Related Links

The Regular Meeting of the Downtown East Valley Policy Advisory Board (PAB) was called to order by Chairperson Alvarado at 3:05 p.m. in Room 204 on the 10th Floor of the County Government Center, 70 West Hedding Street, San Jose, California.

ROLL CALL

Members Present
Blanca Alvarado, Chairperson
Nora Campos
Cindy Chavez, Vice Chairperson
David Cortese
Pete McHugh

Members Absent
None

A quorum was present.

PUBLIC PRESENTATIONS

There were no Public Presentations.

Minutes of October 2, 2003

On order of Chairperson Alvarado, there being no objection, approval of the Minutes of October 2, 2003, was deferred pending further review by staff.

Status Report for the Capitol Expressway Light Rail Corridor

Jim Lightbody, Deputy Director of Transit Planning and Development, advised the PAB that Gail A. Price, Senior Transportation Planner, accepted a position with the San Jose Museum of Art and Steven Fisher, Senior Transportation Planner, has joined the DTEV project team.

Chairperson Alvarado welcomed Mr. Fisher and expressed congratulations for Ms. Price.

Member Chavez took her seat at 3:07 p.m.

Mr. Lightbody distributed background information on the DTEV Improvement Plan and directed attention to a chart titled Typical Transportation Project Phases and Time Line. He provided an overview of the chart and noted that the DTEV Plan began with a Major Investment Study (MIS) that resulted in a plan that included several specific projects.

Chairperson Alvarado requested confirmation that the DTEV Plan is one project and the MIS identified several components of that project.

Mr. Lightbody replied that she was correct and stated that the MIS for the DTEV Plan resulted in three specific projects: Capitol Expressway, Santa Clara/Alum Rock, and Monterey Highway Bus Rapid Transit Projects and noted that conceptual engineering and environmental work is nearly complete.

Member McHugh asked if the nearly completed conceptual engineering and environmental work included the extension to Eastridge and Highway 87 as well as Alum Rock to Downtown San Jose. Mr. Lightbody responded that was correct and that all work to date has addressed the entire DTEV Plan.

Julie Render, Principal Transportation Planner, distributed and provided an overview of a comprehensive packet of documents covering the DTEV Transit Improvement Plan's background and history.

Member Chavez asked why the Eastridge to SR 87 segment was so large. Ms. Render explained, referring to Page 6 of a Board Memorandum dated August 3, 2000, previously distributed which showed that when the project was in the MIS phase the area was considered two separate alternatives. Alternative 2 - LRT on Capitol Expressway from Capitol LRT to Eastridge Mall and Alternative 3 - LRT on Capitol Expressway from Eastridge Mall to Guadalupe LRT.

Chairperson Alvarado recalled that Alternative 3 was the topic of discussion at a past Expressway Task Force meeting for Capitol Expressway where issues were raised regarding light rail (LR) and the loss of High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes. She noted that it has been generally understood for a long time as well as acknowledged and approved by the VTA Board of Director's that this was the alignment that was going to be pursued and conceptual engineering and the work that followed was all premised on a LR System that would go to SR 87. She noted that it was also understood that $500 million would come out of Measure A and the remaining $400 million plus would be sought from Federal New Starts Funding.

Mr. Lightbody explained that two options were proposed to fund the remainder of the project. One was to seek New Starts funding at the appropriate time and the second was the potential inclusion of the third-leg (LRT on Capitol Expressway from Eastridge Mall to Guadalupe LRT) of the project in the "other" rail corridors category.

Chairperson Alvarado asked when it was decided by the Board of Directors to submit only the BART Project rather than both the BART and the DTEV Projects for federal New Rail Starts funds. Carolyn Gonot, Chief Development Officer, responded with a brief explanation of the MTC Regional Planning and Programming Process.

Ms. Render directed the PAB's attention to Page 2, Paragraph 4, Comprehensive County Expressway Planning Study, and Paragraph 5, U.S. 101 Central Corridor Study and reported that both studies proceeded in parallel to VTA's efforts and each other in relationship to the Capitol Expressway Project and both had the ability to influence the design of the Capitol Expressway LRT Project. She reported that VTA's workplan and work done to date accommodate these studies. Many design options were included in the Capitol Expressway Environmental Document to allow VTA to be flexible as the other studies proceed. Mr. Lightbody advised the PAB that information regarding how these projects will integrate would be brought to the next DTEV Meeting in March.

Chairperson Alvarado noted that the U.S. 101 Central Corridor and Capitol Expressway Studies would influence Capitol Expressway planning through decisions made relative to I-680 North and South and Tully Road and noted that the area has been tremendously congested for many years. Chairperson Alvarado noted that the outcome of the studies would affect for instance how station locations and elevations are defined and designed. She stated that we are finally at the point of looking at Tully and I-680 as impact sections of U.S. 101 that must be addressed in order to continue the work on the Capitol Expressway Corridor and light rail.

Mr. Lightbody noted that VTA's revised budget includes funding to go forward with preliminary engineering work on the section of the DTEV project from Alum Rock to Eastridge in the amount of $11 million. He noted that at the March PAB meeting there would be a discussion regarding the potential inclusion of the extension to Nieman Boulevard. He noted that with regard to preliminary engineering on SR 87, prioritized funding would need to be identified before proceeding.

Chairperson Alvarado requested a one-paragraph explanation of MTC's adopted Resolution No. 3434 that identifies projects being considered for future rail and bus expansion be provided at the next regular DTEV meeting in March.

Responding to Chairperson Alvarado's earlier question Mr. Lightbody replied that DTEV as well as BART were identified by VTA for federal New Rail Starts funding but the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) determined that there was not enough money.

Member McHugh asked where in the process would the PAB propose that the Board of Directors and MTC consider the DTEV Project in its entirety for new rail starts funding. 

Mr. Lightbody responded that would occur through the Valley Transportation Plan 2030 (VTP 2030) process.

Ms. Render noted that in covering Agenda Item #6, Agenda Item #7 was also addressed. She provided an overview of the DTEV Environmental Review Schedule and 2004 PAB Workplan included in the previously distributed information packet.

Member Cortese took his seat at 3:45 p.m.

On order of Chairperson Alvarado, there being no objection, the Status Report for the Capitol Expressway Light Rail Corridor was received.

Status Report for the Santa Clara/Alum Rock Corridor

On order of Chairperson Alvarado, there being no objection, the Status Report for the Santa Clara/Alum Rock Corridor was received.

Report on Capitol Expressway Preliminary Engineering

Jack Collins, Chief Construction Officer, reported that the Board appropriated $11 million for preliminary engineering on the Capitol Light Rail Extension to Eastridge at the January 30, 2004, Board Workshop. He distributed and provided an overview of the DTEV Project EIS/EIR & Preliminary Engineering Schedule.

Member Cortese expressed concern that the 85-acre Arcadia Property located adjacent to Eastridge presents a potential Transit Oriented Design (TOD) opportunity that could be held up if not included in preliminary engineering for the Capitol Light Rail Extension to Eastridge. Mr. Collins reported that preliminary engineering costs for the Arcadia area would require an additional $5 to $6 million. Mr. Lightbody reiterated some of the earlier discussion regarding potential extension of the light rail line to Nieman Boulevard.

On order of Chairperson Alvarado, there being no objection, the Report on Capitol Expressway Preliminary Engineering was received.

Report on U.S. 101 Central Corridor

Study Ms. Gonot reported that the study is nearly complete and distributed an overview of the recommendations. She noted that Parsons and VTA staff performed the work jointly and commended them on a job well done. Ms. Gonot noted that the study was originally initiated to address traffic congestion at the Tully/101 Interchange. She reported that the City of San Jose developed a draft project study report to identify improvements at the Tully/101 Interchange. Caltrans delayed approval of the study pending review of the 280/680 Interchange. She introduced Amin Surani, Senior Transportation Engineer, and asked him to provide a brief overview.

Mr. Surani reported that the Aborn and Silver Creek Intersections were also reviewed and the recommendations are to convert one of Aborn´s northbound through lanes to a left-turn lane and one of Silver Creek´s northbound through lanes to a shared left-turn and through lane. Mr. Surani provided a summary of the recommendations resulting from the U.S. 101 Central Corridor Study.

Near-Term Improvement Recommendations:
Add southbound lane on U.S. 101
Tully Interchange - partial cloverleaf
Yerba Buena northbound slip on-ramp
Capitol Interchange - partial cloverleaf

Long-Term Improvement Recommendations:
Yerba Buena southbound braided ramps
Yerba Buena northbound braided ramps

Member Chavez left her seat at 4:13 p.m.

Mr. Surani noted that the total cost for all near-term improvements would be $45.3 million and the total cost for long-term improvements would be $37.4 million for a total cost of $84.7 million.

Mr. Surani noted that VTA received a draft report from the consultant that will be reviewed and sent out for circulation in early March 2004. The projects will then be incorporated into the VTP 2030 programming cycle.

Chairperson Alvarado asked if the identified improvements would be incorporated into the VTP 2030 at the $45.3 or the $84.7 million level. Ms. Gonot responded that all of the identified improvements will be considered but with less available money they may not be included at the $84.7 million level. Chairperson Alvarado noted that including the recommended improvements in the VTP 2030 did not mean they would be funded.

Member Chavez returned to her seat at 4:18 p.m.

Member Cortese asked what improvements would be included in the VTP 2030, improvements identified in the Central Corridor Study or the County Expressway Engineering Report or both and noted his concern that both would be competing for the same funds.

Mr. Lightbody advised that these issues would be revisited at the next DTEV PAB meeting.

On order of Chairperson Alvarado, there being no objection, the Report on U.S. 101 Central Corridor Study was received.

Community Outreach Report

Anne-Catherine Vinickas, Marketing and Customer Service Director, distributed the DTEV Transit Improvement Plan: Santa Clara/Alum Rock Corridor Summary of Public Involvement Program and Comments Volume I and II (November 2002-November 2003) and the latest newsletter regarding the Santa Clara/Alum Rock Corridor Project. Ms. Render noted that translated versions of the newsletter in Vietnamese, Spanish, and Portuguese would be available in approximately two weeks.

On order of Chairperson Alvarado, there being no objection, the Community Outreach Report was received.

On order of Chairperson Alvarado, there being no objection, the meeting adjourned at 4:30 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Barbara R. Cappa, Board Assistant
VTA Board of Directors