Related Links

CALL TO ORDER

The Regular Meeting of the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) was called to order at 1:34 PM by Chairperson Yoshino in Conference Room B-104, Valley Transportation Authority (VTA), 3331 North First Street, San Jose, California.

ROLL CALL

Members Present
Greg Armendariz
Dieckmann Cogill
Dan Collen
Nancy Coss-Fitzwater, Ex-Officio
John Curtis
Don Dey, Vice Chairperson
Glenn Goepfert
Joan Jenkins
Robert Kass
Gayle Likens
Henry Louie
Jim Porter
Jim Rowe
Lee Taubeneck, Ex-Officio
Ben Tripousis
Steve Yoshino, Chairperson

A quorum was present.

There were no Public Presentations.

Jim Lawson, Government Affairs Manager, reported that on February 15, 2006, VTA held a ceremony dedicating Historic Coach #6512 as the Rosa Parks Memorial Bus.  The ceremony was attended by over 80 community leaders and was a great  success.

Mr. Lawson reported that VTA scheduled a tour of its facilities for the VTA Board of Directors and Advisory Committees on April 14 and April 28, 2006, noting that Committee Members may choose to attend either date.   An invitation will be sent out containing full details of the upcoming VTA facilities tours.

Member Curtis took his seat at 1:35 PM

Mr. Lawson referred to the VTA Expenditure Plan and noted that the Expenditure Plan was not approved at the March 2, 2006 Board of Directors’ Meeting.   The Board of Directors chose to appoint a Project Priority and Revenue Advisory Committee (Measure A Committee), consisting of Board Members Chu, Gage, Kniss, Sandoval, and Williams.   The Measure A Committee Meetings will be held in order to establish a list of project priorities.  The Committee will review the 2000 Measure A Project List, look at the local streets and roads, county expressways, bicycle and pedestrian path improvements, and senior and disabled programs in order to come up with a recommendation to the Board of Directors for adoption no later than August 2006.  The Measure A Committee Meetings will be held in the evening, will be publicly noticed, and all Advisory Committees are invited to attend.  

Mr. Lawson referred to the Technical Advisory Committee’s (TAC) request to receive the recommendations/minutes from the Ad Hoc Infrastructure Bond Committee.   He noted that the Ad Hoc Infrastructure Bond Committee met on January 26, February 2, and March 1, 2006.   The Ad Hoc Infrastructure Bond Committee provided direction and developed a series of 16 advocacy principles to guide VTA.  The Board of Directors will adopt the advocacy principles at the April 6, 2006 Board Meeting.  

Mr. Lawson reported that VTA is to be awarded the Freedom and Friendship “Circle of Friends” Award from the San Jose/Silicon Valley National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP).  The award will be presented to VTA at the San Jose/Silicon Valley NAACP 54^th Anniversary Banquet in April 2006.   The award is given to organizations demonstrating continued responsibility towards increasing awareness about diversity in Silicon Valley.

Member Armendariz took his seat at 1:38 PM

There was no Chairperson’s Report.

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

M/S/C (Tripousis/Rowe) to approve the Minutes of February 9, 2006.

M/S/C (Tripousis/Rowe) to review the Scoring Criteria for Lifeline Transportation Projects.

REGULAR AGENDA

Member Kass took his seat at 1:40 PM

John Sighamony, Transportation Planner III, reported that the item was to recommend the project list for Federal Surface Transportation Program (STP) funds for Federal Fiscal Years 2007 through 2009.  He noted that in December 2005, the Board of Directors approved the programming criteria and the city and county funding targets.

Mr. Sighamony directed attention to Attachment A – Third Cycle STP Road Rehabilitation Project List, and noted that the proposed program has two components:  1) 85 percent need-based targets and 2) 15 percent allocated to county expressways.  He indicated that the City of Monte Sereno did not have any eligible streets for the Third Cycle Federal STP and noted that their federal funds in the amount of $40,826 was transferred to the City of Los Altos Hills for use on the Fremont Road Pavement Rehabilitation Project for the third cycle only.  The City of Monte Sereno’s federal funds would be exchanged with Local Program Reserve funds.

M/S/C (Collen/Tripousis) to review and recommend that the VTA Board of Directors approve the programming of federal Surface Transportation Program (STP) funding for local streets and roads rehabilitation projects during Federal Fiscal Years (FFY) 2007 through 2009. 

Mr. Sighamony reiterated that the City of Monte Sereno did not have any eligible streets for the Third Cycle Federal STP, and their federal funds were transferred to the City of Los Altos Hills.   The City of Monte Sereno will be given Local Program Reserve funds in the amount of $41,000.

M/S/C (Curtis/Armendariz) to review and recommend that the VTA Board of Directors program $41,000 in Local Program Reserve funds for the City of Monte Sereno’s Local Streets and Roads Rehabilitation Program; and authorize the General Manager to enter into a funding agreement with the City of Monte Sereno.

Mr. Sighamony reported that in 2005, the Board of Directors approved a $3.3 million fund exchange with the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC).  He noted that VTA would provide $3.3 million in Transportation Fund for Clean Air (TFCA) 40% funds from the Fiscal Years 2005/2006, 2006/2007, and 2007/2008 programming cycles to MTC’s Vehicle Buy-Back Program in exchange for $3.3 million in federal Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) funds.   VTA would then program the $3.3 million in federal CMAQ funds to projects in the Bicycle Expenditure Program.                            

Mr. Sighamony indicated that the following project was the only project in this cycle that was ready to go and needed to have $1.39 million obligated this year: Project Sponsor: Santa Clara County Roads & Airport, Project:  Bicycle and pedestrian improvements on Almaden Expressway between Ironwood and Koch.  He referred to the remaining funds of $1.91 million and noted that VTA would issue a Call for Projects for Fiscal Years 2006/2007 and 2007/2008.

Member Porter took his seat at 1:42 PM

Upon query of Member Jenkins, Mr. Sighamony noted that VTA anticipates issuing a Call for Projects for Fiscal Years 2006/2007 and 2007/2008 in late Spring 2006.

M/S/C (Collen/Jenkins) to review and recommend that the VTA Board of Directors approve the programming of $1.39 million in Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) funds for bicycle and pedestrian improvements along Almaden Expressway.

Mr. Sighamony reported that in 2002 the Board of Directors adopted the Community Design and Transportation (CDT) Program as its primary program for integrating transportation and land use. 

Mr. Sighamony indicated that during the development of the CDT Program, Member Agencies recommended VTA provide financial assistance to encourage the implementation of the CDT Program concepts.   As a result, VTA set-up the following two new Grant Fund Programs:   1) CDT Planning Grants and 2) CDT Capital Grants.  He noted that all of the VTA Member Agencies have approved the CDT Program and are now eligible to apply for the CDT Grant Programs.       

Mr. Sighamony reported that VTA has $8.8 million for the current CDT Capital Grant Program cycle for Fiscal Years 2007/2008.   Project sponsors may request the maximum per project of $1.5 million, with a 20% local match requirement.  He referred to project eligibility and noted that all projects must be located in a core, corridor, or station area as defined in VTA’s CDT Program.  He indicated that all projects must have a pedestrian and transit component, noting that no projects may be “bike only” projects.  Mr. Sighamony directed attention to Attachment B – VTA Cores, Corridors, & Station Areas. 

Mr. Sighamony indicated that eligible capital projects include, but are not limited to the following:  1) Pedestrian Projects, 2) Streetscape/Corridor Enhancement Projects, and 3) Pedestrian-oriented Streets Improvements.

Mr. Sighamony reported that the TAC Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Subcommittee has reviewed the CDT Capital Grants procedures and project evaluation criteria, and has incorporated their contributions in the Capital Grant Program Evaluation Criteria and Procedures.  He directed attention to Attachment A – VTA Community Design & Transportation Program, Capital Grant Program Evaluation Criteria and Procedures, and provided a report on the Project Evaluation, highlighting: 1) CDT Program Goals (10 points); 2) Project Readiness (20 points); 3) Project Scope (10 points); and 4) Project Benefit (20 points); 5) Transportation/Land Use Development (20 points); and 6) Community Connectivity and Access (20 points).

Mr. Sighamony indicated that following Board of Directors’ approval of the procedures and criteria, VTA anticipates issuing a Call for Projects in July 2006, and will also hold a workshop to help Member Agencies with their applications.  Grant awards will take place in the August/September 2006 timeframe and funding agreements are required with the grant awards.

Member Dey referred to the Attachment B and queried about the Coyote Valley Rapid Transit Corridor in South County listed on the map.  Chris Augenstein, Transportation Planning Manager, noted that the map was put together in support of the CDT Program and was developed in the year 2000.  He indicated that VTA went to the local jurisdictions several times and asked them to designate a core, corridor, and station area in their jurisdiction and noted that the map was a product of that.  The City of San Jose felt that the Coyote Valley Rapid Transit Corridor would be an intensification corridor in the future.  Mr. Augenstein reported that VTA considers the map a living document and would be going out to the local jurisdictions again to see if they have any changes to the map.  

Member Curtis referred to Attachment B and queried if the station areas in the Cities of Saratoga and Los Gatos would qualify as potential project areas.  Mr. Sighamony indicated “yes”.

Upon query of Member Kass, Mr. Sighamony noted that the local jurisdictions would know if they were approved for projects in the September/October 2006 timeframe.

Upon query of Member Likens, Mr. Sighamony noted that another Call for Projects would be issued after the two-year cycle.  

M/S/C (Rowe/Tripousis) to review and recommend that the VTA Board of Directors approve the evaluation criteria and procedures for selecting projects and awarding Community Design and Transportation Program Capital Grants.

Adam Burger, Transportation Planner I, directed attention to the updated draft 2005 Monitoring and Conformance Report that was distributed at the meeting.   He indicated that VTA is the designated Congestion Management Agency (CMA) for Santa Clara County and monitors the level of service (LOS) on the roads that make-up the Congestion Management Programs (CMP) Roadway Network.   Roads that are found to be operated at a LOS below the CMP standard, which is LOS E, can be considered out of conformance, and jurisdictions that have those roadways within their city limits can have their gas tax revenues under Proposition 111 withheld.

Mr. Burger noted that the 2005 Monitoring and Conformance Report contained the results of the monitoring program and provided a report on the results, highlighting:  1) Freeways, 2) Expressways, 3) Rural Highways, 4) Land-Use Data, and 5) Bicycle and Pedestrian Data.

Ex-Officio Member Lee Taubeneck, newly appointed member representing the Department of Transportation – Caltrans District 4, queried if the level of service was based on density analysis.  Mr. Burger indicated that it would depend on the type of roadway.  He noted that for freeways it is based on density, however, other traffic counts are done for rural highways.

Member Likens referred to the 2005 Draft Monitoring & Conformance Report, Pages 2-2 and 2-3, and noted that there were discrepancies pertaining to the City of Palo Alto on the following Tables: “Table 2.1: Approved Dwelling Units by Member Agency, 2002-2005, Palo Alto, Year 2005, -49”, and “Table 2.2: Approved Jobs by Member Agency, 2002-2005, Palo Alto, Year 2005, 1524”.  Mr. Burger referred to Table 2.1 and noted that the dwelling unit approvals would be corrected to reflect +81, instead of -49.  He referred to Table 2.2 and noted that the job approvals would be corrected to reflect –194, instead of 1524.  Mr. Burger indicated that the corrections would be reflected in the Final 2005 Monitoring and Conformance Report.

Alternate Member Cogill referred to the map on Page 1-1, Figure 1.1: CMP Roadway Network, and queried if the entire length of Lawrence Expressway was included in the CMP Roadway Network.   Mr. Burger noted that he would provide a report back.

Ex-Officio Member Taubeneck requested that the data be sent to him electronically.

Member Likens referred to Table 2.2 and asked how VTA came up with the job numbers contained in the table.  Mr. Burger noted that staff would provide an explanation of the methodology used in the final report.

M/S/C (Tripousis/Armendariz) to review and recommend that the VTA Board of Directors approve the Draft 2005 Monitoring and Conformance Report and Conformance Findings.   Further requested that the Final 2005 Monitoring and Conformance Report, Table 2.1- Approved Dwelling Units by Member Agency, reflect the correct dwelling unit approvals number of  +81 for Year 2005 for Palo Alto and that Table 2.2 - Approved Jobs by Member Agency, reflect the correct job approvals number of –194 for Year 2005 for Palo Alto.  Also, requested that an explanation of the methodology used to come up with the job numbers contained in Table 2.2 be reflected in the final report.

Alternate Member Tripousis directed attention to the draft Local Streets and Roads Strategic Plan that was provided at the meeting.  He reported that the Local Streets and Roads Committee at MTC was formed by Public Works Directors and transportation professionals from around the Bay Area in order to try to address the under funding of local streets and roads projects throughout the Bay Area. 

Alternate Member Tripousis reported that in the 2001 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP), out of a total of $7.3 billion in regional discretionary dollars, local streets and roads was allocated $143 million; transit was allocated $1.1 billion.  In the 2005 RTP, out of a total of $8.8 billion, local streets and roads was allocated $990 million, and transit was able to secure $1.3 billion of the regional discretionary dollars. 

Alternate Member Tripousis noted that the advocacy the Local Streets and Roads was able to put forth began to balance the scales a little bit in terms of investment in the local street network.  He indicated that Bay Area wide, there is about $20 billion in local streets and roads assets, but still faces an $11 billion shortfall in local streets and roads funding. So, the notion was that in order to better advocate for committing funds as a region to local streets and roads, there needed to be a strategic plan, a road map of how to get there, how to advocate a little more effectively for local stakeholder groups.  Alternate Member Tripousis indicated that the idea of the Local Streets and Roads Strategic Plan was to provide more tools in the toolbox to try to get out there and advocate for local streets and roads revenues.  

Alternate Member Tripousis reported that on Monday, March 6, 2006, as part of MTC’s Users Week, the Local Streets and Roads Committee was able to provide a presentation to public works and transportation professionals from around the region on the local streets and roads problems.  It was also an opportunity to broaden the constituency in support of local streets and roads.  He noted that Member Kass was also in attendance.

Alternate Member Tripousis noted the intent is to educate policymakers and stakeholders and provide more accurate assessment of the local streets and roads shortfall.   MTC surveyed the local jurisdictions to determine the shortfalls and as a result there is better information, which allows the local jurisdictions to advocate more effectively.  Now it is incumbent upon the local jurisdictions to communicate the problem and advocate for additional resources. 

Alternate Member Tripousis indicated that the ultimate goal of the Local Streets and Roads Strategic Plan is to communicate the need, help identify new funding sources, and focus on the notion of “fixing it first”.  MTC has tried to institute a “fix it first” policy that relates to their entire transportation network.  The average Pavement Condition Index (PCI) for local streets and roads in the region is “62” and other parts of the region are down in the 50’s.  There is significant difference in cost between fixing a roadway when it is in better shape than when it is in worse shape.  Trying to emphasize fix it first and the notion that early investment reduces overall cost, would link investment in local streets and roads to public safety.  It is not just the impact to vehicles, but to drivers, pedestrians, and bicyclists, and the impacts that deteriorating roadways have on those communities and stakeholders. 

Alternate Member Tripousis reported that as an advocacy tool, the Local Streets and Roads Committee wants to try and use the Local Streets and Roads Strategic Plan as a tool for action, such as permanently fixing Proposition 42; conditioning maintenance funds in terms of local investments, where we might, as a sales tax county, invest more in local roadways to get help from Caltrans and the State, and to get help from the federal government in terms of additional investment in local streets and roads. 

Alternate Member Tripousis referred to the draft Local Streets and Roads Strategic Plan, noting that the Strategic Plan was the most recent draft.   He noted that the Local Streets and Roads Committee welcomes TAC’s input, and hopes to come back to the Local Streets and Roads Committee to get their approval of the Strategic Plan and to forward it to the Commission for approval by the June/July 2006 timeframe.

Member Kass acknowledged Alternate Member Tripousis’ participation on the Local Streets and Roads Committee, noting that he keeps the local jurisdictions informed about what is going on in the Bay Area wide region.   He indicated that Alternate Member Tripousis is the Local Streets and Roads Vice Chairperson and will be the Chairperson in 2007.  Member Kass referred to the Bay Area wide region and the passage of sales tax measures in other counties and noted that most of the counties have an ongoing source of money for local streets and roads projects.

Member Collen asked how the philosophy being put together by the Local Streets and Roads Committee fits in with MTC’s advocacy position on the infrastructure bond proposal, and VTA’s advocacy efforts.   He noted that things like “fix it first” policies are not being addressed by the bond measure.  It is only going to increase the need for operations and maintenance without generating any new revenue for local agencies to address the maintenance shortfall.

Alternate Member Tripousis referred to the discussion held during MTC’s Users Week and noted it was about finding ways to generate new revenues.  He noted that people forget that MTC has the statutory ability to raise the Bay Area gas tax by a dime.  Part of the problem is communicating that California has the lowest gas tax in the west, among neighboring states, such as Nevada, Utah, Arizona, New Mexico, Washington, and Oregon, which are all between 23 and 25 cents a gallon in terms of state-wide gas taxes, and California is playing catch up.  The approach the Local Streets and Roads Committee would take would be to try and get as much money committed to the local as possible from whatever bond that goes forward.  That way the our Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) and VTA have the opportunity to distribute those funds on the local priority, one of which would be local streets and roads. 

Mr. Lawson referred to the principles that the VTA Infrastructure Bond Committee has recommended for adoption and noted that the crux of the recommendations is to preserve as much as possible the local decision making, to keep it a bottoms up rather than a top down approach to transportation funding, and to protect those sources of funding that can be utilized for the priorities at the local organizations. 

Member Dey commended Alternate Member Tripousis for his effort on the Local Streets and Roads Strategic Plan.  He noted that the City of Gilroy has been struggling with maintenance.  He referred to the comments made regarding local jurisdictions losing an opportunity to take care of their management in operations when funding was cut by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger.  He indicated that South County raised the issue that there is just not enough money going for local streets and roads.

Alternate Member Tripousis noted that the Local Streets and Roads Committee meets on the first Friday of every month and that the next scheduled meeting is on April 7, 2006.

Chairperson Yoshino thanked Alternate Member Tripousis, on behalf of the Committee, for his efforts. 

Alternate Member Tripousis informed the TAC Members to forward any feedback/comments on the Local Streets and Roads Strategic Plan to him directly.  Mr. Sighamony noted that he would forward an electronic copy of the Local Streets and Roads Strategic Plan to the TAC Members.

On order of Chairperson Yoshino, there being no objection, the Committee received an overview of the Local Streets and Roads Strategic Plan from TAC Member Ben Tripousis.

Michelle DeRobertis, Bicycle Program Manager, reported that the Countywide Bicycle Plan was adopted by the Board of Directors in the year 2000 and was followed by the adoption of the Bicycle Expenditure Plan (BEP), which had been amended a few times since its adoption.  Ms. DeRobertis noted that it was time to update the Bicycle Plan and that the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee (BPAC) is forming a Bicycle Plan Update Working Group to assist with the Bicycle Plan update.  The BPAC recommended that a TAC Member serve on the working group.  It is anticipated that the working group would meet five to eight times over the next eight to 12 months, and the first meeting would probably be held in April 2006.  Ms. DeRobertis indicated that it is recommended that the TAC appoint one member and one alternate member to serve on the working group.

Upon query of Ex-Officio Member Taubeneck, Ms. DeRobertis noted that a draft of the Bicycle Plan update is anticipated by the end of 2006.

Upon query of Member Curtis, Ms. DeRobertis noted that the working group would consist of four members from BPAC, one member from the Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition, and one member from TAC.

Upon query of Chairperson Yoshino, Alternate Member Cogill volunteered to serve as the Member and Alternate Member Tripousis volunteered to serve as the Alternate Member on the Bicycle Plan Update Working Group.

On order of Chairperson Yoshino, there being no objection, the Committee appointed   Alternate Member Cogill as the representative and Alternate Member Tripousis as the alternate from the VTA Technical Advisory Committee to serve on the Bicycle Plan Update Working Group.

OTHER

There were no Announcements.

The Agenda was taken out of order.

Committee Staff Report (continued)

Mr. Lawson referred to the Board Memorandum that was distributed entitled “Infrastructure Bond Advocacy Principles” and noted that the Ad Hoc Infrastructure Bond Committee recommended 15 principles to guide VTA’s advocacy efforts in Sacramento with regard to infrastructure bonds.   He indicated that a 16^th principle was added at the March 2, 2006 Board of Directors’ Meeting, and it was to streamline environmental requirements without sacrificing environmental quality and to prevent costly delays to project completion.

Alternate Member Collen thanked VTA for a job well done on the Infrastructure Bond Advocacy Principles.  He referred to Infrastructure Bond Advocacy Principle No. 15, Revenue Bonds, and noted that part of the out year bonding is proposed to be paid back with a portion of the gas tax.  As it stands, the Governor was still proposing to utilize a portion of local streets and roads gas tax to pay for the capital projects.  Mr. Lawson indicated that part of the Governor’s menu of bonds covering a many year period was to use some general obligation and some revenue anticipation bonds.

On order of Chairperson   Yoshino, there being no objection, the meeting was adjourned at 2:27 PM

Respectfully submitted,

Tracene Y. Crenshaw, Board Assistant
VTA Board of Directors

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