Related Links

CALL TO ORDER

The Regular Meeting of the Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC) was called to order at   4:35 p.m. by Chairperson Blaylock   in Conference Room B-104, Valley Transportation Authority (VTA), 3331 North First Street, San Jose, California. 

ROLL CALL

Members Present                                   Members Present

Stephen C. Blaylock, Chairperson              Margaret Okuzumi
Don Burnett                                                Sally Probst
Ellen Fletcher                                             Connie Rogers 
Roberta Hughan                                         Martin Schulter, Vice Chairperson 
Luis Mendez                                               Laura Stuchinsky
Gaye Morando

Members Absent

A quorum was present.

PUBLIC PRESENTATIONS

There were no public presentations.

Committee Staff Report

There was no Committee Staff Report.

Chairperson’s Report

Chairperson Blaylock requested that the September 2005 agenda include an update the Community Bus in Los Gatos and further requested information on how future contracts for Community Buses will be awarded.   Chairperson Blaylock expressed appreciation to the new agenda format, which includes the consent and regular agenda.

BUSINESS REFERRED TO COMMITTEE BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS/ GENERAL MANAGER

Member Probst requested that the minutes of the meeting be taken off the consent agenda and placed on the regular agenda.

CONSENT

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

Approve the Minutes of May 11, 2005.

FY 205 Third Quarter Transit Operations Performance Report

M/S/C (Burnett/Fletcher) to receive and file the FY 2005 Third Quarter Transit Operations Performance Report was received and filed.

Programmed Projects Quarterly Monitoring Report from April through June 2005   

M/S/C (Burnett/Fletcher) to receive and file the Programmed Projects Quarterly Monitoring Report from April through June 2005.

Proactive CMP Reviewed and Approved Projects Quarterly Status Report January through March 2005

M/S/C (Burnett/Fletcher) to receive and file the Proactive CMP Reviewed and Approved Projects Quarterly Status Report January through March 2005.

CAC Quarterly Attendance Report

M/S/C (Burnett/Fletcher) to receive and file the CAC Quarterly Attendance Report. 

REGULAR

The Agenda was taken out of order.

Minutes of May 11, 2005

M/S/C (Probst/Burnett) on a vote of 8 ayes, 0 noes, and 2 abstentions to approve the Minutes of May 11, 2005.   Members Mendez and Morando abstained.

Valley Transportation Plan (VTP) 2030 Transit Capital Expansion Policy and New Corridors Study

Chris Augenstein, Transportation Planning Manager, provided a brief background noting that the Transit Capital Expansion Policy (TEP) and New Corridors Study were called out in the Board approved VTP 2030 document.  The study will be conducted in two parts.  Phase I – Transit Expansion Policy will examine existing criteria and propose possible changes.  The goals are to establish a better link between transportation and land-use policies from local governments, develop a process that is more responsive to VTA long-term financial goals, and broaden the range of modes and technologies such as the Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) and Enhanced Bus.

Phase II – New Corridors Study involves the evaluation of the seven corridors identified in VTP 2030 for their potential to support high capacity transit services.  For corridors that do not meet the criteria, the study will develop a tool kit that could help elevate the corridor to fair better in the selection process.

Mr. Augenstein reported that staff has conducted a process for selecting the consultant and will be considered by the Board of Directors on September 1, 2005.  The study will  commence immediately after approval and is expected to conclude in two to two and a half years.

Member Probst inquired about incentives for cities that participate in the program.     Mr. Augenstein stated that if cities want high capacity transit services to be implemented in their jurisdiction, it is best that they participate.

Member Stuchinsky inquired about the integration of the study with the long-term expenditure plan for Measure A.  Mr. Augenstein noted that the study is specifically looking at the monies identified for the new corridors called out in Measure A.  Any future transit capital expansion not prioritized will fall under these guidelines. 

Upon query of Member Probst, Mr. Augenstein noted that VTA is encouraging cities to make appropriate land-use decisions.  However, this is a challenge for VTA as it does not have land-use authority.  The policy’s purpose is to better link VTA’s capital investment with policy decisions of cities.  VTA has the fiscal responsibility to redirect investments that will have pay-off to VTA. 

Member Mendez inquired about the process of reaching out to transit users.  Mr. Augenstein replied that there are no affirmative conclusions at this time but staff intends to take the study through the committee process. 

On order of Chairperson Blaylock, there being no objection, the Valley Transportation Plan (VTP) 2030 Transit Capital Expansion Policy and New Corridors Study was reviewed and commented.

Santa Clara County High Occupancy Toll Lane Demonstration Project

John Ristow,   Programming and Project Development Deputy Director, distributed the High Occupancy Toll (HOT) Lane Feasibility Study Executive Summary and provided a Powerpoint presentation on the study’s summary. 

Mr. Ristow stated that HOT lanes are carpool lanes (High Occupancy Vehicles HOV) where single occupant vehicles are allowed for a toll.   HOT lanes are congestion management tools and potential revenue enhancement for VTA.   HOT lanes will essentially look like HOV lanes except that it will have overhead gantries. 

Assembly Bill 2032 signed in 2004 is the state legislative authority that allows implementation of two HOT lane corridors in Santa Clara County.   The conditions of this bill include maintenance of HOT lane Level of Service (LOS) C or LOS D and should have a four-year demonstration with evaluation report to legislature.   The HOT lane will have dynamic pricing to address the LOS.

Upon query of Chairperson Blaylock, Mr. Ristow stated that enforcement may be challenging.   There will be designated places for vehicle entry and exit and this model was patterned after the HOT lanes in Southern California.   There will be high California Highway Patrol (CHP) visuals and technologies.

Mr. Ristow noted the HOT lane concept was from the Ad-Hoc Financial Stability Committee but the study did not start until April 2004.   The study aimed to determine if HOT lanes are feasible in Santa Clara County.   Mr. Ristow noted that good HOT lane corridors are corridors that have high level of congestion, room for other travelers for capacity issues, and high level of longer distance commuters.

Mr. Ristow stated that the study identified that U.S. 101 is a good corridor and that the Golden Triangle area is a major destination.   The study involved models to see how HOT lanes would look and if revenues were generated.   The study also looked at 101/85 corridors in 2010 in the AM and PM peak hours.  The revenue model that was run for the 101/85 in 2010 yielded positive results. 

Mr. Ristow noted that HOV lanes will only have striping, there will be no physical barrier, everything will be electronic, and there will be a separate ingresses and egresses.

Mr. Ristow noted that staff is currently working with Alameda County for the  I-680 Sunol Grade.   Mr. Ristow reviewed the Minnesota HOT lanes and noted its positive performance but cautioned that Minnesota and Northern California have different road conditions, traffic congestion, and drivers. 

Member Stuchinsky left the meeting at 5:10 p.m.

Upon query of Member Okuzumi, Mr. Ristow replied that the toll could be done in several ways:   per mile, in or out of the HOT lane, or by segment.   The fees will change according to different times of day or amount of traffic.  The next phase of the project will identify the different ingress and egress of the lanes. 

Mr. Ristow stated that VTA contracted with a San Jose State University professor to determine social equity of HOT lanes.   The study suggests that usage of HOT lanes is evenly spread out on all income levels and users utilize it on the “need” basis.

Chairperson Blaylock expressed concern on the prioritization as to who could use the lanes.   Mr. Ristow explained that there is no priority as to who can use the HOT lanes as carpoolers can use the HOT lanes without toll. However, he noted that there may be reduced carpoolers because of the fact that there will be restrictions on getting in and out of the lanes.

Member Mendez inquired about the toll collection and planned expenditure for the revenues.   Mr. Ristow responded that Bay Area Toll Authority will collect the toll.   If HOT lanes are implemented, VTA Board of Directors will decide where to allocate the revenues from the program.  

Member Mendez thanked staff for the presentation and suggested that as the study moves forward, a broader definition of HOT lanes be used so that excess funding from revenues could be disbursed on a broader range.

Member Hughan expressed concern on air quality issues.   Mr. Ristow assured that in the course of the projects, those kinds of issues will be addressed.

M/S/C (Mendez/Probst) on a vote of 9 ayes, 1 noes and 0 abstentions to review and recommend that the VTA Board of Directors authorize VTA staff to proceed to the preliminary engineering phase in the development of a demonstration project of a high occupancy toll (HOT) lane based on the findings of the Santa Clara County HOT Lane Feasibility Study and that the study use a broader definition of HOT lanes so that excess funding from revenues could be disbursed on a broader range.  Chairperson Blaylock opposed.

Amendment to the Citizens Advisory Committee Bylaws Requested by the VTA Board of Directors

Stephen Flynn, Senior Management Analyst, noted that the change is a result of the Board of Directors’ review of the Policy Advisory Committee (PAC) Bylaws voting provision.   The Board of Directors felt that Advisory Committees’ requirements should mirror that of the Board and that the affirmative vote to pass the item should reflect the majority of the total membership.  Mr. Flynn clarified that the change in CAC would mean having nine affirmative votes versus the current five.

Member Rogers referred to the Attendance Report and expressed that the proposed change does not pose a problem as long as the full roster of the Committee is maintained.

Mr. Flynn expressed the Board of Directors’ concern that there should always be a quorum at Advisory Committee meetings. 

Member Fletcher noted that she would not support the amendment unless there is a guarantee that CAC Members would have alternates. 

Member Okuzumi expressed concern that CAC does not have control of membership and noted that CAC should not be penalized if the vacancies are not filled.   Member Okuzumi suggested basing the quorum on the actual appointed membership.

Mr. Flynn referred to Members Fletcher and Okuzumi’s comments and noted that appointing an alternate may be difficult.

Member Probst inquired if the decision regarding the bylaws could be delayed.  Member Probst supported Member Rogers’ comments and noted that there is good representation in the Committee.  She added that Members should be cognizant of the need to be present and that there should be a lot of effort to obtain member replacements, when needed.  Member Probst noted that the Committee is not a recommending body and is not in control. 

Member Fletcher referred to the issue of alternates and noted that it may be easier to fill alternates as current Members have contacts and they could refer someone.

Member Burnett supported Member Okuzumi’s suggestion and stated that the quorum should be based on the number of filled seats.   He expressed concern on having alternates as alternates are not present at all meetings, thus does not have expertise on issues.

Member Mendez noted that CAC Members are volunteers compared to the Board of Directors, the PAC, or the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) who attend the meetings are part of their jobs.

Member Rogers suggested changing the quorum of the majority of the seats that are filled. 

Mr. Flynn responded that the Board of Directors approved a similar change for Committee for Transit Accessibility (CTA) due to the Members’ health reasons.           Mr. Flynn explained that in CTA, as long that there is a quorum present, it is majority of the members present. 

M/S/C (Mendez/Schulter) on a vote of 6 ayes, 4 noes, and 0 abstentions to not consider the Board of Director’s amendment to the CAC bylaws and keep the CAC Bylaws as it is currently.   Members Burnett, Morando, Probst, and Rogers opposed.

CAC Work Plan

On order of Chairperson Blaylock, there being no objection, the CAC Work Plan was reviewed.

OTHER

Announcements

Chairperson Blaylock thanked the members of the public who attended the meeting.

Member Okuzumi inquired about having an “Item of Concern” on the CAC Agenda and noted concerns on the Bus Bridge.

ADJOURN

On order of Chairperson Blaylock, there being no objection, the CAC was adjourned at 6:01 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Elaine F. Baltao             
VTA Board of Directors