|
Recommendations for VTP 2030 Program Allocations and Project Priorities
Carolyn Gonot, Chief Development Officer, distributed the following Attachments: Attachment A - Transit Program, Attachment B Highway Program, Attachment C Expressway Program, Attachment D Local Streets and County Roads Program, Attachment E Transportation Systems Operations and Management Program, Attachment F Sound Barrier Program, Attachment G Pavement Management Program, Attachment H Bicycle Program, Attachment I Livable Communities and Pedestrian Program, and Attachment J Landscape Restoration and Graffiti Removal Program.
Ms. Gonot reported that the attachments were the recommendations for the VTP 2030 Program Allocations and Project Priorities that staff presented to the Board of Directors at their February 27, 2004 Workshop Meeting. The recommendations will be presented at the March 19, 2004 Workshop Meeting. Ms. Gonot noted that the recommendations are the update of the Countywide Transportation Plan. The Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) has given VTA an investment target allocation of $1.081 billion, including directed funds. The Measure A Program will also be in the Countywide Transportation Plan.
Ms. Gonot directed attention to Attachment A Transit Program, and provided a report on the program. She noted there was a lot of discussion by the Board of Directors regarding the additional new rail corridors. The West Valley Cities had some issues pertaining to Vasona. There are still some issues about the full completion of the Downtown East Valley Project. VTA will try to get a $1 million as soon as possible to do a study on the proposed rail lines. There will be a line item placed above the 25-Year line contained on the VTP 2030 Measure A Transit Program that will be presented to the Board of Directors recommending that VTA conduct a study.
Ms. Gonot referred to the Zero Emission Buses (ZEBs) and noted VTA is currently having a demonstration project with three ZEBs and will test the technology. VTA moved the project to the end of the list and moved Caltrain Electrification up above the 30-Year line, and $189 million towards the New Rail Corridors above the 30-Year line.
Ms. Gonot noted that staffs primary focus is to keep all projects moving in the Regional Plan. She noted that the program does not assume any additional bonding.
Mr. Augenstein noted that the Bus Rapid Transit Project would be placed above the 25-Year line. The Caltrain Service Upgrades will be split under a Phase 1 and Phase 2 and Phase 1 will be moved above the 25-Year line.
Ms. Gonot noted that there will be a presentation at the March 19, 2004 Board of Directors Workshop Meeting. She noted there has been a lot of confusion about the different Caltrain Projects, such as Caltrain Service Upgrades, Caltrain South County, Caltrain Electrification, and what the benefits are of each.
Member Batra referred to the Caltrain Service Upgrades and noted the estimate is $171 million and queried if $155 million is available. Ms. Gonot indicated no it is not available. She noted that is what the Measure A allocation was to the set of improvements, $155 million.
Member Jenkins commented that the word allocation is confusing. Ms. Gonot noted that Measure A has a list of projects and assumed how much was going to each of the program areas. In some cases costs have gone up on projects, but the allocation has remained the same, until the Board takes a change to that allocation. The allocation that was given in 2000 out of Measure A was escalated up to 2004.
Member Batra reported that the City of Santa Clara Council discussed VTP 2030 and noted that the West Valley Cities and North County Cities were concerned about the Vasona Corridor. He referred to a letter submitted by representatives from the North County Cities, which requests that the Board allocate funding for transportation needs in their area. He noted that the City of Santa Clara Council discussed the letter and an official request is being submitted to VTA to revisit the criteria and the weight given to each element. He requested that the City of Santa Claras request be submitted for the Board of Directors Workshop Meeting.
Ms. Gonot noted that there has been a request to show how each of the projects scored and noted that staff would be sending the information to the PAC and TAC.
Ms. Gonot referred to the Dumbarton Rail Project and noted it is looking better because of the passage of Regional Measure 2 and VTA could be looking at moving the project up. She noted that staff might have the time to revisit the project criteria if the Board of Directors is okay with staff moving the ZEBs below, because it allows the projects to get into the Regional Transportation Plan, which VTA has to submit in May 2004. The revisiting of project criteria could be discussed at the next scheduled TAC Meeting.
Mr. Augenstein noted that the VTP document and the RTP get updated every three years. He noted that the project list is likely to change significantly with future updates.
Chairperson Kott noted that the City of Palo Alto Council is also concerned about VTP 2030 and will meet next Monday to discuss the North County Cities letter regarding project rankings. The gist of the concern is that the elected officials in Palo Alto supported the sales tax (Measure A) very strongly as well as the community. The elected officials strongly support the Regional Transportation Program, but one of the requirements of the program is that the program serves the entire region. He noted there was concern about North County communities not having a strong presence on the earlier program (25-Year).
Member Batra noted that the City of Santa Clara Council also expressed an interest in looking at the ranking of projects before being finalized. He queried if the City of Santa Clara should recommend this given the time frame that VTA has to submit the project list to MTC. Ms. Gonot noted that the most important thing is to get in the Regional Transportation Plan. She will seek clarification from MTC if it is below the 25-Year line, but above the 30-Year line, can it still be considered being able to move. Staffs goal is to have the Board of Directors adopt the list for submittal at the Board of Directors Meeting of April 1, 2004 or at the Board of Directors Workshop Meeting of April 23, 2004. If it is felt that the cities want to take the list to their Councils one more time, staff will delay adoption to April 23, 2004. Staff will be getting feedback at the March 19, 2004 Workshop Meeting.
Member Tripousis commented that Mr. Augensteins point is the simple one, less so for transit, but certainly for the rest of the program, this is going to be largely a paper exercise. There are not a lot of programming dollars out of this version of VTP 2030; it will be done again in three years. He noted the importance from a staff standpoint to let our policymakers know, as it relates to something like Caltrain Electrification, the investment to Caltrain is not being short shifted. VTA has committed $127 million to baby bullet and another $140 million to the maintenance facilities in San Jose. There are a host of improvements VTA has remained committed to over and above any future commitments to electrification that is tied to San Mateo and San Francisco. He noted that revisiting the criteria may or may not improve the potential of any of the projects moving up in the near term, even so, it would not necessarily change the status.
Member Batra recommended revisiting the criteria and requested that the item be brought back at the April 8, 2004 TAC Meeting.
M/S/C (McNeely/Batra) to request that the item be provisionally placed on the April 8, 2004 TAC Agenda, pending further information that Ms. Gonot will obtain from MTC on whether MTC will allow VTA to continue with those projects below the 25-year line.
Ms. Gonot directed attention to Attachment B - Highway Program and noted staff created a list of projects, worked with the cities, and worked on corridor studies. Staff had several meetings with Caltrans, identified projects, and then ran them through the evaluation criteria contained on Page B-2. She noted that $446 million was allocated for the Highway Program. Ms. Gonot noted that there would be a couple of changes taken to the Board of Directors that are not contained on the list.
Mr. Augenstein noted that staff found some cost savings on some of the projects. Staff worked with some of the Member Agencies and the Member Agencies reviewed their cost savings. Staff received some updated costs from some of VTAs ongoing corridor studies and was able to shift a few more projects above the line. He noted that a $2 million follow-up study was added for High Occupancy Toll (HOT) lanes and a $2 million study for Maybury Road, which was moved above the line. Ms. Gonot noted that the information mentioned would be in the March 19, 2004 Workshop Meeting materials.
Member Rose queried if staff will quantify or get more specific about the ability to move projects. Ms. Gonot noted that staff will have a section in the Board Workshop Agenda Packet in response to some of the Board Members comments/concerns and that Mr. Augenstein is working on language regarding what happens if a Member Agency gets developer/local funds.
Ms. Gonot directed attention to Attachment C Expressway Program and noted that staff tried to accommodate the projects in Tier 1a identified in the Comprehensive County Expressway Planning Study. She noted the addition of the Almaden Project. Staff will present a total list to the Board for approximately $155 million, noting that $150 million will be allocated to fund the Tier 1a project list.
Ms. Gonot directed attention to Attachment D Local Streets and County Roads Program, and noted there was criteria that had gone through VTA Committees, the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Subcommittee, and adopted by the Board. Staff then did a Call for Projects. She noted that a strategy was needed to allow most of the cities to get a project in the Program. The strategy was that staff would cap the City of San Jose at $100 million and each city would be capped at $50 million.
Member Curtis queried about the City of Los Gatos Project making the list. Ms. Rensi noted there have been some changes and there is an updated list.
Ms. Gonot directed attention to Attachment E Transportation Systems Operations & Management Program, and noted that there is not a lot of money available for the program. VTA anticipated using Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program (CMAQ) monies, but the CMAQ monies will now be going to regional programs. The funds for the program will now be carved out of the Transportation Fund for Clean Air (TFCA) or the STIP. She noted that $14 million would go directly to traffic signal upgrades and traffic signal retiming.
Ms. Gonot directed attention to Attachment F Sound Barrier Program, and noted staff wanted to cover the cost increases for the soundwalls identified. VTA has a process for adding soundwalls into the Plan to be updated.
Member McNeely referred to Attachment E Transportation Systems Operations & Management Program, and queried about the list. Ms. Gonot noted that staff is working on developing a list. Member McNeely recommended that a Call for Projects be completed. Ms. Gonot noted that she would provide TAC with an update.
Ms. Gonot directed attention to Attachment G Pavement Management Program, and noted the cities participation in identifying the shortfall for County Roads. The Public Works Directors were able to secure more for the Regional Transportation Program (RTP), noting it went from about $150 million in the last RTP to over $900 million in this RTP for the region over the next 25 years. MTCs policies for funding the Local Streets and Roads Rehabilitation shortfall identify a minimum amount of $201.5 million to be used for the Pavement Management Program, based on Santa Claras County share of Metropolitan Transportation System (MTS) roads. Staff recommends the Board provide an additional $100 million from its discretionary resources, for a total of $301.5 million.
Member Batra asked how the funds would be distributed. Ms. Rensi noted that a committee of the MTC has been discussing how the funds would be distributed to the cities and came back with an initial recommendation that at least for the first two programming rounds, they wanted to do it just based on MTS need. The committee is meeting again on March 12, 2004, to revisit the matter. She referred to the $201.5 million shortfall and noted the committee debate is that once it gets to the County, does it have to stay on MTS projects. Member Tripousis noted the larger problem with that is how do you compare non-MTS funding versus the transit shortfall and the criteria that they used to fund transit improvements.
Ms. Gonot directed attention to Attachment H Bicycle Program, and noted it is a regional program. VTA previously had $23 million in the RTP for bicycles and is being reduced to $10 million. MTC has created a $200 million regional bicycle/pedestrian program in the RTP. The Countys target share of the regional program is $50 million. The $10 million covers VTAs commitment to cover the rest of the Bicycle Expenditure Program.
Member McNeely expressed concern regarding the City of Milpitas Project going over its allocated amount of $2.4 million. Ms. Gonot noted that every two years staff updates the Bicycle Plan list and gets the most recent cost estimates of the projects and updates the plan.
Ms. Gonot directed attention to Attachment I Livable Communities and Pedestrian Program, and noted that MTC created about a $454 million program. Of that amount, MTC is keeping two-thirds and one-third goes back to the County, which is about $37.5 million. She noted that the Board asked staff what the target is of the other two-thirds. About 25 percent of that one-third would return to the County. Ms. Gonot noted that the Board asked for access to transit projects or large projects, particularly, the Almaden Pedestrian Overcrossing. Staff has been directed to identify a list of projects that could compete at the regional level.
Member McNeely asked if the City of Milpitas has a bicycle project on Attachment H that provides access to transit and qualifies in the Livable Communities and Pedestrian Program. Ms. Gonot noted she would look into the matter.
Ms. Gonot directed attention to Attachment J Landscape Restoration and Graffiti Removal Program, and noted that there is no fund source that VTA has been able to identify that actually can be used toward the Program. The program will be kept in the plan and VTA will look for other sources.
Member Rose commented that the Program should not go forward without operating funds for Caltrans to maintain what they do.
Ms. Gonot directed attention to Page 3 of 4 of the Board Memorandum, Table 1, Proposed VTP 2030 Investment Target Allocation BART Connection, and noted that $107 million of Prop 42 STIP dollars was put into the New Rail Starts Report for BART.
On order of Chairperson Kott, there being no objection, the Committee reviewed and commented on the recommendations for the Valley Transportation Plan 2030 (VTP 2030) program allocations and project priorities.
| 
Rider's Links 
