Transit Planning and Operations
Thursday, August 18, 2005
City of San Jose
801 North First Street - Room 106-E
San Jose, California
Summary Minutes
|
1. |
CALLED TO ORDER at 4:34 p.m.
ROLL CALL
| Members Present |
Members Absent |
|
David Cortese, Chairperson
|
Bob Livengood
|
|
Ron Gonzales
|
|
|
Joe Pirzynski, Vice Chairperson
|
|
| |
|
| Alternates Present |
Alternates Absent |
|
Dennis Kennedy
|
Dolores Sandoval
|
|
|
Ken Yeager
|
*Alternates do not serve unless participating as a Member.
A quorum was present.
| |   |   |
|
2. |
PUBLIC PRESENTATIONS
There were no Public Presentations.
| |   |   |
|
3. |
ORDERS OF THE DAY
There were no Orders of the Day.
| |   |   |
|
4. |
Staff noted that the August 18, 2005 TP&O Committee Meeting will be the last meeting held at the old San Jose City Hall, Room 106-E. Staff noted that Mayor Gonzales’ staff is working diligently to secure a meeting location for VTA at the new San Jose City Hall that is consistent from month-to-month and available to the public. Staff noted that the VTA River Oaks site is also available. Staff noted that as soon as the meeting location is determined, Committee Members will be notified.
| |   |   |
CONSENT AGENDA |
|
5. |
Approved the Minutes of May 19, 2005.
| |   |   |
|
6. |
| |   |   |
|
7. |
Received and filed the Community Oriented Design Enhancements (CODE) Program Update: July through August 2005.
| |   |   |
|
8. |
Received and filed the Monthly Legislative Report for July 2005.
| |   |   |
REGULAR AGENDA |
|
9. |
| |   |   |
|
10. |
| |   |   |
OTHER ITEMS |
|
|
Alternate Member Kennedy took his seat at 4:40 p.m.
| |   |   |
|
11. |
Reviewed and recommended that the General Manager execute a contract with Ove Arup and Partners California, Ltd. for consulting services to develop the Valley Transportation Plan 2030 Transit Expansion Policy and complete a study of potential New Transit Corridors. The contract shall be for a three-year period for a total contract value not to exceed $1,100,000.
Expressed concern regarding the timing of the item, noting that so much can change in the community. Noted that 2000 Measure A called for at least two more light rail extensions, but identified all the different potential corridors to be studied.
Noted that there seems to be a lot of time and money spent in looking at different modes and corridors without some initial assessment that says what needs to be prioritized; not on what mode is most effective, but what area needs the greatest service. Noted that the next project on the line should be the project that serves the most riders in the most effective way. Expressed concern regarding putting the mode before the prioritization of the corridor.
Noted that VTA does not have voter authority to take 2000 Measure A dollars into any of the specified corridors and use it for anything other than light rail.
Referred to the following language in 2000 Measure A: “Provide capital funds for at least two new future light rail corridors to be determined by Major Investment Studies (MIS). Potential corridors include…” Noted that the new language in VTP 2030 is saying up to and no more than two light rail corridors.
Referred to the time to be spent on the modes and recommended that staff conduct a two-phase step and look at some preliminary analysis that says of the seven corridors, there are two that just stand out among them all. Noted priority would be based on ridership, issues with cities, and so forth.
Questioned if the intent of this project is to look at the reality that we are coming to the end of our light rail modality in terms of new extensions, and if we are going to be looking at Bus Rapid Transit (BRT)/Enhanced Bus as the next phase, then we have to find a way to go from where we are now (light rail) to that point (BRT/enhanced bus). Noted that there is a good deal of interest with constituencies to get services on the street now, and this study might evaluate BRT/enhanced bus as a way to respond to these needs quickly and with less expense.
Queried if the Committee would receive status reports on the study.
| |   |   |
|
12. |
Reviewed and recommended the following list of qualified developers to proceed with joint development work on the West San Carlos Street property and the Capitol, Curtner and Tamien Light Rail Station properties: ROEM Corporation and Avalon Bay Communities, Inc. – Santa Clara, CA; Fairfield Residential LLC – San Francisco, CA; Bridge Housing Corporation, BRE Properties, Inc., Blake Hunt Ventures, & DR Horton – San Francisco, CA; Republic Properties Corporation & Green Valley Corporation (Barry Swenson Builders) – San Jose, CA; and Transit Development Partners LLC (Kenwood Investments, Wilson Meany Sullivan & Stockbridge Capital Group) – San Francisco, CA.
Referred to a fee land sale versus a ground lease and requested a financial/risk analysis of the two when considering joint development proposals for the four sites in the Request for Proposals.
Requested a copy of the list of projects throughout Santa Clara County, specifically, the VTA jointly owned property at the Caltrain Station.
| |   |   |
|
13. |
Received and filed the Committee for Transit Accessibility Report.
| |   |   |
|
14. |
Reviewed the Committee Work Plan.
Staff noted the following Committee Work Plan updates: 1) the Developer Selection for Joint Development Program was moved up to the August 18, 2005 Meeting, 2) the Vasona Light Rail Project Monthly Report and Cerone Bus Wash Building Improvements was moved to the October 20, 2005 TP&O Meeting, and 3) the Downtown Platform Retrofit Project was moved to the December 15, 2005 TP&O Meeting.
| |   |   |
|
15. |
Committee Staff Report
There was no Committee Staff Report.
| |   |   |
|
16. |
Chairperson’s Report
There was no Chairperson’s Report.
| |   |   |
|
17. |
Determined the Consent Agenda for the September 1, 2005 Board Meeting.
CONSENT: Item #6. Authorize the General Manager to enter into an agreement with INIT Innovations in Transportation, Inc. for the procurement and installation of Automatic Passenger Counters (APCs) on 20 VTA light rail vehicles, plus the associated hardware and software to support the system, for a total cost of $568,898.
| |   |   |
|
18. |
Announcements
There were no Announcements.
| |   |   |
|
19. |
ADJOURNED at 5:04 p.m.
| |   |   |
|
|