Related Links

The Regular Meeting of the Downtown East Valley Policy Advisory Board (PAB) was called to order at 3:04 p.m. by Chairperson Alvarado at 10^th Floor Conference Room, 70 West Hedding Street, San Jose, California.

ROLL CALL

A quorum was present.

M/S/C (McHugh/Alvardo) to approve the Minutes of October 2, 2004, and February 5, 2004.

Action taken under Agenda Item #3., Minutes of October 2, 2003, and February 5, 2004.

Mr. Lightbody stated MTC is requesting that VTA, as the Congestion Management Agency, submit updated information, to be included in the VTP 2030 process, which will be VTA's input into modifications to both Resolution 3434 and to the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP).

Member McHugh recommended staff submit a proposal for New Starts funding from MTC for the extension from the Nieman Station to State Route 87. Mr. Lightbody stated that MTC is not anticipating opening up projects for new start money that is not already a part of the update but that a proposal could be submitted. Mr. Lightbody noted that the BART Extension and San Francisco Subway projects were both included in the Regional Transit Expansion Program (RTEP) and final phase of DTEV was identified as a Blueprint project.

Chairperson Alvarado queried what MTC did with the information provided at MTC's public meetings held in the Eastside during October 2004. Marc Roddin, MTC staff person, stated that public meetings were held throughout the region to enable members of the public to know of MTC's plans, schedules, and provide the public an opportunity to submit projects of their own.

Member McHugh queried if VTA Board of Directors were to propose the extension to SR 87 from the Nieman Station be included in a revised plan would MTC provide a response with their rationale for not considering the project or for their willingness to consider. Mr. Roddin explained that there are a number of projects in the RTEP, some of which have been identified. He stated that many of the projects are in the preliminary stages so operators and applicants have plans to rescope or better scope them. Mr. Roddin noted that this is a fixed program, which does not have enough funding to further expand the program. Mr. Roddin also noted that every six months a presentation is made to Commission on the status of the projects and at that time the issue of scope changes and how to deal with them will be presented to them for guidance.

Vice Chairperson Chavez requested the definition of "scope expansion" and Mr. Roddin advised that there is no definition available.

On order of Chairperson Alvarado, there being no objection, the Report on MTC Resolution No. 3434 was received and filed.

Julie Render, Principal Transportation Planner, stated that the document provided to the Members contains preliminary staff recommendations subject to change based on public review of the document, which will be circulated once the Federal Transit Agency (FTA) releases the Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report (EIS/EIR).

Ms. Render noted that the document includes all design options originally presented to the Committee and each option was fully analyzed so there would be a lot of flexibility when the time came to choosing options and to approve a project on Capitol Expressway.

Mr. Render further noted that once the document is released by the FTA it will be circulated for 45 days at public hearings and staff will prepare a final environmental document that will contain all of the responses to any comments made during the public circulation. The document will also identify what the project is that will go to the Board of Directors for approval.

Steven Fisher, Senior Transportation Planner, noted that the options have to do with the location of the light rail line and where some of the stations are and how the stations are configured. Mr. Fisher stated that one thing that is constant throughout the project is not only building light rail but also pedestrian amenities and bicycle paths along the corridor and project landscaping.

Mr. Fisher provided a report regarding the following Design Options:

Design Option #1 Vertical Alignment from Alum Rock Station to Story Road Station

The Option would extend the project to Capitol Expressway and staff knew early on in engineering analysis that it had to be grade separated from the intersection of Capitol Avenue, Capitol Expressway, and Story Road for the sake of automobile operations and light rail operations. Staff considered the following design solutions:

1-A. Aerial/Aerial - from the end of Alum Rock Station over the Capitol Expressway Station where the light rail vehicle would enter the median of Capitol Expressway in an aerial alignment and extending that aerial alignment all the way down to Story Road;

1-B. Depressed/Aerial would be a combination of depressed alignment in a tunnel under the Capitol Avenue/Capitol Expressway intersection and rise up in an aerial configuration at Story Road where there would be an aerial station; and,

1-C. Depressed/Depressed which would stay depressed for the entire length of this segment of the project where there would be an open air station at Story Road but still be depressed.

Mr. Fisher stated that staff is recommending design solution 1-A. Aerial/Aerial.

Vice Chairperson Chavez queried about open air depressed. Mr. Fisher responded it would be a station depressed in a trench without a roof.

Chairperson Alvardo requested staffs rationale for choosing design solution A-1 and Mr. Fisher responded that cost, passenger convenience are consistent with design solutions with Milpitas and Vasona Project.

Vice Chairperson Chavez stated it is important to be neighborhood friendly and inquired if 1-B, Depressed/Aerial would not be a better option. Mr. Lightbody responded that there is a drainage channel in that location and from an engineering standpoint would require a light rail vehicle to go down and come back up at a very steep grade.

Design Option #2 Pedestrian Access to the Aerial Story Road Station

Staff considered the following design solutions:

2-A. Passenger Access from the Median Portals - have people cross the expressway at grade to the median and then take an elevator up to the station;

2-B. Passenger Access via Pedestrian Overcrossings - continuous over-crossing with access at each one of the four quadrants of the intersection to a mezzanine level and then one level up to the station. This allows passengers to access light rail without having to cross Capitol Expressway.

Mr. Fisher stated that staff is recommending design solution 2-B., Passenger Access via Pedestrian Overcrossings. He noted that this design solution is a little bit more expensive but gives the community a continuous crossing at Capitol Expressway.

Ms. Render noted that photo simulations of the two design solutions are available.

Chairperson Alvardo queried if the Board of Directors will be touring the opening of the new segment line, as she would like to look at the aerial section. Mr. Fisher stated that staff might be able to take her on tour before the extension opens.

Design Option #3 Station Location in the Segment between Ocala and Cunningham Avenues

Mr. Fisher stated that this section will drop down to at-grade on the alignment is in the median of Capitol Expressway. Mr. Fisher noted that along the light rail portion a pedestrian crossing, bicycle pathways, and landscaping will be provided. One of the options considered at Ocala Road was not to have a station there but as a result of comments from the community and ridership studies, staff proceeded with the option of a station at Ocala Road.

Staff considered the following three design solutions:

3-A. Ocala Station - platform stations directly at Ocala Road where it crosses Capitol Expressway the closest location to most of the adjoining neighborhood but with some tradeoffs such as rebuilding the large portion of the Expressway to straighten it out.

3-B. Ocala/Cunningham Station - build a little offset from the intersection between Ocala and Cunningham. That would be a single platform station in the center with passenger access via a pedestrian overcrossing.

3-C. Cunningham Station would provide platform stations at Cunningham.

3-D. No Station

Mr. Fisher stated that staff recommends design solution 3-B. Ocala/Cunningham Station.

Mr. Fisher noted that there are major PG&E gas lines which run parallel to the expressway which staff is trying to impact as little as possible. Chairperson Alvarado queried as to the status of advancing funding to PG&E for the underground work along Capitol Avenue in the Tasman East/Capitol Project. Jack J. Collins, Chief Construction Officer, stated that the funds were never advanced and PG&E paid for their share of the undergrounding in the joint trench.

Design Option #4 Vertical Alignment into the Eastridge Transit Center

Mr. Fisher reported that the first segment of the Project would have a station at Eastridge, which would interface with the bus system at Eastridge. The light rail vehicle would come out of the median of Capitol Expressway as close the Eastridge Transit Center as possible, either by an aerial out of Capitol Expressway over Tully Road where there would be an aerial station at Eastridge or building a depressed section of tunnel out of the expressway under Tully Road with a station at grade which would be at the same level as the transit center at Eastridge. This would be the most convenient for passengers, as they would not have to change levels to transfer from light rail to bus at Eastridge.

Staff considered the following design solutions:

4-A. Aerial Alignment/Aerial Station

4-B. Depression Alignment/At-grade Station the depressed section under Tully Road and at-grade at Eastridge.

Mr. Fisher stated that staff recommends design solution 4-B. Depressed Alignment/At-grade Station

Design Option #5 Park-and-Ride Facilities in the Minimum Operating Segment (MOS) Phase 1

Mr. Fisher noted that a 400-space Park-and-Ride facility will be needed somewhere in Eastridge and Ocala Road Area to accommodate the demand.

Staff considered the follow design solutions:

5-A. Ocala (new) and Eastridge (expansion) - divide some of the parking between Ocala Road and Eastridge. This would be a small parking lot at Ocala Road and a 300-space lot at Eastridge.

5-B. Eastridge (expansion) accommodate all the parking demand at Eastridge Shopping Center.

Mr. Fisher stated that staff recommends design solution 5-B Eastridge (expansion).

Mr. Lightbody stated that based on preliminary discussion with Eastridge all of the property will not have to be acquired from Eastridge as VTA already owns property for an existing park-and-ride lot that can be either utilized or swapped for property.

Design Option #6 Alignment from Eastridge Transit Center to Nieman Station

Mr. Fisher stated that this location will be on the side of the expressway, which will be piece of land that will be a transit-oriented development with a station at Nieman Road. Mr. Fisher noted that staff has been working with the City of San Jose on the Evergreen-Eastridge Plan, completed by Knight Foundation, which identified that Arcadia Parcel as land that would have potential for a transit oriented development associated with a light rail project.

Staff considered the following design solutions:

6.A. Side-running at-grade alignment from Eastridge to Nieman Station.

6.B. Side-running depressed alignment from Eastridge to south of Quimby and at-grade to Nieman Station.

6.C. Median-running from south of Eastridge to Nieman Station

Mr. Fisher stated that staff recommends design solution 6-B. Side-running depressed alignment from Eastridge to south of Quimby and at-grade to Nieman Station.

Member Cortese expressed concern regarding access to light station from the neighborhoods east of the expressway, have to cross the expressway at grade. Mr. Fisher noted that the trade-off would bet better access for the Transit Oriented Development, but a little further walk for those live on east side of the expressway.

Member Cortese stated that the Strong Neighborhood Initiative Strategy is just immediately west of Nieman, which was adopted by the San Jose City Council, indicated that linkage to infrastructure like the library in the neighborhoods on the other side of Capitol Expressway is a huge priority. Not creating a pedestrian linkage is inconsistent with plans developed not only from a land use standpoint with the City of San Jose, but from the Strong Neighborhood Initiative. Member Cortese emphasized the need for a very safe pedestrian crossing.

Design Option #7 Alignment from Nieman Station to McLaughlin Station

Mr. Fisher reported that an aerial transition from side-running at Nieman Station to the median of Capitol Expressway and continuing on a median aerial alignment over Aborn Road and Silver Creek Road, then over US 101 on a new light rail bridge north of Capitol Expressway and transitioning back to a median aerial alignment east of McLaughlin Avenue and an aerial station at McLaughlin, and transitioning back to an at-grade alignment east of the Coyote Creek Bridge.

Member Cortese stated that he queried about coordination at Silver Creek and Capitol between VTAs work and the expressway study recommendations, which has been submitted into the Draft VTP 2030 Plan. Member Cortese also queried about VTAs standpoint about an interchange at that location. Mr. Lightbody responded that staff determined, after reviewing the 101 Corridor Study, that an interchange was not a need in the near term.

Chairperson Cortese queried if it was safe to approve this Option. Mr. Lightbody stated that because it is an elevated alignment it is not necessarily to preclude the interchange and because it may not be completely compatible a design for that interchange is not available but does not preclude adding the interchange, clear it environmentally and revisit it at a later time.

Design Option #8 - Location of Park and Ride Facility (260 300 Spaces) at Monterey Highway

Mr. Fisher stated this will be for an at-grade alignment with a parking lot in the Monterey Road area on spare land the County of Santa Clara has at the interchange configuration on Monterey Road.

Staff considered the following design solutions:

8-A. Park-and-Ride Lot within Expressway Loop Ramps this option will have the least environmental impact and right-of-way impacts.

8-B. Park-and-Ride Lot on the Drive-In Theater/Flea Market Site.

8-C. Park-and-Ride Lot on Commercial Property in the northeast quadrant of Monterey Highway/Capitol Expressway.

Mr. Fisher stated that staff recommends Option 8-A. Park-and-Ride Lot within Expressway Loop Ramps.

Design Option #9 - Location of State Route (SR) 87 Station

Mr. Fisher reported that this will be a station at the end of the line at SR 87. Staff considered two different locations and the option recommended has better pedestrian access and no complication with going under the SR 87 structure.

Staff considered the following design solutions:

9-A. Station under Highway 87.

9-B. Station west of Highway 87.

Mr. Fisher stated that staff recommends design solution 9-B Station west of SR 87.

Design Option #10 - Overnight LRV Storage/Light Maintenance Facility

Mr. Fisher noted that staff is considering an overnight storage yard for vehicles which would save on deadhead costs.

Staff considered the following three option solutions:

10-A Storage facility at Ocala Avenue.

10-B Storage facility south of Quimby Road.

10-C Storage facility at SR 87 Park-and-Ride.

Mr. Fisher stated that staff recommends option 10-B Storage facility south of Quimby Road.

Mr Fisher noted that the Board of Directors approved an increase to the budget to allow the preliminary engineering on Phase 1 to Eastridge because of the Eastridge-Evergreen Plan and the opportunity to interface to a transit-oriented development at Nieman. Staff will be recommending the budget be supplemented in August, 2004 to complete the conceptual engineering for the three phases.

Chairperson Alvarado queried how much the budget will need to be supplemented and Mr. Fisher responded between $5 million and $6 million.

Chairperson Alvarado queried how much the budget will need to be supplemented with option solutions 10-A and 10-B2. Mr. Fisher stated he would have a better response after the VTP 2030 prioritization process with the Board of Directors.

Chairperson Alvarado queried as to the total cost of the project and staff responded that they would provide those figures at the April 1, 2004 meeting.

Member Cortese requested clarification regarding costs on a project that goes from Alum Rock to Eastridge and from Eastridge to Nieman. Mr. Lightbody stated that the cost of the whole project is between $100-120 million per mile and from Alum Rock to Eastridge there are some cost savings when in the median. The elevated section over Story Road and the tunnel section by Eastridge increases costs.

Ms. Render stated that the sides running feature assumes close to $20 million being assumed in right-of-way costs.

Chairperson Alvarado requested staff provide a chronology of the public hearings for review of the draft EIS/EIR.

Or order of Chairperson Alvarado, there being no objection, the Capitol Expressway Light Rail Corridor Preliminary Staff Recommendations regarding Project Staff Options were received and filed.

Ms. Render stated staff is expecting an administrative draft of the environmental document this month so the schedule has changed for the Santa Clara/Alum Corridor. Staff expects to circulate the document sometime in July and August 2004.

Chairperson Alvarado queried when the PAB is scheduled to make a decision. Ms. Render stated that decision at the PAB level for the mode would be in October 2004.

Ms. Render noted that the translations were delivered to VTA today in Portuguese, Spanish, and Vietnamese. She noted the Portuguese community has been active in the project.

Ms. Render also noted that staff will be bringing back the preliminary thoughts and draft outreach plan in either April or May 2004.

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

On order of Chairperson Alvarado, there being no objection, the Community Outreach Report was received as submitted in the Agenda Packet.

Member Alvarado requested staff agendize election of chairperson and vice-chairperson for the April 1, 2004 meeting.

ADJOURNMENT

On order of Chairperson Alvarado, there being no objection, the meeting adjourned at 4:15 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Gilda M. Grozdanich, Board Assistant
VTA Board of Directors