proposed modifications to the BPAC Bylaws to the BPAC Committee, which the Committee approved and the Board of Directors subsequently approved.

At that time, Member Stallman recommended that this Committee serve as the Countywide Pedestrian Advisory Committee for the County of Santa Clara.   The County of Santa Clara has verified that it is their intention to have the VTA BPAC serve as the Countywide Pedestrian Advisory Committee therefore that modification, as well as a few minor modifications now need the Committees approval.

Mr. Flynn stated that to improve the efficiency of appointing members to the PAC, it is being requested that the current schedule for appointing the Chair and Vice Chair from the first meeting of the fiscal year be changed to the first meeting of the calendar year.

Member Anderson requested clarification regarding Section 3.2 entitled Member Terms, when VTA needs information from Member Agencies for new members.   Mr. Flynn responded that December 2004 letters were sent to Member Agencies information that terms for the current members would be expiring June 30, 2004.

Discussion ensued amongst the Members regarding the verbiage on Section 5.4, Quorum; Vote; Committee of the Whole and whether changes to the Section should be made.

Chairperson Sullivan queried if there are other possibilities regarding the nine members or the majority of the members present if and a minimum number could be used instead.

Member Eltgroth called point of order and stated that the query had been called.

M/S/C (Stallman/Simons) on an order of 11 yeas, 1 no and 0 abstentions to recommend the Board of Directors approve the amendment of Bicycle & Pedestrian Advisory Committee Bylaws with the addition that Section 5.4 read: All official acts of the Committee shall require the presence of a quorum and the affirmative vote of a majority of the members present.   Member Anderson opposed the motion.

Member Simons recommended that in a future agenda Chairperson Sullivan and Vice Chairperson Jensen state their interest in serving out their terms in June 2004 or extending the their term to then end of the calendar year. Mr. Simons stated that it might be useful in assisting the Committee in making their decision regarding the term of the current Chairperson and Vice Chairperson.

Ms. Chung reported that at the January 7, 2004 BPAC meeting, staff requested Members approve a recommendation to the Board of Directors to approve a $250 thousand increase for the River Oaks Bicycle and Pedestrian Bridge.   On January 27, 2004, staff met with Caltrans staff to review the environmental requirements and was advised that the environmental process would be inadequate and a more extensive environmental process was needed.  This environmental process would take an additional six months, taking it out to a September 2004 deadline for spending the federal dollars.  Funding was in jeopardy, as well as requiring more trenching.  Given the situation, staff worked to de-federalize the project, replacing the $1 million Federal grant for local money.  A project was identified to allocate the federal money to so the funding wouldnt be lost.   Staff is therefore, proposing a $1 million advance from the current overall $32 million BEP to keep this project moving, to be repaid in the future so that none of the other projects would lose funding.

Member de La Beaujardiere requested Ms. Chung clarify whether a new project has been identified to trade the Transportation for Livable Community (TLC) funds.   Ms. Chung stated that the project is a traffic signal synchronization project through ITS Program.  She explained that funds would be obligated before September but did not have local dollars allocated to that project making the project ineligible to be traded.

Ms. Gonot noted that staff was looking for funding sources such as TEA Funds which are over and above the amount that was guaranteed for the original Bicycle Expenditure Program which would put in $1 million back in the bicycle expenditure program over the next six years.

Member Simons expressed concern regarding money transfers, the future knowing the financial issues with the VTA, and the impact those issues may have have.   Mr. Simons queried what would happen to the status of Tier 1 funding if VTA were to default in certain situations and what is and is not guaranteed with regard to funding for projects.    Ms. Gonot responded that there is a firewall between the funds that can be programmed by the Congestion Management Agency (CMA) and what is programmed for operations.  Ms Gonot explained that the CMA acts as the program Manager for the Transportation Fund for Clean Air (TFCA) so transit agencies would have to apply to the CMA for funding and compete for the funding but funding would depend on monies available.

Ms. Gonot stated a bigger concern for her is spending the 1996 Measure B funding, which will be winding down by 2006 because if they arent allocated to a project, the funding could be lost

Member Simon queried if Tier 1 projects have to be delivered by 2006 or in the under construction by 2006.   Ms. Gonot replied that the County of Santa Clara has not made any stipulations.

M/S/C (Walton/Wadler) to recommend the Board of Directors approve an increase of $1.45 million to the Bicycle Expenditure Plan (BEP) allocation to the River Oaks Bicycle and Pedestrian Bridge over the Guadalupe River, for a total BEP allocation of $1.7 million.

Member de La Beaujardiere inquired when the reserves would be replenished.  Ms. Gonot responded that reserves are based on financial projection and stated that the reserve will fluctuate based on the financial projections.

Member Stallman inquired whether the $1 million TLC funds have to go to a project that qualifies as a TLC criteria project and if there was a bicycle related project that could have absorbed the funding?

Amin Surani, Senior Transportation Engineer responded that that all projects were considered but only California Mitigation and Air Quality type of projects can qualify.

Ms. Gonot noted that VTA is putting a $1 million of local for what TLC will be so theyre still getting $1 million of the TLC project and taking the TLC Program money, which is actually CMAQ money and putting it on a CMAQ eligible project.

David Sausjord, Revenue Sales Manager, reported that this fare proposal began with the adoption of the two-year FY 04 and FY 05 budget, which occurred June 2003.   That budget had a fare increase for FY 04 and had an assumption and revenue projection based on a second fare increase for FY 05, which as assumed to occur in July 2004

Mr. Sausjord reported that at the same time the budget was adopted and at the time of the fare increase, the Board requested staff develop a fare policy that would be used by the Board to guide them in future decisions about fare changes and changing fares to achieve an improve fare box recovery ratio of 25 percent by Year 2007.   Mr. Sausjord further reported that the budget included three major features such as a statement of the commitment to achieving and improving fare box recovery, establishing a process and schedule, and establishing formal relationships between different elements of the fare structure for all fares or calculations form the adult based cash fare.

Mr. Sausjord noted that the monthly and day pass are multiple of the cash fare and the senior and youth fares are percentages of the adult fares, specifically the youth fares where 89 percent of adult fares and senior/disabled fares were 40 to 45 percent of the adult fares and actually those ratios for both of those groups were modified by the Board during the review and the discussion of that in November and December.

Mr. Sausjord stated that in January 30, 2004, the Board did include an adjustment to the budget to reflect reduced fare revenues for 2005 compared to what originally had been assumed based on a fare increase occurring in the middle of the year. 

Mr. Sausjord referred to and provided an overview of Attachment C, Proposed Fares per Fare Policy (Resolution 03.12.21) and Attachment D, entitled ADA Paratransit Fare.

Mr. Sausjord noted that the fiscal impact, which includes ridership and revenue projections, has some crosscurrents and anticipates a certain recovery, basically the background demand for the services based on the beginnings of the economic recovery that seems to be occurring. 

Mr. Sausjord stated that a two percent growth for FY 05 has been used and anticipates some additional riders due to the opening of the light rail extension.

This proposed fare change is being presented to the Advisory Committees in February 2004, public meetings are scheduled for March 2004 and will be coming to the Advisory Committees for formal comment in April 2004, as well as the Board Standing Committees and will go to the standing committees in May with action taken by Administration and Finance Committee with final Board action in June 2004.

Member Eltgroth recommended that on the Agendas that they be labeled which Department they are from.

On order of Chairperson Sullivan, there being no objection, the Review Proposed Fare Modification Prior to Public Review Process was received and filed.

On order of Chairperson Anderson,there being no objection, the Proactive CMP Reviewed and Approved Projects Quarterly Status Report was received and filed.

Member Anderson advised that the Santa Claras Bicycle Advisory Committee will not having a meeting in February 2004.

Ms. Chung announced that May 20, 2004 is Bike to Work Day and that MTC has hired a consultant team to coordinate the regional effort.   Ms. Chung noted that the Marketing Department is developing car cards to put in the light rail vehicles to explain how to use the bike racks in the new light rail vehicles.   Ms. Chung provided draft copies of the language used on the car cards for review.

Member Riffle reported that the City of Los Altos City Council agreed with the neighborhood not to allow an extension of the Hetch-Hetchy Passway, a Tier 1 Project, through the El Camino Real because of their concern of crime in the neighborhoods.  Mr. Riffle also reported that with regard to the Stevens Creek Bike Trail, City Staff that

does not even want to attempt to go after the project because it was $80 thousand for the feasibility study.   The City of Los Altos is in the process of updating the two-year old Bicycle Transportation Plan and reevaluating the Project Priorities and how the priorities are determined.   With regard to Bike to Work Day the City of Los Altos will have two energizer stations.  Mr. Riffle thanked Ms. Chung for help with Bike to Work Day.

Member Thielges reported that the City of San Jose is in the process of updating the Bicycle Plan and stated if anyone has any interest in changes to the Plan to contact John Brazil, City of San Jose.

Member Wadler reported that the City of Campbell is also revising the Bicycle Plan and there will be a meeting in March 2004 to review the proposed schedules and revisions to the Plan.

Member de La Beaujardiere reported that the City of Palo Alto will be having a community meeting to review the proposal for a Bicycle Boulevard on a school commute route on Mabel Avenue.

Member Walton reported that the contractors will be meeting with Caltrans to review and approve the designs for the Mary Avenue Bridge; the creek trail in back of City Hall will be the start of a 3 mile trail from that point on to some city parks; at the next City Council meeting John Brazil will be present, along with a member of the Friends of the Stevens Creek Trail who will discuss developing the trail to a city owned park; and, environmentalist groups have expressed concern regarding having pedestrian and cyclist together on the same path because of the speed of the cyclists.   Some of the established trails will be surveyed because of design considerations, rural regulations consideration, and enforcements considerations.

Member Kobayashi reported that the County of Santa Clara is working on a traffic study, between Stanford Avenue and Campus Drive.   Member Kobayasi advised that the number one complain from the neighborhood is bicyclists throwing trash in their front yards and requested that Members advise groups to be more considerate about their trash.

Member Reisinger reported that with regard to the City of Milpitas, the City Council approved the revised bike plan, the traffic engineer has retried and will provide the name new contact, and Joe Oliva, Sr. Transportation Planner, will the City Staff Liaison. 

Member Eltgroth reported that the City of Morgan Hill has moved their BPAC meeting location from City to Hall to the Public Works Department, Bike to Work Day has a new coordinator, and Gavilian College will have some energizer stations.   Mr. Elgroth stated that John Brazil will continue to teach the Bike Ed Classes for the City of San Jose in odd numbered months and the first classes taught in the City of Morgan Hill will be         February 28 and February 29, 2004.  Mr. Eltgroth noted that the City of Gilroy has a Task Force to write a trails master plan.

Member Anderson reported that with regard to City of Mountain View, the Evelyn Avenue Project is a ahead of schedule, with regard to the Hetch Hetchy right-of-way, another hurdle has been crossed and construction is scheduled to commence soon and completed summer 2004. 

Member Simons, City of Sunnyvale, reported that he will be attending the California City Planners Conference at the end of March 2004 and stated that he would encourage representations from the cities, county or BPAC involved in presenting the 2005 Bicycle and Pedestrian Design Guidelines.

On order of Chairperson Sullivan,there being no objection, the meeting was adjourned at 8:15 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Gilda M. Grozdanich, Board Assistant
VTA Board of Directors

NOTE:  M/S/C MEANS MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED AND, UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.