Beginning of Electronic Accessible Version of VTP 2030 Document Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority Valley Transportation Plan 2030 (VTP 2030) February 2005 2005 Board of Directors Joe Pirzynski, Chairperson, Council Member Town of Los Gatos Cindy Chavez, Vice Chairperson, Vice Mayor City of San Jose David Cortese, Council Member City of San Jose Ron Gonzales, Mayor City of San Jose Nora Campos, Council Member City of San Jose Forrest Williams, Council Member City of San Jose Liz Kniss, Chair, Supervisor County of Santa Clara Don Gage, Supervisor, County of Santa Clara Jamie Mathews, Council Member City of Santa Clara Robert Livengood, Council Member City of Milpitas Dean J. Chu, Mayor City of Sunnyvale David Casas, Mayor City of Los Altos Board Member Alternates Dolly Sandavol, Council Member City of Cupertino Peter McHugh, Supervisor County of Santa Clara Ken Yeager, Council Member City of San Jose Breene Kerr, Mayor Pro Tem Town of Los Altos Hills Dennis Kennedy, Mayor City of Morgan Hill Ex-Officio Members James T. Beall, Jr., Supervisor County of Santa Clara, Santa Clara County Representative to MTC John McLemore, Santa Clara County Cities Association Representative to MTC Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority Peter M. Cipolla, General Manager Carolyn M. Gonot, Chief Development Officer Chris Augenstein, Transportation Planning Manager Begin Table of Contents Forward Chapter 1, Foundations: Plan with Vision Looking to Tomorrow Influences of Growth VTP 2030 Goals and Objectives Financial Foundation Chapter 2, Investment Program The Planning and Funding Process Capital Investment Program Subarea Analysis VTP 2030 Program Areas Highway Program Expressway Program Local Streets and County Roads Program Transit Services and Programs Transportation Systems Operations and Management Program Bicycle Program Livable Communities and Pedestrian Programs Systemwide Performance Results Chapter 3, Land Use and Transportation Transportation and Land Use Integration Transportation and Land Use Investment Strategy Partnerships for Livability Chapter 4, Implementation Program Area Allocations and Funding Issues Near-Term Implementation Activities VTP Development Process Appendix, Program Area Detailed Projects Lists Glossary Acknowledgements End Table of Contents Begin Foreword The Valley Transportation Plan (VTP) 2030 is the long-range countywide transportation plan for Santa Clara County. The Valley Transportation Authority (VTA), in its role as the appointed Congestion Management Agency (CMA) for Santa Clara County, is responsible for preparing and periodically updating the countywide transportation plan. VTP 2030 is a plan. It is a statement of the programs and projects the Board of Directors would like to see built, and for which the Board may want to pursue State and/or Federal funds, within the timeframe of the plan. It is intended to provide a planning and policy framework for developing and delivering transportation projects and programs over the next 25 years (2005 to 2030). The Plan identifies existing and future transportation-related needs, considers all travel modes, links land use and transportation funding and decision-making, examines alternative courses of action, and identifies what can be accomplished with the projected available funding for projects and programs. Revenue projections and project cost estimates presented in the Plan are shown in 2003 dollars to be consistent with State and Federal revenue projections provided by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) and with project cost estimates developed in 2003. VTP 2030 is not a programming document. It does not include precise schedules for implementation and does not make assumptions regarding financing costs that may be needed to implement specific projects in specific years. Beginning in late 2004, the VTA Board began development of an Expenditure Plan to implement the 2000 Measure A Transit Program. This process is expected to conclude in Spring/Summer 2005 with the adoption of a VTA Long-Term Transit Capital Investment Program. The Expenditure Plan will provide guidance for future Board actions that may include seeking an additional source of funding for transit or the re-evaluation of current project priorities. End Foreword Begin Chapter1, Foundations: Plan with Vision Index Looking to Tomorrow Influences of Growth VTP 2030 Goals and Objectives Financial Foundation Plans are visionary. They help us to understand where we are, envision where we want to go, and lay out the steps necessary to get there. Successful plans are founded on an understanding of not only the vision and goals that the plan is designed to achieve, but also on the issues that frame them and the resources available to achieve them. The Valley Transportation Plan (VTP) 2030 is both visionary and pragmatic-it affirms what we can do, and raises the bar for what we should do. Looking to Tomorrow "Make no little plans; they have no magic to stir the blood, and probably will themselves not be realized. Make big plans; aim high in hope and work, remembering that a noble, logical diagram once recorded will not die."-daniel burham Valley Transportation Plan (VTP) 2030 was developed in an especially challenging environment. The unprecedented economic hardships associated with the high-technology bubble burst, and the growing State and Federal budget deficits, have raised questions about long-range financial forecasts. These funding realities have greatly affected VTA's operating and capital budget projections, and have introduced additional uncertainty regarding the future resources available to provide for and maintain a comprehensive multimodal transportation system in Santa Clara Valley. Added to this context are the continuing pressures of population and job growth in the county, and in the region, over the life of the plan. There is, however, plenty of reason for optimism, and our expectations of what we can achieve should be high. Silicon Valley, centered in Santa Clara County, is nationally and internationally recognized as a center of entrepreneurship, innovation, high technology, and creative thinking. This creative and innovative spirit is not isolated to software engineers and venture capitalists-it is found in every facet of government and community too. Moreover, Santa Clara County has distinguished itself as a leading "self-help county." Its residents have a long and successful history of taxing themselves to pay for and implement the programs, projects, and services necessary to make successful communities and businesses. Notable examples include the 1996 Measure B 1/2 cent sales tax funding a ten-year, $1.63 billion capital program of highway and transit projects, and the 2000 Measure A 1/2 cent sales tax providing a 30-year multi-billion-dollar capital program of transit projects. With the leadership and people of Santa Clara County working together, there is every reason to believe we can achieve what we set out to do. VTP 2030 provides policies and programs to guide investments in: Roadways, Transit, Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS), Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities, and Land Use. It is intended to demonstrate leadership and vision in the planning and delivery of innovative transportation projects, programs, and strategies. Moreover, VTP 2030 provides an opportunity for the community and the VTA Board of Directors to affirm an agenda for growth and change that: 1) Balances transportation resources, plans their future use, and effectively improves the existing countywide roadway system 2) Improves the operations of the county's roadways and transit services 3) Implements new technologies and management strategies to better operate, manage, and maintain transportation systems 4) Improves the relationship between transportation and land use planning and decision-making 5) Responds to a heightened awareness of the importance of the links between transportation systems, open space preservation, air quality, urban form, and other quality-of-life issues 6) Creates a multimodal framework for improving mobility options throughout the county The past three decades have seen the completion of numerous roadway projects including new and expanded freeways, highways, and expressways, new and improved interchanges, and upgrades and improvements to arterial and local roadways. The transit system has been expanded and enhanced to include 54 stations and 37 miles of light rail, a modernized bus fleet, creative service plans, and new and expanded commuter rail services. A countywide network of bicycle trails and facilities that links with regional facilities is taking shape, and more recently, advances in technology are catching up with theory to allow the practical implementation of "intelligent transportation systems." As this plan indicates, these trends are projected to continue into the future with sustained investments in multimodal transportation services and infrastructure. However, while system expansion is still a key element of this plan, the VTP 2030 vision includes a shift toward enhanced utilization, better modal coordination and integration, and better operations of the existing transportation system. Finally, while the transportation system has been maturing, there is intense latent demand for changes in land use patterns-in a sense, maturing them to better support existing and future investments in transportation infrastructure and services. Growth is coming-and the ultimate form of that growth will determine if we succeed in fully utilizing our investments in transportation and urban infrastructure, or if we continue to grow outwards, spreading our investment dollars ever thinner over ever-increasing areas. Chapter 1 of the VTA's Valley Transportation Plan 2030 (VTP 2030) examines the influences of growth in Santa Clara County, explores plan goals and their context, and presents an outlook for the resources anticipated to be available to implement the plan during its 25-year timeframe (2005 to 2030). Together, these sections lay a foundation for the broad array of investments, services and programs that VTA and its partnering agencies will work to put into place over the coming decades. The following sections of Chapter 1 outline: 1) Influences of Growth-engine of change 2) VTP 2030 Goals-principles of change 3) Financial Foundation-building blocks of change The VTP 2030 vision provides an opportunity for the VTA Board and community to demonstrate leadership in moving Santa Clara County to better times, and making it a better place to live, work, and play. Influences of Growth The population and land use data used in VTP 2030 is derived from the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) Projections 2003. Projections 2003 is based on a "Smart Growth" scenario derived from work conducted region-wide by ABAG during 2002 and 2003. ABAG projections have been questioned in the past because they were built primarily on historical growth trends, and therefore tended to perpetuate the status quo growth patterns of sprawl and decentralization in their forecasts. Released during October 2003, this new approach to forecasting, termed a "Network of Neighborhoods," assumes much of the new growth in the region will be focused in existing downtown and main street areas, around transit stations, and along major transportation corridors. This scenario is very much in line with VTA's own Community Design and Transportation (CDT) Program's framework of growth focused in cores, corridors and station areas (The CDT Program is discussed in Chapter 3) -areas where major investments in transportation and urban infrastructure have already been made. An important note here is that these assumptions about new growth can only be realized through actions of local governments with land use authority-concerted and deliberate efforts are needed to change land use regulations to allow these new development patterns to emerge. [Photo: A row of townhomes lines a new-urbanist neighborhood. By combining, smaller front yards, efficient land use, smarter parking management, and well-kept streets, new-urbanist neighborhoods are more affordable, more walkable and have less crime.] Growth Trends Although the high-technology bubble burst has greatly impacted the Silicon Valley economy over the last few years, growth projections for population and jobs remain strong for the foreseeable future. The advantages offered by Silicon Valley's unique concentration of high-technology firms, world-renowned Bay Area universities, a superb climate, and a highly educated workforce are expected to continue to be strong attractive forces for the area. ABAG growth projections depict a robust economy continuing through 2030, with increases in the county's population of 27 percent, and in job growth of 37 percent, from 2005 levels. These numbers are significant: they represent 31 percent of the total population growth and 29 percent of total job growth projected for the entire nine-county Bay Area region during the same time period. As a major employment center within the region, Santa Clara County will continue to retain significantly more jobs than employed residents. Over the next 25 years, this imbalance will become pronounced by a 37 percent increase in new jobs, which is expected to exceed the increase in employed residents by nearly 44,000. As a result, the need for labor from surrounding counties will increase. Growth in net in-commuting is projected to continue over the next decade and then to level off over the longer term. [Photo: An aerial view of a large apartment complex in the middle of a high-tech business district in North San Jose. By locating affordable housing next to job sites, employees can relocate to housing closer to their jobs, reducing automobile congestion into the area by walking or biking to work instead of driving.] [Table 1-1 Growth Trends for Santa Clara County] In 2005, the population of Santa Clara County is 1.79 million. In 2030, the population of Santa Clara County is projected to be 2.27 million, an increase of 27 percent. In 2005, the number of households in Santa Clara County is 600,000. In 2030, the number of households is projected to be 770,000, an increase of 28 percent. In 2005, the number of employed residents in Santa Clara County is 960,000. In 2030, the population of Santa Clara County is projected to be 1.31 million, an increase of 36 percent. In 2005, the number of jobs in Santa Clara County is 1.09 million. In 2030, the number of jobs is projected to be 1.48 million, an increase of 37 percent. [End Table 1-1] Growth Patterns Within Santa Clara County Over the next 25 years, substantial growth will occur in the northern parts of the county, in northern San Jose, Santa Clara, Sunnyvale, and Milpitas, in particular. This growth will continue the pattern of intensive development at the southern end of San Francisco Bay, filling in the area from the Peninsula to the East Bay. A shift in the countywide pattern of growth is also anticipated, with a larger share of growth occurring in the southern parts of the county. In particular, high rates of growth are projected for southern San Jose, Morgan Hill, and Gilroy, as development accelerates in those areas. Population Growth Santa Clara County's population is estimated to be 2.27 million by 2030, an increase of nearly 486,000 residents over today's (2005) population. About two-thirds of Santa Clara County's population and household growth over the next 25 years will occur in San Jose, which will gain nearly 324,000 new residents and 107,000 new households. San Jose will remain the most populous jurisdiction within the county, the largest city in the Bay Area region, and the third largest city in California. The next largest amounts of population growth are expected in Santa Clara with 30,000 new residents, 26,600 in unincorporated areas of the county, 22,800 in Milpitas, 21,500 in Sunnyvale, 13,600 in Gilroy, and 13,300 in Mountain View. Excluding north San Jose, the cities in the northern parts of the county represent about 21 percent of total county population growth. About 4 percent of countywide population growth is expected in the southernmost communities of Gilroy and Morgan Hill. The highest rates of population growth are projected for San Jose at 34 percent, Milpitas at 33 percent, Gilroy at 29 percent, Santa Clara at 28 percent, unincorporated county areas at 25 percent, and Palo Alto at 20 percent. Job Growth Despite the recent economic downturn, job growth in Santa Clara County is expected to be strong over the next 25 years, increasing by 37 percent (or nearly 400,000) to 1.48 million jobs (according to the Association of Bay Area Governments' Projections 2003). Almost half of this growth in new jobs is projected for San Jose. Most of these will be higher-paying jobs (about 271,000) related to the high-technology industry. Job growth will also remain strong for other cities in the northern part of the county: 36,000 new jobs in Sunnyvale; 33,000 in Santa Clara; 20,000 in Milpitas; and 20,000 in Mountain View. The continued strength of employment in the northern parts of the county is highlighted by the large combined job growth projected for the cities of Santa Clara, Sunnyvale, Milpitas, Mountain View, Cupertino, and Palo Alto, totaling nearly 128,000 jobs and representing 32 percent of the total job growth in the county. In the southern parts of the county the workforce will also expand significantly, by approximately 93 percent for Morgan Hill, and 62 percent for Gilroy. Together, these two cities account for over 26,000 new jobs, or nearly 6 percent of total countywide job growth, not including the substantial job growth expected in the southern San Jose/Coyote Valley area. Congestion and Mobility Management The pursuit of economic growth means that travel demand will continue to increase significantly over the next 25 years. Plans are under way to expand roadway capacity to accommodate more trips in the coming years, but the ability to expand the roadway system to accommodate more vehicles is approaching practical limits. Moreover, adding roadway capacity essentially "induces" more automobile travel as people find the "cost" of driving (i.e., travel time) reduced, further aggravating the problem as new capacity is quickly gobbled up. This is one of the endemic problems of transportation planning associated with managing roadway congestion: build it and they will come. [Table 1-2 Population, Employment and Freeway Capacity Increases] This table is shows the projected increase in population and jobs in Santa Clara County relative to the increase in freeway growth between 2005 and 2030. Population will increase by 27 percent, jobs will increase by 37 percent and freeway capacity will increase by 6 percent. [End Table 1-2] [Table 1-3 Vehicle Trips] This table contrasts the number of total AM peak hour trips and diverted trips (trips that are forgone due to limited roadway capacity) in 2000 against the projections for 2030. In 2000, the number of AM peak hour trips is 356,298 and diverted trips are 38,273. In 2030, the project number of AM peak hour trips is 493,843 and diverted trips 53,048. [End Table 1-3] The estimated 5.6 percent increase in freeway capacity (additional lane miles) from VTP 2030 roadway projects is far short of the percentage increases in residents and jobs. The widening gap between job and population growth and roadway capacity expansion means that a growing pool of commuters will be unable to find room on the roads during peak periods. By 2030, there is a demand for travel during the morning peak hour of nearly 550,000 vehicle trips. Over 50,000 of those trips will not be able to travel during the morning peak hour due to congestion. One result of this is an even greater duration of congested conditions, as more drivers adjust their time of travel to avoid the most heavily congested commute hours. The enormous pent-up demand for roadway space will limit the ability to significantly reduce congestion over the 25-year planning horizon of VTP 2030. [Table 1-4 Traffic Growth] This table contrasts the number of arterial, expressway and freeway trips observed in 2000 against the projected number of trips for these types of roadways in 2030 for the AM peak hour. In 2000, freeway trips total 1,461,408, expressway trips total 417,748 and arterial trips total 1,186,970 for a total of 3,066,126. In 2030, projected freeway trips total 2,164,650, expressway trips total 588,468 and arterial trips total 2,032,127 for a total of 4,785,246. The bottom line is that no matter how much we expand and refine our roadway systems, we will never completely eliminate congestion; nor would we want to in all areas, since some level of congestion-for example, in downtown business districts or along main streets-is an indicator of a healthy economy. This isn't to suggest that roadway improvements are not necessary. Quite the opposite: roadways are-and will continue to be-a critical piece of delivering a balanced and integrated transportation system in Santa Clara County. [Photo: A compact car and a light rail vehicle travel along Tasman Drive in North San Jose. As roadway demand increases, automobile drivers can avoid traffic congestion by using public transit such as light rail] With diminishing options for expansion, greater emphasis must be placed on throughput enhancement through systems management. Mobility management strategies and techniques can improve community livability and help shift person trips from driving alone to other modes such as shared ride, transit, biking and walking. VTP 2030 must thus accept and respond to these realities and opportunities. Responses include: 1) Alternative transportation modes and changes in land uses and development patterns. These are necessary to provide travel alternatives to driving alone in the peak hours. A primary obstacle to managing peak-hour congestion is the high level of demand at the fringes of the morning and evening peak periods. Strategies that add peak-period roadway capacity will increase peak-hour throughput but will not relieve congestion in key corridors. 2) Transit improvements in congested corridors to increase transit mode share by providing an attractive alternative to driving alone in heavy traffic. However, transit travel times need to be competitive with automobile travel times. As roads become more congested, transit service is also impacted, and ways to maintain and improve transit speeds become critical. 3) Transportation system management strategies and the implementation of new technologies. These strategies will have increasingly important roles in future transportation plans due to their cost-effectiveness in improving roadway conditions, and to the high costs and limited benefits of improving the transportation system through expansion. Effective systems management requires the completion of an interconnected, multimodal system that provides travel options for all types of trips. 4) Land uses and development patterns that support transit, walking and bike trips. High- quality, infill developments in downtowns, around transit stations, and along main streets and major transportation corridors should be priorities of local jurisdictions. These are areas where tremendous investments in urban and transportation infrastructure have already been made, and where changes in land uses will yield the greatest mobility and livability benefits. Understanding these realities helps define a framework for VTA and local jurisdictions to take actions that can improve travel conditions and the quality of life for the county's residents and workers. The next section discusses the goals and objectives associated with VTP 2030, and how they can make a difference in sustaining and improving the quality of life and economic health of the region. VTP 2030 Goals and Objectives Goals and objectives are fundamental components of the planning process. They help to define an overall vision and the steps necessary to move forward in attainment of that vision. VTP 2030 is intended to fulfill several complementary goals established by VTA, including VTA's overarching Vision and Mission Statements and its Strategic Plan Goals. This section presents these goals within the context of the VTP 2030 planning process. [Photo: An aerial view of the intersection of North First Street and Karina Court in San Jose.] VTA Vision and Mission Statements In 1995, VTA adopted the following Vision and Mission Statements: Vision Statement The vision of the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) is to provide a transportation system that allows anyone to go anywhere in the region easily and efficiently. Mission Statement The mission of the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) is to provide the public with a safe and efficient countywide transportation system. The system increases access and mobility, reduces congestion, improves the environment, and supports economic development, thereby enhancing the quality of life. In addition, the VTA Board of Directors specified four key policy directions and adopted a fifth related to the 1996 Measure B Program in 1999. Those policies are as follows: 1) Integrate land use and transportation 2) Use all transportation options 3) Create safe, convenient, reliable and high-quality bus/rail operation 4) Build a regional perspective 5) In partnership with the County of Santa Clara, implement the 1996 Measure B Transportation Improvement Program VTA Strategic Plan Goals VTA recently completed a review of its services and programs and formulated recommendations to improve its efficiency and effectiveness, and to enhance its ability to continue providing quality services and programs to its customers within the context of current Board policy, the region's current economic realities, and financial constraints. Subsequently, previous Strategic Plan goals and objectives were revised and expanded to include recommendations from a Business Review Team (composed of members of the business community and VTA management and staff) and an Ad Hoc Financial Stability Committee (composed of VTA Board members and community members). These goals and objectives, presented below, were reviewed and approved by the VTA Board on November 7, 2003. [Photo: A construction worker atop a metal beam, assists a crane in guiding a bridge segment into place] Maintain Financial Stability 1) Secure adequate levels of funding to sustain the existing transportation system and secure new fund sources for system expansion. 2) Increase the transit system's operating recovery ratio, with a target of 20-25 percent, by adding new riders, increasing the average fare per passenger through a multi-year fare policy and annual or biennial fare reviews, and improving cost efficiencies. 3) Ensure timely maintenance, replacement and/or rehabilitation of essential capital assets. 4) Implement new capital programs only when operations and maintenance costs have been identified and revenue sources determined. 5) Ensure the Reserve Fund policy will sustain sufficient future cash flow through changing economic cycles. 6) Maintain a proactive State and Federal legislative program to ensure policies and funding allocations serve the needs of VTA's mission and diverse communities. 7) Pursue joint development opportunities that result in both ridership and development revenues for VTA. 8) Ensure that expenditures of 2000 Measure A funds are consistent with priority projects and services as identified by the Board of Directors. Improve Mobility and Access [Photo: A VTA bus crosses through the intersection of The Alameda and Julian Street west of downtown San Jose.] 1) Provide transportation facilities and services that support and enhance the quality of life for Santa Clara County residents and the continued health of Santa Clara County's economy. 2) Manage congestion by focusing investments to address the transportation system's greatest roadway, transit, bicycle and pedestrian needs. 3) Increase the use of commute alternatives, especially in defined key cores, transportation corridors and station areas. 4) Continually evaluate services through the Service Management Plan, using revised service standards, making necessary modifications to assure efficiency and effectiveness of transit service, and expand service as allowed by financial resources. 5) Develop plans, secure environmental clearance and begin implementation of priority 2000 Measure A transit projects as funds become available. 6) Complete the 1996 Measure A transit and highway projects as local, State and Federal funding allows. Integrate Transportation and Land Use 1) Continue to work with the cities and County to improve the relationship between land use and transportation decisions, and advocate for the implementation of the principles and practices contained in the Community Design and Transportation Program. 2) Develop and enhance partnerships with the cities and the County to ensure adoption of Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) plans and policies along existing and future transit corridors. 3) Partner with the private sector and the cities to develop projects at VTA station areas to intensify residential, commercial, and retail uses. 4) Through the VTP 2030 Plan, strive to provide certainty to cities and private developers that priority transit projects upon which cities base land use decisions will be implemented in a timely manner. Enhance Customer Focus 1) Increase ridership at least 1 to 3 percent annually. 2) Maintain a high level of transit system reliability. 3) Better communicate transit service information to customers and improve customer information resources as near- and long-term opportunities arise, including real-time route and schedule information, on-line trip planning, and e-commerce for VTA passes and tickets. 4) Maintain a proactive media relations presence to promote services and provide awareness of VTA benefits to the community. 5) Continue to enhance transit service in order to make VTA the travel mode of first choice. 6) Ensure that comprehensive public participation programs are a key element in developing transportation system plans and projects. Increase Employee Ownership 1) Continue to involve employees in the refinement of VTA business practices, such as transit routes and schedule planning. 2) Continue to respond to key areas of organizational improvement identified by employees. 3) Continue to work with employee labor representatives to develop strategies and to implement additional operational efficiencies. 4) Foster an environment that demonstrates VTA is an employer of choice. [Photo: A light rail vehicle travels through Downtown San Jose.] VTP 2030 Goal and Objectives The overarching goal established for VTA's long-range planning is: "To provide transportation facilities and services that support and enhance the county's continued success by fostering: A high quality of life for Santa Clara County's residents, and continued health of Santa Clara County's economy." While this goal remains the backbone of countywide long-range transportation planning, VTP 2030 establishes the following supporting objectives: 1) Provide a policy framework in which the investments made in transportation infrastructure and services are matched with land use policy commitments from local jurisdictions that fully support those investments and encourage optimal utilization and effectiveness of all transportation modes 2) Provide a balanced transportation system that supports implementation of all modes of travel 3) Provide projects, programs, and policies that develop and foster proactive partnerships between VTA and local jurisdictions 4) Provide projects, programs, and policies that encourage and support community vitality, and economic and social prosperity 5) Provide a long-range planning framework that supports and implements VTA's Strategic Goals and Objectives [Sidebar: Aging of Population and the Impact on Paratransit] The 65 to 80+ population will nearly triple between 2005 and 2030. These individuals will need health care, social, shopping and other human services, including transportation. VTA anticipates that a large percentage of people 80+ will register for paratransit services, significantly increasing demand over current levels. To the extent that traditional transit can diversify and meet more of the needs of these individuals, the demand for paratransit service as we know it today can be focused on those needing it most. [Table 1-5 Population by Age in Santa Clara County] This table contrasts the breakdown of Santa Clara County residents by age in the year 2000 against the age projections for 2030. Notably, while the amount of residents between the ages of 0 and 49 will remain constant between 2000 and 2030, 50-64 year olds will increase by approximately 50 percent, 65-79 year olds will increase by nearly 200 percent and residents over 80 years old will increase by approximately 150 percent. [End Table 1-5] [End Sidebar] Context of VTP 2030 Goals The above goals and objectives are intended to provide overarching principles for VTA in the planning process for VTP 2030. They relate to building and maintaining a multimodal transportation system that fosters a healthy economy and a high quality of life for residents and workers. VTP 2030 aims to achieve this by providing: 1) Relief from congestion 2) Better facilities and services for off-peak trips 3) Attractive travel choices 4) Services for a diverse population 5) Transportation for vibrant communities 6) Economic dividends of transportation investment Relief from Congestion Time spent in traffic is time lost. Delays caused by incidents, construction and inadequate transportation system capacity aggravate drivers and passengers and make it harder to fulfill family, work and community commitments. The package of multimodal programs and projects in VTP 2030 is intended to provide a range of mobility and livability improvements. Facilitating Both Peak and Non-Peak Trips Transportation planning generally focuses on managing peak-hour demand for the trip to work, and the improved transit service and roadway improvements described in VTP 2030 strives to do that. But people make many other types of trips throughout the day and evening to enjoy the region's activities and conduct their daily lives: high-tech workers may take evening college courses or pick up children after school sports or a karate class; teens may want to meet friends after school or get to parks, museums or malls during summer break; and families may want to attend sporting events or concerts during evening hours or on weekends. About half of all daily trips made in the county are made during the morning and afternoon peak periods. In 2000 (according to MTC's 2000 Regional Household Survey Data), home-based work trips represented about a quarter of the daily trips made in the county, and roughly 65 percent of these trips are made during the morning and evening peak commute times. However, workers also make trips before, after and in between their work trips. Moreover, about 43 percent (according to ABAG Projections 2003) of the county's population is not part of the work force (children, seniors, students, etc.) and many of these non-work trips are made during off-peak hours. Non-work based trips accounted for about three-quarters of the county's daily trips (according to VTA countywide models). This underscores the importance of providing transportation facilities and services for both peak and off-peak trip-making. Future planning must consider a range of options including congestion pricing, TDM programs, and the development of a well-designed, compact, mixed-use urban form where housing, schools, worksites, restaurants and stores are located close together. [Table 1-6 Current Trip Types] This table breaks down total daily trips by trip type. Home-base work trips constitute 23 percent of total daily trips, non-home-base 29 percent, home-based social/recreational 13 percent, home-based shopping 26 percent, and home-based school 9 percent. [End Table 1-6] [Photo: A busy sidewalk in a downtown area. By providing ample sidewalk space, streetscaping and attention to pedestrian level detail, urban roads can be transformed into multimodal throughways.] Attractive Travel Choices A transportation system that offers multiple modes of travel not only reduces automobile congestion, but also allows individuals to choose which mode is best for them. Public transportation, bicycling, walking and paratransit service offer a comfortable solution for residents who cannot drive due to age or ability or who prefer the economic dividends and convenience of not driving. As trips shift from single occupancy vehicles (SOV) to other transportation modes, the capacity of the overall system increases. Services for a Diverse Population Over the next few decades a significant demographic shift will yield increased demand for transit, bicycle and pedestrian services. An active and retired baby boom generation will increasingly turn to transit for longer trips and walkable destinations for shorter trips. These modes of transit are also viable economic options for residents who choose not to drive. By supporting transit- and pedestrian-friendly land uses we can ensure high mobility and a high quality of life for our communities. Transportation and Vibrant Communities Key to vibrant communities is a pedestrian-oriented environment, well-integrated and easy-to-use transit, a mixture of land use, interesting buildings and public spaces, and efficient street design. However, the robust economic growth of the past 25 years has brought with it transit- and pedestrian-unfriendly features such as ultra-wide streets and expansive parking lots, and has segregated our employment cores from our residential areas. Through smart infill, advocacy, and transportation and land use investment, we can increase the number of vibrant community spaces in Santa Clara County. VTP 2030 helps do this with: 1) Funding for local streets and roadways 2) Funding for transit projects and services 3) Funding for bicycle and pedestrian projects 4) Funding grants for planning and building vibrant communities Economic Dividends of Transportation Investment The nature of business in Silicon Valley puts significant demands on the transportation infrastructure. Manufacturing industries require interconnectedness with surrounding counties, states and ports to transport freight. High-tech companies, service providers and research parks require easy access to airports, regional rail lines, and interstate freeways to meet their need for rapid travel. And we require high-quality roads and transit to get to and from work. Ensuring that the transportation needs of business are met is a key factor in sustaining our employment centers and the high quality of life we are accustomed to. Included in the many business-friendly projects VTP 2030 calls for are the following: 1) Rapid transit improvement and additional multimodal capacity in key commute corridors 2) Regional and local rail improvements 3) Highway and expressway improvements 4) Improved multimodal airport access to Mineta San Jose International Airport [Sidebar: Rethinking Street Design] The growing desire to balance auto capacity more sensitively with capacity for alternate modes is leading to a re-examination of some accepted approaches to street design. Increasingly we understand the need for a range of street types. Conventional, auto-dominated streets will continue to be essential to serving the low-rise business parks and campuses that are among Silicon Valley's trademarks. However, streets emphasizing a balance among modes rather than maximizing auto capacity will support traditional city-style downtowns and suburban neighborhoods where people can get around by foot or bicycle. [Illustration: An artist's sketch depicts a rethought urban street where the street width is divided almost evenly between accommodating automobile travel and the pedestrian realm. In the sketch, approximately 40 feet is allotted for two lanes of automobile travel and street-side parking. Sidewalks, streetscaping and outdoor dining total 20-25 feet on both sides of the street. This is in contrast to the street type that pervades contemporary communities where four to eight lane-wide roadways are adjacent to 5 foot-wide sidewalks.] [End Sidebar] Access to Work Force Silicon Valley's future depends on access to the largest and most diverse work force possible. The transportation system can support this success by getting people to their jobs quickly and easily. Nevertheless, continued growth of the Silicon Valley economy and a scarcity of affordable housing will enlarge the valley's commute shed. With the median price of a single-family home at $590,000 in June 2004, providing affordable housing for Santa Clara County workers continues to be a challenge. As a result, many workers are forced to accept either longer commutes or less desirable housing, wages increase and the diversity of the labor pool decreases. Bringing people and jobs closer together means improving transportation, promoting telecommuting, and expanding access to housing, good schools, and other essential services. [Table 1-7 Population and Jobs Ratio] This table shows the ratios between jobs and employed residents, jobs and residents working in the county, the total number of net in-commuters and the percentage of the county that does not work between 1990 and 2030. In 1990, there were 1.10 jobs for every employed resident of Santa Clara County, 1.25 jobs for every resident working in Santa Clara County, 78,585 in-commuters and 46 percent did not work. In 2000, there were 1.14 jobs for every employed resident of Santa Clara County, 1.50 jobs for every resident working in Santa Clara County, 133.259 in-commuters and 43 percent did not work. In 2010, there are projected to be 1.22 jobs for every employed resident of Santa Clara County, 1.57 jobs for every resident working in Santa Clara County, 214,260 in-commuters and 48 percent will not work. In 2020, there are projected to be 1.14 jobs for every employed resident of Santa Clara County, 1.46 jobs for every resident working in Santa Clara County, 168,830 in-commuters and 43 percent will not work. In 2030, there are projected to be 1.13 jobs for every employed resident of Santa Clara County, 1.44 jobs for every resident working in Santa Clara County, 168,270 in-commuters and 42 percent will not work. [End Table 1-7] [Table 1-8 Santa Clara Jobs and Labor Supply] This table shows the growth rate in ten-year increments between 1990 and 2030. The number of jobs in Santa Clara County has increased/is project to increase at a steady rate of about 200,000 every decade. The number of employed residents and the number of residents working in Santa Clara County have increased/are projected to increase at about 75,000 residents per decade until 2010 when both measures are projected to grow at a rate of 200,000 per year. [End Table 1-8] In 2010, about 64 percent of the county's workforce is expected to live and work within Santa Clara County. This means that about 36 percent of jobs in the county are filled with workers commuting in from other counties. But some residents live in Santa Clara County and commute to jobs in other counties. When this is factored in, about 214,000 net in-commuters are expected to be commuting to jobs in the county by 2010. However, if we are successful in implementing ABAG's Smart Growth vision-by concentrating higher-density housing and job centers around major transit facilities-the growth in housing supply in Santa Clara County is expected to better balance jobs and housing. So, while about 290,000 workers in 2030 will be living outside the county, the ratio of jobs to residents will improve. [Photo: Passengers wait to board a train.] Financial Foundation Developing VTP 2030 requires an awareness of the resources that will become available during the plan period to implement the programs and projects in the plan. This section of the plan examines the fiscal setting underlying the development of VTP 2030, the steps being taken to ensure VTA's long-term financial stability, the sources of funding, and the funds projected to become available during the 25-year timeframe of the plan. These elements provide the foundation for the Capital Investment Program discussed in Chapter 2. VTP 2030 Fiscal Setting The ebbs and flows of an economy are natural occurrences. In the late 1990s, Santa Clara County found itself at the center of a high-technology boom and unprecedented job growth. But by the early 2000s, it found itself at the center of the high-technology bubble burst. This latest economic downturn has been the most severe on record, and with it an estimated 200,000 jobs left the county between 2000 and 2003. Most of these jobs were in the higher-paying high-technology sectors concentrated in Santa Clara County, and consequently, this area has been more severely affected than other Bay Area counties. These lost jobs, and the related decline in business-to-business transactions, have significantly affected the amount of sales tax revenue generated in the county-VTA's primary source of funding, historically accounting for 80 percent of its operating revenue. Between fiscal year 2001 and 2003, VTA revenues from VTA's 1/2 cent sales tax declined nearly 30 percent, or about $50 million annually. VTA has also been affected by impacts to State and Federal budgets as belt tightening in those areas has steadily trickled down to regional and local agencies. In addition, transit ridership has declined in proportion to the loss of jobs, further affecting VTA's operating budget. All of these factors establish a fiscal setting in which VTA is compelled to critically examine its near- and long-term capital and operating plans. In response to these conditions, VTA assembled two working groups to assist it in planning its financial future. VTA Financial Stability and Efficiency During 2002 and 2003, VTA worked with a Business Review Team and an Ad Hoc Financial Stability Committee to analyze and address VTA's near- and long-term financial situation and provide the Board of Directors with recommendations. The Business Review Team was composed of members of the business community and VTA management and staff. The Ad Hoc Financial Stability Committee consisted of VTA Board members, financial consultants, and community stakeholders. Each of these groups prepared recommendations for improving VTA's financial foundation. Business Review Team Recommendations The Business Review Team submitted five recommendations addressing 1) farebox recovery and average fare per boarding, 2) health benefits costs, 3) ADA/Paratransit program, 4) marketing efforts, and 5) the role of VTA in Joint Powers Authorities in approving operating and capital budgets. [Photo: A construction worker positions rebar] Ad Hoc Financial Stability Committee Recommendations The Ad Hoc Financial Stability Committee developed a strategy based on the current economic climate and the viability of obtaining a new or broadened revenue source. The committee's recommendations were discussed at several Board workshops and meetings between May and November 2003. On February 19, 2004, following further review and input from VTA Board members, the VTA Board of Directors approved the Financial Stability Strategy. The Ad Hoc Committee recommendations were presented in near-term (six months to one year) and mid-term to long-term (one year and beyond) timeframes. A summary of the recommendations pertinent to VTP 2030 is presented below: Near-Term 1) Maximize revenues to support operations. 2) Prioritize VTA's transportation projects and improvements. 3) Utilize an advance of Measure A operations funds, only to the extent necessary to maintain current transit service as shown in the Adopted Fiscal Years 2004 and 2005 Budget. Mid-Term to Long-Term 1) Work in partnership with community leaders to identify the most viable new or expanded revenue source(s) for VTA. 2) Over the next several years, lay the foundation to pursue limited expansion of the sales tax base to help make up for the continuing erosion of this financial resource. 3) Use Budgetary Operating Reserves and authorized 2000 Measure A funds as necessary to maintain existing service. 4) Continue to aggressively pursue joint development opportunities that will provide VTA a diverse revenue stream. As appropriate, in partnership with applicable surrounding communities, identify assessment district sites that will benefit both the surrounding community and VTA. Seek other revenue opportunities as may be appropriate. 5) Consider submitting an advisory ballot measure for setting project priorities if no new revenue sources are approved prior to December 1, 2006, and projected revenue shortfalls prevent implementation of all Measure A projects prior to 2036. The ballot measure should be preceded by a public involvement and community stakeholder input process. These recommendations add to the economic setting and financial foundation that influence the overall development of VTP 2030, and specifically the Financial Plan discussed next. [Photo: a line of cars wait at a red light along Santa Clara Street in Downtown San Jose.] VTP 2030 Financial Plan Developing the plan requires an understanding of the resources that are expected to become available during the life of the plan to implement the programs and projects presented in the plan. The VTP 2030 Financial Plan examines the various sources of funding for transportation programs in Santa Clara County, describes the planning and funding process, the funds projected to become available during the timeframe of the plan, and the Board-adopted fund allocations for each Program Area. Fund Sources Funding for the projects, programs and services identified in VTP 2030 comes from a number of local, State and Federal fund sources. Generally, the plan focuses on the larger sources that provide flexibility in programming and that are expected to provide significant revenues for transportation projects in Santa Clara County. Other less flexible funding sources, or funds that are dedicated for specific purposes such as transit operations, are also presented. While these other funds are critically important to operate and maintain the transit system, their limitations mean that the plan is not needed to establish policy for their use, and so they are not discussed here in detail. Details regarding use of these funds can be found in VTA's Short Range Transit Plan, and in other city and county planning documents. In addition to the more traditional fund sources, VTP 2030 discusses additional funding strategies that will be explored during the timeframe of the plan, and that may become valuable sources of revenue. A description of all of these fund sources follows. [Table 1-9 Fund Sources 2004-2030] This table lists the many sources of funding and revenue projections. These projections are estimates as of November 1, 2004 and are shown in 2003 dollars to be consistent with State and Federal revenue projections provided by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) and with project cost estimates developed in 2003. Among VTP 2030 Fund Sources: 2000 Measure A Sales Tax (2006-2036) is projected to be $5.432 billion. Section 5309, New Rail Starts-Discretionary is projected to be $973 million. State Traffic Congestion Relief Program (TCRP) is projected to be $732 million. Federal Surface Transportation Program/Congestion Mitigation Air Quality (STP/CMAQ) is projected to be $569 million. State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) is projected to be $559 million. Proposition 42 STIP is projected to be $426 million. Interregional Transportation Improvement Program (ITIP) is projected to be $320 million 1996 Measure B Sales Tax Fund (remaining through 2006) is projected to be $290 million TFCA 40 percent is projected to be $45 million Transportation Enhancement Act 21 (TEA-21) Enhancements is projected to be $43 million. Among Other Major Transportation Fund Sources: Gas Tax Subventions are projected to be $4.773 billion. Current VTA Dedicated Sales Tax (2005-2030) is projected to be $4.481 billion. Transportation Development Act (TDA) articles 4,4.5 and 8 is projected to be $2.425 billion. Section 5307 Total San Jose and Gilroy/Morgan Hill Urbanized Area is projected to be $925 million. Section 5309 Fixed Guideway San Jose/UA is projected to be $468 million. State Transit Assistance (STA) Program is projected to be $283 million. TDA Article 3-Bicycle/Pedestrian Funds is projected to be $49 million. [End Table 1-9] Transportation Funding Sources for VTP 2030 Projects and Programs The fund sources described below provide significant revenue for transportation projects in Santa Clara County, and are available for VTP 2030 projects and programs at the VTA Board of Directors' direction. A 25-year projection (in 2003 dollars) and a general description of the programming processes and fund-specific limitations are included with each source. 2000 Measure A Sales Tax On November 2, 2000, the voters of Santa Clara County voted to extend the 1996 Measure B Sales Tax for 30 years to fund a specified package of transit projects and programs. The new 2000 Measure A begins on April 1, 2006, and ends on March 30, 2036. The tax is currently projected to generate $5.432 billion in 2003 dollars in that 30-year time span. The VTA Board has already committed $325 million for bonding to pay for current operating costs, low-floor light rail vehicles and Preliminary Engineering for the BART extension to San Jose/Santa Clara; $5.107 billion remains to fund the rest of the projects. This is not enough to fund the entire project list at current cost estimates. The VTA Board determined which 2000 Measure A projects will be considered within the fiscally constrained portion of VTP 2030 on April 23, 2004. The VTA Board of Directors will develop an expenditure plan to determine priorities and scheduling of the constrained project list. [Photo: Freeway traffic enters a construction zone.] Federal New Starts Program (Section 5309) The Federal New Starts program is one of the Federal transit funding programs created in 1991 as part of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA). These programs were continued in the Transportation Efficiency Act for the Twenty-First Century (TEA-21) and are expected to be renewed in the next reauthorization. The New Starts program is part of Title 49 United States Code (USC), Section 5309. The funds are for significant rail and rapid bus expansion projects. Congress distributes these funds to projects at its discretion, based on project evaluations by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA). VTP 2030 projects $973 million from this source to extend BART from Fremont to San Jose and Santa Clara. Traffic Congestion Relief Program (TCRP) and Proposition 42 In 2000, the Traffic Congestion Relief Program (TCRP) was enacted, directing revenues generated by the State sales tax on gas and diesel fuel from the State general fund to transportation. The transfer was to occur for fiscal years 2003/04 through 2007/08, then end. However, in 2002, California voters passed State Proposition 42, making the transfer permanent. These transfers are now referred to as "Prop. 42 funding." Proposition 42 funding goes to four specific programs: 1) Traffic Congestion Relief Projects (TCRP): establishes a list of specific congestion relieving transit and highway projects designated to receive funds. Approximately $965 million is designated for projects in Santa Clara County: $233 million has already been allocated, and the remaining $732 million is included in VTP 2030. The future of the TCRP is uncertain. The administration submitted proposals to eliminate the program in its 2002/03, 2003/04 and 2004/05 State Budget proposals. While the program itself has remained intact, the fund transfers were suspended in 2002/03 and 2003/04. As of the writing of this plan, the 2004/05 proposal to eliminate the program has been rescinded. As of the writing of this plan, the 2004/05 proposal to eliminate the program has been rescinded; however, the proposal to suspend the transfer for 2004/05 is still in place. Funds to pay expenses on existing TCRP allocations are linked to the defeat of two November 2004 ballot measure regarding Native American gaming receipts. The legislation directing transfers to these projects sunsets in 2008. 2) Local Streets and Road Rehabilitation: augments the gas tax receipts that the State subvenes directly to cities and counties. The current estimate is $621.5 million in 2003 dollars. Since the VTA Board of Directors does not control or direct these funds, the table incorporates them into the Gas Tax Subventions shown in the "Other Major Transportation Fund Sources" section. 3) State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP): increases the amount of State funding flowing into the State Highway account for the STIP, subject to the distribution formulas that apply to the existing funds. The current estimate is $426 million in 2003 dollars. More discussion is included under the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). 4) State Transit Assistance (STA): increases the amount of State Transit Assistance to transit operations. The current estimate is $106.6 million for VTA and $34.0 million for Caltrain in 2003 dollars. The transfer has been suspended for the last two years. STA funds are directed to specific transit operators and funds are generally used for operations. More discussion of the STA program is included under "Other Major Transportation Fund Sources." State Budget shortfalls in 2003 and 2004 have negatively impacted Prop. 42 funding. The State Legislature has the ability to suspend the transfers when the State is in a fiscal crisis and has exercised that option twice in the past two years, and is expected to do so in the 2004/05 State Budget. Each suspension to date has been accompanied by a commitment to repay the funds no later than 2008/09. Federal Surface Transportation Program/ Congestion Mitigation Air Quality Program (STP/CMAQ) The STP and CMAQ funding programs were created in ISTEA and continued in TEA-21. Since they are not restricted to particular modes, STP and CMAQ are also called "flexible funds." STP funds can be used for virtually all transportation capital projects. CMAQ funds are limited to implementing the transportation provisions of the 1990 Federal Clean Air Act in Air Quality Non-Attainment areas. The Bay Area is currently a non-attainment area. Federal funds are authorized in six-year programs. TEA-21 expired on October 1, 2003; however, Congress has been adopting continuing resolutions to allow transportation agencies to continue doing business until a successor bill is adopted. The Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) has final programming authority for STP and CMAQ funds in the nine-county Bay Area, and directs the use of these funds through the Regional Transportation Plan. The current estimate for Santa Clara County is $569 million. State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) Senate Bill 45 (SB-45), enacted in 1997, consolidated several State transportation funding programs and directed State and Federal transportation funds from the State Highway Account (SHA) into the Regional Improvement Program (RIP) and the Interregional Improvement Program (IIP). Together, these programs are called the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). STIP funds may be used for road rehabilitation and capacity-expanding capital transportation projects. RIP funding is 75 percent of the STIP, and it is distributed among the counties via a formula established by State legislation. In the Bay Area, Congestion Management Agencies (CMAs) program RIP funds with review by MTC and approval by the California Transportation Commission (CTC). The IIP is the remaining 25 percent of the STIP. IIP funds are programmed by Caltrans through the Interregional Transportation Improvement Plan (ITIP) process, with final approval by the CTC. The STIP programming process occurs every two years in "even" years. The current total STIP projection for Santa Clara County is $1.305 billion, consisting of $559 million in RIP funds, $426 million in the Proposition 42 RIP increment, and $320 million in IIP funds for projects nominated by Caltrans. Transportation Fund for Clean Air (TFCA) Health and Safety Code Section 44223 authorizes the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) to levy a fee on motor vehicles. Funds generated by this fee are placed in the Transportation Fund for Clean Air (TFCA) account to be used for implementing projects and programs that reduce air pollution from motor vehicles. Health and Safety Code Section 44241 limits expenditure of these funds to specified eligible transportation control measures (TCMs) that are included in BAAQMD's 1991 Clean Air Plan, developed and adopted pursuant to the requirements of the California Clean Air Act of 1988. BAAQMD directly administers 60 percent of the TFCA, with annual revenues ranging from $9 million to $15 million. The remaining 40 percent goes directly to TFCA Program Managers in each Bay Area county. VTA, as Santa Clara's TFCA Program Manager, works with member agencies to develop criteria that are then used to select projects consistent with the eligible project categories specified in statute. The current TFCA 40 percent estimate for Santa Clara County is $45 million in 2003 dollars. [Photo: A light rail vehicle arrives at a stop along the Tasman West line.] Transportation Enhancement Activities (TEA) The Intermodal Surface Transportation Enhancement Act (ISTEA) provided a 10 percent set-aside of each state's STP allocation for "Transportation Enhancement Activities" (TEA) above and beyond normal capital improvements. TEA-21 continued this program. TEA funds must be used for elements of a project that are over and above what would be termed the "normal project." They must have a direct relationship to the intermodal transportation system and fit one or more of 12 activity categories described in TEA-21. These activities include bicycle and pedestrian improvements, scenic preservation, and wildlife mortality mitigation. The mechanisms and responsibility for programming TEA funds have changed several times since the program's inception. As of 2004, TEA funds are programmed through the STIP process. Each of the counties receives a TEA share estimate with its RIP share estimate. The TEA estimate for Santa Clara County is $43 million in 2003 dollars. Other Major Transportation Fund Sources Although the fund sources discussed in this section provide significant funding for transportation projects in Santa Clara County they have not been included in VTP 2030 for the following reasons: 1) Funds are given directly to cities and counties for local road repairs. 2) The VTA Board does not control them, and/or they are committed to operations and rehabilitation purposes. The priorities for using these funds are determined by the cities, the county, VTA and Caltrain, through local capital improvement programs (CIPs) and short-range transit plans (SRTPs). [Photo: A motorist refuels at a gas pump.] Gas Tax Subventions A portion of the State sales tax on gasoline and diesel fuel goes directly back to the cities and the counties for streets and roads maintenance. These funds are allocated based on formulas established by the State Legislature. The State Controller's office transfers funds directly to local agencies. These funds were augmented by Prop. 42. The current estimate, including Prop. 42 transfers, is $4.773 billion in 2003 dollars. VTA Dedicated Sales Tax In 1976, the voters of Santa Clara County enacted a permanent 1/2 cent sales tax for local transit operations and capital projects. These funds flow to VTA and are allocated by VTA for operations and capital projects through VTA's annual budget and Short Range Transportation Plan (SRTP). The current 25-year estimate is $4.481 billion in 2003 dollars. Transportation Development Act Article 3 (TDA 3) TDA Article 3 funds are a portion of the sales tax on gasoline and diesel fuel, which is returned by the State of California to the county in which it was collected. TDA Article 3 funds are for use on bicycle and pedestrian projects. MTC programs these funds in the nine Bay Area counties. Each year, VTA coordinates and submits countywide project priorities for this fund source. The VTA Board has set aside 30 percent of the annual allocation for the Countywide Bicycle Expenditure Program between 2000/01 and 2010/11. The remainder is distributed among the cities/towns and county by a VTA Board-adopted formula. The current 25-year projection for TDA Article 3 funds is $49 million in 2003 dollars. Transportation Development Act (TDA, Articles 4, 4.5, and 8) TDA Article 4 and TDA Article 8, also generated from the statewide sales tax on diesel and gasoline fuels noted above, provide transit operating, maintenance, and capital funds. TDA Article 4.5 is available only for paratransit operating assistance and capital projects. TDA funds are administered by MTC and allocated annually based on sales tax receipts in each county. These funds flow to VTA and are allocated for operations and capital projects via VTA's annual budget and Short Range Transportation Plan (SRTP). The combined TDA estimate (for Articles 4, 4.5 and 8) for Santa Clara County is $2.425 billion in 2003 dollars. Federal Transit Act Section Funds (Section 5307, 5309) The Federal Transit Act (FTA) funding programs were parts of ISTEA, and were continued in TEA-21. These funds flow to transit operators via MTC's regional programming process, with earmarks for specific urbanized areas (UAs). Based on 2000 census data, Santa Clara County contains two UAs-the San Jose UA and the Gilroy/Morgan Hill UA. VTA and Caltrain are the only fund recipients within these two UAs. The three most significant federal funding programs are: 1) Section 5307 - Transit Formula Funds: These funds are available to VTA and Caltrain for rolling stock purchases and paratransit operations. Programming is determined in VTA and Caltrain SRTPs, through the MTC region's Transit Capital Priority process, subject to the provisions of the Caltrain Joint Powers Agreement (JPA). The current 30-year estimate is $925 million in 2003 dollars. 2) Section 5309 - Fixed Guideway: These funds are available to VTA and Caltrain for rail or ferry capital projects. Planning for projects occurs in VTA's and Caltrain's SRTPs. Programming is through MTC's Transit Capital Priority process, and subject to the provisions of the Caltrain Joint Powers Agreement (JPA). The current 30-year estimate is $468 million in 2003 dollars. 3) Section 5309 - New Rail Starts: This is a discretionary program for rail, ferry and rapid bus transit expansions, and is discussed in the previous section under VTP 2030 Fund Sources. Measure B Sales Tax Funds In 1996, Santa Clara County voters approved Measure B, a 1/2 cent nine-year countywide general sales tax to be collected by the county. Tax collections began on April 1, 1998, and will end on March 31, 2006. Measure B is expected to provide $290 million during the VTP 2030 plan period (July 1, 2004, through March 31, 2006). When Measure B was approved, voters also approved 1996 Measure A, a nine-year program of transit, highway, expressway, and bicycle projects and a pavement management program to be funded with any new sales tax revenue and carried out by VTA and the county. The 1996 Measure A specified the transit and highway projects, established the pavement management funding allocations to each of the 15 cities/towns and the County of Santa Clara, and established a $12 million bicycle program, without identifying specific bicycle projects. Bicycle projects funded by Measure B are identified in the 2000 Bicycle Expenditure Plan. The majority of the 1996 Measure A projects and programs are either complete or under construction as of the writing of this plan. The remaining $249 million that Measure B is expected to produce before it expires is already dedicated to projects and programs and is therefore not discussed in VTP 2030. State Transit Assistance (STA) These funds may be used for transit capital projects and transit operations, including regional transit coordination. STA funds are subdivided into STA-Revenue Based and STA-Population Based categories. Revenue-based funds are allocated to transit operators based on operator revenues. Population-based funds are allocated to transit operators based on service area population. The current 25-year STA projection is $283 million in 2003 dollars. This includes base funding and $140.6 million in Proposition 42 STA increments to VTA and Caltrain. It does not include population-based funds taken off the top by MTC for regional paratransit coordination. Additional Funding Strategies Local Sales Tax Since the voters in Santa Clara County approved a sales tax for specified transportation projects in 1984 and 1996, the county has successfully constructed significant improvements to the transportation system. The projects built under the 1984 measure and currently under design and construction with the 1996 measure dwarf the projects programmed with State and Federal flexible funds. In November 2000, the Santa Clara County voters approved a 30-year 1/2 cent sales tax to fund transit projects and services in the county. Measure A revenues are administered by VTA, and VTA is responsible for providing the funds necessary to sustain operations and maintenance of the Measure A projects in perpetuity. The recent economic recession has resulted in downwardly revised sales tax forecasts for Santa Clara County. As a consequence, VTA will need to secure a new sales tax for transit operations to fully implement the 2000 Measure A Transit Program. [Photo: an aerial view of Santa Clara County.] Local Revenue Sources Local revenues can offer greater reliability and flexibility than State or Federal sources, and may be used strategically to leverage other funds. Forecasting the amount of revenue that many of these sources might generate is a difficult and inexact process over the long term. These local sources include, but are not limited to: 1) Citywide or countywide development impact fees (discussed below) 2) City or county general funds 3) Business tax and/or license fees 4) Transient Occupancy taxes 5) Gas tax subventions 6) Local assessment districts 7) Developer exactions 8) Right-of-way dedication 9) California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) mitigation 10) Redevelopment tax increment financing 11) Parking charges and taxes 12) Payroll tax 13) Parcel tax 14) Joint development and other forms of value capture 15) Vehicle registration fees 16) Other user fees Twenty Percent or Higher Local Match Requirement The Capital Improvement Program of the CMP includes a policy requiring Member Agencies to provide a minimum 20 percent match for local transportation projects. This policy has been implemented with flexibility to allow key projects to move forward in a timely manner. Sources of matching funds are, for the most part, left to the discretion of the local agency, but include those listed above. Development Impact Fee Development Impact Fees may be assessed to projects through local agency policies, or through the Congestion Management Program (CMP) Deficiency Planning Process. The CMP statute requires Member Agencies to prepare deficiency plans for CMP system facilities located within their jurisdictions that exceed the CMP Traffic Level-of-Service (LOS) standard. Santa Clara County's CMP traffic LOS standard is LOS E. [Photo: Bumper-to-bumper traffic clogs a freeway. Congestion management projects and policies aim to bring roadway segments performing at LOS F to LOS E or higher.] During the development of its draft Countywide Deficiency Plan (CDP), VTA investigated a countywide development impact fee dedicated to specific improvements on the CMP network. Such a fee program could have the following aspects: 1) Fees charged directly to developers seeking permits to build within the county. 2) Fees charged proportional to the impact (i.e., vehicle trip generation) of the specific land use type. Thus, the fee could be scaled according to the burden new development places on congested transportation infrastructure. The traditional approach to instituting CDP fees is for all local jurisdictions to adopt the plan by a majority vote of their city council or board. Although no legal precedent has been established, an alternative strategy may be for VTA to institute a 50 percent matching requirement and give each jurisdiction the option of adopting the countywide fee as a means of generating its local match. VTA Member Agencies may develop their own Citywide Deficiency Plans for the same purposes. Several cities in the county have or are developing deficiency plans or impact fees for new development projects. VTA staff is available to assist local jurisdictions with developing deficiency plans and impact fees. Roadway Pricing Although the concept of having drivers pay for using the roadways has existed for decades, it is now drawing more attention from local, State, and Federal agencies. This increased attention is attributable to worsening traffic congestion, the scarcity of transportation funding, and the improved ability to electronically collect tolls and vary toll amounts by time of day and location. Tolling is the user fee best able to directly charge for the use of a facility at the place and time of use. Such user fees address the market side of the equation by considering the interaction between demand for transportation services and the available supply. This results in a direct cost for the good-or service-being consumed. Cost in this context may be considered as the time spent driving. Economic theory tells us that as the price of a good decreases (i.e., drive time) demand for it increases-so drive alone trips are induced as long as the cost of driving remains relatively low and new facilities that improve travel time are constructed. VTP 2030 suggests two forms of roadway pricing for serious consideration: [Photo: Traffic zips along a five lane highway.] 1) Toll Roads. Toll Roads charge drivers in all travel lanes to use the roadway. Toll Roads have the admirable quality of being able to pay for themselves through the revenue generated from toll collection. Given the scarcity of-and the high demand for-State and Federal highway funds, Toll Roads are considered in some cases as the best-or only-hope for timely implementation of needed highway expansion or improvement projects. Toll roads are commonplace in other parts of the country and in other countries, and have often been constructed to accommodate long distance or commute trips. Toll Roads can also be an effective congestion management tool. Flexible pricing plans can be used to encourage ridesharing while charging for use of the roadway. Pricing plans can also be used to discourage trips during the peak-hour periods and encourage drivers to shift their commute to times when fewer vehicles are using the facility. The revenue generated in excess of the amount needed to pay for construction and operation of the facility can be used to provide transit services in the corridor; these efforts can further enhance the level of ridesharing and transit use, thereby effectively increasing the overall carrying capacity of the corridor. [Photo: Traffic backs up in solo-driver lanes. Carpooling reduces the number of cars on the road and increases passenger throughput.] 2) High Occupancy Toll Lanes. An innovative operational and financial approach to implementing roadway pricing is High Occupancy Toll (HOT) lanes. HOT lane facilities can be viewed as a subset of toll roads that allow Single Occupant Vehicles (SOVs) to use-for a fee-what would otherwise be a preferential lane for carpools and transit vehicles. HOT lanes are essentially toll roads where tolling is applied to new or existing carpool lanes. HOT lane operations have existed on State Route (SR) 91 in southern California since 1991. This four-lane HOT facility constructed in the median of SR 91 allows free passage to vehicles carrying three or more people, while charging a fee to SOVs and two-person carpools. Creating HOT lanes by converting already existing carpool lanes is currently under design for the southbound I-680 Sunol Grade carpool lane in Alameda and Santa Clara counties. This facility would charge SOVs for use, but would allow free passage to vehicles carrying two or more people. The fee charged for using the lane is used to manage operations and prevent congestion in the HOT lane through "dynamic pricing." To more actively balance demand with supply during operations, dynamic pricing is considered an essential component of many HOT lane operations. Dynamic pricing scales up the cost for using the HOT Lane as capacity (supply) decreases to provide a higher assurance of optimal operations. Just as for toll roads, revenues from HOT lanes could be used to pay for all or a portion of the cost of the additional lane(s) or the lane conversions, and to pay for transit services serving the corridor or other roadway improvements in the corridor. In 2004, State legislation (AB 2032, Dutra) was passed giving VTA the authority to implement HOT lane operations in up to two corridors in Santa Clara County. VTA is currently conducting a HOT Lanes Study to identify candidate corridors for further evaluation. The HOT Lane Feasibility Study includes an assessment of Santa Clara County's freeway system to determine if the operation of HOT lanes is feasible and to identify viable corridors for HOT lane operations. In addition, future studies for new roadways, or for adding lanes to existing roadways, will consider roadway pricing as a method of financing and operating these new facilities and to provide services in the corridors. [Photo: A multi-passenger car takes advantage of a carpool lane, passing solo-drivers in the more congested lanes.] End Chapter 1 Begin Chapter 2, Investment Program Index The Planning and Funding Process Capital Investment Program Subarea Analysis VTP 2030 Program Areas Highway Program Expressway Program Local Streets and County Roads Program Transit Services and Programs Transportation Systems Operations and Management Program Bicycle Program Livable Communities and Pedestrian Programs Systemwide Performance Results This section of the plan is the core of VTP 2030. It presents a capital investment plan for a comprehensive set of transportation projects and programs that express a vision of Santa Clara County's transportation future. The Investment Program will guide VTA in enhancing both the county's livability and its economic health over the next 25 years. The success of these investments-both short- and long- term-requires the ongoing commitment of VTA and its partnering agencies, as well as the support of the Silicon Valley community. The Planning and Funding Process As noted in Chapter 1, the projects, programs, and services identified in this section will be funded from a number of local, State and Federal fund sources. The process for dividing up and allocating Federal and State funds to the local level-and then to the various program areas-is complex and varies by fund source (refer to MTC's "Moving Costs: A Transportation Funding Guide for the San Francisco Bay Area," for additional information about the funding process). For the purposes of this plan, a brief summary of how this money flows to VTA is helpful in understanding the overall financial planning process for VTP 2030 and the policy environment that shapes VTA Board decisions. [Photo: Traffic on an elevated freeway at night] The Flow of Money Locally generated funds are normally governed by local initiatives-such as a sales tax or parcel tax measure-that earmark revenues for specific purposes. Federal funds flow into the State and are divided up based on both Federal and State statutes and guidelines. State funds are essentially moved to the regional and local level through the State Transportation Improvement Planning (STIP) process, and allocated for specific purposes in accordance with the statutes and guidelines governing the STIP process. Various organizations may be involved along the way-for example, the California Transportation Commission and Caltrans-but in the end the funds essentially arrive at the regional level where either a Regional Transportation Planning Agency (RPTA) or a Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) or both divide them up for various dedicated and discretionary purposes. These regional entities may, and most often do, have their own statutes and guidelines for directing funds to various uses. In our case, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) functions as the MPO for the nine-county San Francisco Bay Area region. The policies for MTC to assign transportation funds to counties occur through the development of the long-range Regional Transportation Plan (RTP), which is prepared every four years. The Long-Range Transportation Planning Process Not surprisingly, the preparation of VTP 2030 coincides with MTC's preparation of the RTP, this year called Transportation 2030, or T2030. The projects and programs included in VTP 2030 are submitted to MTC for inclusion in the RTP. Any project that could have regional significance, particularly as it pertains to air quality or transportation system capacity enhancement, must be in the RTP to receive Federal or State funding, or to move into construction or implementation phases. The projects contained in VTP 2030 are sent to MTC for inclusion in the RTP. Constrained and Unconstrained Projects Under guidelines established by the Federal government in the 1998 Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21), and its earlier sibling, the 1991 Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA), long-range transportation plans must be financially constrained. The financially constrained portion of the RTP includes projects funded with projected revenues from sources that exist today-such as approved sales tax measures, Federal flexible formula funds, or gas tax subventions (Fund sources are discussed in Chapter 1). The unconstrained portion of RTP includes projects that would be funded from sources that do not exist today, but could reasonably be assumed to happen or be pursued within the timeframe of the plan; for example, revenues from developer fees, an increase in gasoline tax, or a new sales tax measure. Like the RTP, not all of the programs and projects identified in VTP 2030 can be funded with the fund sources identified, which means that VTP 2030 also has an unconstrained portion. Both constrained and unconstrained projects lists are presented in the Capital Investment Program that follows. [Photo: A roadway segment taken out the window of a car.] The Programming Process VTP 2030 is a long-range transportation-planning document. Neither it, nor RTP, set priorities or schedules for when projects are to be implemented. Programming documents, such as the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP), are where priorities and schedules for delivery of specific projects are developed. These are shorter-range documents with a three- to six-year timeframe. The VTA Board of Directors and its partners determine an expenditure program that will guide project priorities and schedules that are affirmed in these shorter-range programming documents. MTC Fund Estimates As part of the development of the RTP, MTC conducts an assessment of all State and Federal revenue sources and prepares revenue projections for the 25-year timeframe of the plan. Out of the total pot of money coming into the region, MTC policies for RTP identify revenues that are already committed to an established set of regional programs-including a share for Santa Clara County-and revenues that are not committed, and thus available for allocation to other programs and projects. Table 2-1 shows the breakdown of "committed" and "uncommitted" revenues in the region. Approximately $100 billion of $108 billion in projected revenue for the region is "committed" over the 25-year life of the RTP. The "committed" revenues consist of a mixture of funds from the local, State and Federal sources discussed earlier in this plan. The remaining $8.8 billion is considered "uncommitted" revenue that is available for discretionary allocation to regional programs and the counties. Of this $8.8 billion, about $1.46 billion is projected to come directly to Santa Clara County for allocation to the programs and projects in VTP 2030. [Table 2-1 T2030 and VTP 2030 Revenues Of the initial $108.1 billion to be spent in the MTC region, $8.8 billion is uncommitted. Of that $8.8 billion in uncommitted funds, $1.462 billion will go to VTP 2030. The 1.462 billion to be incorporated into VTP 2030 will be divided up as follows: $37.5 million to TLC/HIP, $142 million to the transit capital shortfall, $202 million to Local Streets and Roads Shortfall, and $1.08 billion will be determined by the VTA Board of Directors. [End Table 2-1] [Table 2-2 VTP 2030 Program Allocation by Fund Source This table identifies funding sources by program area. The Highways Program will receive $320 million from ITIP, $127.3 million from STIP and $319.0 from Proposition 42 (STIP) for a total of $766.3 million. The Expressways Program will receive $150.0 million from STIP. The Local Streets and County Roads program will receive $179.7 million from STIP and $50.3 million from TE/TFCA for a total of $301.5 million. The Pavement Management Program will receive $92.1 million from STIP and $209.4 million from STP/CMAQ for a total of $301.5 million. The Soundwalls program will receive $10.09 million from STIP. The Landscape Restoration & Graffiti Removal Program will receive $1.0 million from STIP. The 2000 Measure A Transit Program will receive $973.0 million from Federal New Starts, $5.017 billion from 2000 Measure A, $732.0 million from TCRP and $107.0 million from Proposition 42 (STIP) for a total of $6.829 billion. The Transportation Systems Management and Operations Program will receive $28.0 million from TE/TFCA. The Bicycle Program will receive $80.5 million from STP/CMAQ and $10.0 million from TE/TFCA for a total for $90.5 million. The Livable Communities and Pedestrian Program will receive $120.1 million from STP/CMAQ. Combined, all VTP 2030 programs total $8.5264 billion. [End Table 2-2] VTP 2030 Fund Projections and Allocations Part of the $1.46 billion noted above is already committed by VTA to cover the county share of the Transit Capital Shortfall ($142m), Local Streets and County Roads Shortfall ($202m), and the Santa Clara County share of the Transportation for Livable Communities/ Housing Incentive Program (TLC/HIP). Setting these commitments aside, the VTA Board can apply $1.08 billion in discretionary revenue to the programs and projects in VTP 2030. In addition to the $1.08 billion, VTP 2030 allocations include the 2000 Measure A revenues for transit, TCRP funds, and Federal New Starts funds, ITIP funds, and the additional regional target amounts for lifeline transit, the Bicycle Program and the Livable Communities and Pedestrian Program. At its April 23, 2004 meeting, the VTA Board of Directors approved allocations for the ten VTP 2030 Program Area, as shown in Table 2-2. Table 2-2 also includes Santa Clara County's share of regional commitments. The total amount available for VTP 2030 programs and projects is $8.53 billion. Details regarding each of these Program Areas and their respective lists of projects are presented in the following section-The Capital Investment Program. The VTA Board of Directors adopted the allocations amounts for the projects shown in this table at its April 2004 meeting. These allocations were based on revenue projections developed for the Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP) adopted by the VTA Board in February 2004. The Board is currently developing a Transit Expenditure Plan to deliver the 2000 Measure A Program that considers a more conservative projection for sales tax revenues. This more conservative sales tax figure is reflected in Table 1-9. Capital Investment Program How will transportation systems respond in the coming decades to people's evolving needs for travel options and continuing pressures of local and regional growth? How can we get more out of existing investments in transportation and urban infrastructure and services? How can new projects make alternative modes more attractive? What is the best balance between transit and roadway investments, and how can transportation investments address or encourage beneficial changes in land use patterns and community livability? Responding effectively to these questions will require vision, dedication, creativity, and innovative changes in the way we design and manage Santa Clara County's transportation systems and built environment. [Photo: An interchange under construction] The high cost and lengthy delivery process for major capital investments means that they are the focus of the long-range transportation plan. This focus does not change the fact that VTA's activities extend far beyond construction of roadway and transit projects, and include transit and paratransit operations, pedestrian and bicycle facilities, planning activities, and land use programs. VTP 2030 Capital Investment Program is built on a vision in which the existing roadway network is better managed with ITS improvements: an expanded high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) system, improved interchanges, freeway-to-freeway connector ramps, and some freeway upgrades. Transit lines are expanded, and existing transit services are refined-increasing efficiency and productivity, and requiring fewer resources. Bicycle and pedestrian improvements augment other modes and firmly establish walking and biking as viable forms of travel. Overall, land use decisions are better integrated and coordinated so as to complement and support transportation projects. The $8.53 billion package of programs and projects to implement this vision are discussed in the following sections of VTP 2030. However, much of the work that keeps the overall transportation system going is accomplished through periodic planning efforts such as the preparation and implementation of the Congestion Management Program (CMP), the Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP), Annual Transit Service Plans, the Community Design and Transportation (CDT) Program, and through the programming of individual funding sources. Understanding the Investment Program The Capital Investment Program addresses transportation-related projects and actions in Santa Clara County that involve participation by VTA and its partnering agencies, impact inter-jurisdictional travel, or are regional in nature. These investments are location-specific improvements for four modes of travel: roadway (including HOV and ITS), transit, bicycle, and pedestrian. The projects and programs for these modes are covered in ten Program Areas: 1) Highway Program 2) Expressway Program 3) Local Streets and County Roads Program 4) Pavement Management Program 5) Sound Mitigation Program 6) Landscape Restoration and Graffiti Removal Program 7) Transit Program 8) Systems Operations and Management Program 9) Bicycle Program 10) Livable Communities and Pedestrian Program Developing the Project Lists Because the VTP 2030 Capital Investment Program represents a strong commitment to specified projects and programs, forming the project lists required extensive technical analysis and broad input. VTA's member and partnering agencies have been the primary source for identifying the projects. In addition, since the adoption of VTP 2020 in December 2000, VTA has developed new programs and conducted comprehensive planning studies for future transit investments, roadway improvements, intelligent transportation systems (ITS), bicycle facilities, pedestrian facilities, and land use. All of the projects presented in these lists were evaluated using mode-specific methodologies approved by VTA Committees and the Board of Directors. After a public review period and a series of public outreach meetings and VTA Board Workshops, the VTA Committees and Board approved the project lists in April 2004 for inclusion in VTP 2030 and the RTP. The process for evaluation, review, and approval of this investment program, and for future updates to the program, is presented in Chapter 4 of the plan. Programming Projects Together, the plan's projects and programs will be used as input into the countywide, regional, and statewide planning and programming process. These include the Expenditure Plan for sales tax reauthorizations, the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), and MTC's Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). These and other planning, programming, and funding documents and authorizing legislation will be consistent with the capital investments presented in this section. Projects and Programs The remaining sections of the Capital Investment Program are presented in two parts: 1) Geographic Subareas and 2) Program Areas. SUBAREA ANALYSIS As shown in the map, seven subareas focus on travel within the county's boundaries and four gateways focus on inter-county travel. Each of the subarea discussions consists of a description of travel demand and growth projections in that subarea over the next 25 years; a summary of the investment program for the subarea; and concludes with a map and list of the specific projects by mode. In order to gain an understanding of travel patterns in the county, Table 2-3 presents the estimated 2000 and projected 2030 person trips destined (trips to or within) for each of the seven county subareas. As shown, all seven county subareas will experience growth in the number of trips destined for that subarea. The Downtown subarea will experience the highest percentage of growth (74.2 percent) followed by South County (72.7 percent). Central County will experience the greatest growth in the number of trips, with 46,500 new trips coming into the central part of the county. [Table 2-3 Travel Demand for the Seven Subareas This table contrasts the travel demand for the seven subareas in 2000 against the projections for 2030. In 2000, the travel demand for Central County was approximately 117,000 and in 2030 is projected to be approximately 159,000. In 2000, the travel demand for Downtown was approximately 38,000 and in 2030 is projected to be approximately 72,000. In 2000, the travel demand for East Valley was approximately 74,000 and in 2030 is projected to be approximately 98,000. In 2000, the travel demand for Northeast County was approximately 83,000 and in 2030 is projected to be approximately 124,000. In 2000, the travel demand for Northwest County was approximately 98,000 and in 2030 is projected to be approximately 159,000. In 2000, the travel demand for South County was approximately 22,000 and in 2030 is projected to be approximately 43,000. In 2000, the travel demand for West Valley was approximately 126,000 and in 2030 is projected to be approximately 160,000. [End Table 2-3] [Table 2-4 Person Trips across the Gateways] This table compares the AM peak hour inbound and outbound travel across the four gateways into Santa Clara County between 2000 observed traffic and 2030 projections. Among person trips across the Peninsula Gateway in 2000, 25,400 were inbound and 14,700 were outbound for a total of 40,100. Among person trips projected to cross the Peninsula Gateway in 2030, 19,500 will be inbound and 26,100 will be outbound for a total of 45,600. Among person trips across the East Bay Gateway in 2000, 27,000 were inbound and 12,000 were outbound for a total of 39,000. Among person trips projected to cross the East Bay Gateway in 2030, 51,500 will be inbound and 15,700 will be outbound for a total of 67,200. Among person trips across the Southern Gateway in 2000, 5,900 were inbound and 1,000 were outbound for a total of 6,900. Among person trips projected to cross the Southern Gateway in 2030, 9,000 will be inbound and 1,900 will be outbound for a total of 10,900. Among person trips across the Santa Cruz Gateway in 2000, 6,500 were inbound and 1,100 were outbound for a total of 7,600. Among person trips projected to cross the Santa Cruz Gateway in 2030, 5,000 will be inbound and 4,700 will be outbound for a total of 9,700. [End Table 2-4] Northeast County Subarea The Northeast County subarea consists of Western Milpitas, Northern San Jose and Northern Santa Clara. Principal roadways include US 101, I-880, I-680, SR 237, Montague Expressway, Central Expressway and Lawrence Expressway. Transit service includes the Altamont Commuter Express train, Caltrain, Mountain View, Guadalupe and Alum Rock Light Rail lines, and express and local VTA bus lines. Travel Patterns in 2030 Northeast County is one of five subareas with more inbound AM peak commuters (77,900) than outbound (28,400). Inbound trips come largely from the East Bay Gateway (18,600) and the East Valley (16,200), West Valley (11,100), and Central County (11,600) subareas. Outbound trips go mostly to the Northwest County (6,700), the West Valley (4,600) and East Valley (4,100) subareas as well as north through the East Bay Gateway (3,800). Investment Program The capital investments in the Northeast County subarea center around intelligent transportation systems (ITS) technologies, expressway, highway, transit and bicycle upgrades and improvements. ITS improvements to US 101, I-880, I-680, SR 237, Lawrence Expressway, Central Expressway, Bowers Avenue, Old Oakland Road and other major thoroughfares will increase roadway efficiency and reduce delay from congestion and metering lights. Nearly the entire lengths of Montague Expressway, Lawrence Expressway and Central Expressway will undergo major upgrades including new interchanges, additional lanes and HOV lane modifications. Highway improvements such as interchange improvements and additional HOV lanes will speed up commutes along US 101, I-680 and SR 237. Transit improvements include the extension of BART to San Jose and upgrades to the Altamont Commuter Express train. Cross-county bicycle trails will be constructed along San Tomas Aquino Creek in Santa Clara and San Jose as well as the extension of the Coyote Creek Trail to the East Bay through San Jose and Milpitas. Other improvements include the River Oaks bicycle and pedestrian bridge that will better connect neighborhoods and shopping areas to the Guadalupe light rail line. [Graphic: A map of Santa Clara County highlighting the inbound and outbound AM peak hour travel between Northeast County and the other subareas and gateways.] [Chart: In Northeast County, 23,600 AM peak hour trips are internal, 77,900 trips enter the subarea and 28,400 leave the subarea] [Map: A map showing the locations of all of the VTP 2030 projects in Northeast County] [Table 2-5 VTP 2030 Proposed Projects, Northeast County. Project T1, Altamont Commuter Express Upgrade, will cost $22.0 million. Project T2, BART, will cost $4,193.0 million. Project T4, Caltrain Electrification, will cost $650.0 million. Project T5, Caltrain Service Upgrades, will cost $171.0 million. Project T12, Mineta San Jose International Airport APM Connector, will cost $400.0 million. Project H101-06, US 101 SB/Trimble Rd./De La Cruz Blvd./Central Expwy. Interchange improvements, will cost $27.0 million. Project H101-07, US 101 auxiliary lane widenings: Trimble Rd. to Montague Expwy., will cost $10.0 million. Project H101-10, US 101/Mabury Rd./Taylor St. Interchange Environmental & Preliminary Engineering, will cost $3.0 million. Project H101-11, US 101/Zanker Rd./Skyport Dr./Fourth St. I/C Environmental & Preliminary Engineering, will cost $7.0 million. Project H101-12, US 101 SB auxiliary lane Great America Pkwy. to Lawrence Expwy., will cost $2.0 million. Project H101-25, US 101 SB auxiliary lane widening: I-880 to McKee Rd./Julian St., will cost $8.0 million. Project H101-26, US 101 NB auxiliary lane widening: I-880 to McKee Rd./Julian St., will cost $9.0 million. Project H237-10, SR 237 WB auxiliary lane between Coyote Creek Bridge & North First St., will cost $15.0 million. Project H680-01, I-680 HOV lanes: Calaveras Blvd.to SR 84, will cost $25.0 million. Project H680-02, I-680/I-880 cross-connector environmental & conceptual engineering, will cost $7.0 million. Project X04, Central Expwy.-convert the Measure B HOV lane widening between San Tomas Expwy. & De La Cruz Blvd. to mixed flow & remove the HOV queue jump lanes at Scott Blvd., if unsuccessful after a three- to five-year trial period, will cost $0.1 million Project X05, Central Expwy.-widen to six lanes between Lawrence & San Tomas Expwys. without HOV lane operations, will cost $10.0 million. Project X10, Lawrence Expwy.-convert HOV to mixed flow lanes between US 101 & Elko Dr., will cost $0.1 million. Project X11, Lawrence Expwy.-Close median at Lochinvar Ave. & right-in-and-out access at DeSoto Ave., Golden State Dr., Granada Ave., Buckley St., and St. Lawrence/Lawrence Station on-ramp (not mapped), will cost $0.5 million. Project X16, Montague Expwy.-convert HOV lanes to mixed-flow use east of I-880, will cost $0.1 million. Project X17, Montague Expwy.-baseline project consisting of eight-lane widening & I-880 partial clover Interchange with at-grade improvements at Lick Mill Blvd., Plumeria Dr./Rver Oaks Pky., Main St./Old Oakland Rd. & McCandless Dr./Trade Zone Blvd., will cost $38.5 million. Project R01, Calaveras Blvd. overpass widening with operational improvements, will cost $40.0 million. Project R02, Oakland Rd. widening from US 101 to Montague Expwy., will cost $10.0 million. Project R04, Berryessa Rd. widening from US 101 to I-680, will cost $7.0 million. Project R11, Montague Expwy./Great Mall Parkway-Capitol Ave. grade separation, will cost $24.5 million. Project R13, Dixon Landing Rd. widening, will cost $0.6 million. Project R16, Charcot Ave. connection, will cost $36.0 million. Project R23, Lawrence Expwy. & Wildwood Ave. roadway realignment & traffic signal, will cost $4.4 million. Project R33, Dixon Landing Rd. at North Milpitas Blvd. Intersection improvements, will cost $1.0 million. Project B16, Berryessa Creek Trail (Reach 3), will cost $0.9 million. Project B17, Coyote Creek Trail (Reach 1), will cost $1.2 million. Project B18, Bike/Pedestrian Overcrossing of UPRR tracks (near Great Mall), will cost $5.6 million. Project B30, Coyote Creek Trail (Hwy 237/Bay Trail to Story/Keyes), will cost $6.1 million. Project B31, Guadalupe River Trail (Alviso St. to Hwy 880), will cost $5.1 million. Project B35, Guadalupe River Bridge at River Oaks, will cost $2.8 million. Project B36, San Tomas Expwy. Aquino Creek Trail (Hwy 237 to City Limits), will cost $17.0 million. Project S701, South Milpitas Blvd. Smart Corridor, will cost $0.5 million. Project S1200, City of Santa Clara Communications Network Upgrade, will cost $3.5 million. Project S2011, Brokaw/Hostetter Roads Smart Corridor, will cost $2.0 million. Project S3001, County of Santa Clara Traffic Operations System Improvements, will cost $18.0 million. Project S4010, Caltrans I-880 Corridor TOS Elements & Ramp Metering, will cost $3.6 million. This project is covered by a project identified in the VTA Highway Program. Project S4020, Caltrans I-680 Corridor TOS Elements & Ramp Metering, will cost $5.4 million. This project is covered by a project identified in the VTA Highway Program. Project S4030, Caltrans SR 237 Corridor TOS Elements & Ramp Metering, will cost $5.7 million. This project is covered by a project identified in the VTA Highway Program. Project S4060, Caltrans US 101 Corridor TOS Elements & Ramp Metering, will cost $3.0 million. This project is covered by a project identified in the VTA Highway Program. End Table 2-5] Northwest County Subarea The Northwest County subarea consists of Palo Alto, Mountain View, Sunnyvale and Northern Cupertino. Principal roadways include US 101, I-280, SR 85, SR 237, Central Expressway, Oregon Expressway, Foothill Expressway, Lawrence Expressway, El Camino Real and Stevens Creek Boulevard. Transit service includes Caltrain commuter rail, Amtrak, the Mountain View Light Rail line and various express and local VTA bus lines. Travel Patterns in 2030 Northwest County is one of five subareas with more inbound AM peak commuters (65,900) than outbound (41,700). Inbound trips come largely from the West Valley subarea (15,500 commuters) as well as the East Bay (13,300 commuters) and Peninsula (13,400 commuters) gateways. Outbound trips head largely to the Peninsula Gateway (12,200 commuters) and the West Valley (11,900 commuters) and Northeast County (9,700 commuters) subareas. Investment Program The capital investments in the Northwest County subarea include major upgrades in intelligent transportation systems (ITS) technologies, expressways and transit services as well as several bicycle and roadway projects. Major ITS improvements will cover the entire lengths of Lawrence, Foothill and Oregon Expressways. Investments to all three of these expressways will include roadway widening and interchange improvements. Other major thoroughfares such as Stevens Creek Boulevard, De Anza Boulevard, Fair Oaks Avenue and Fremont Avenue will be the recipients of ITS improvements. Palo Alto's Smart Residential Arterials roadway project will put in place intelligent traffic management and multimodal amenities on major residential corridors such as University Avenue, Embarcadero Road, Middlefield Road and San Antonio Road. Caltrain will undergo electrification and service upgrades and bus rapid transit (BRT) service will improve transit along El Camino Real. The Palo Alto Intermodal Transit Center will increase train, bus, bicycle and pedestrian interconnectivity. The extension of the Stevens Creek Trail, and several bicycle improvements along the Central Expressway/Caltrain corridor will facilitate safer and easier bicycle travel. [Graphic: A map of Santa Clara County highlighting the inbound and outbound AM peak hour travel between Northwest County and the other subareas and gateways.] [Chart: In Northwest County, 55,700 AM peak hour trips are internal, 65,900 trips enter the subarea and 41,700 leave the subarea] [Map: A map showing the locations of all of the VTP 2030 projects in Northwest County] [Table 2-6 VTP 2030 Proposed Projects, Northwest County. Project T1, Altamont Commuter Express Upgrade, will cost $22.0 million. Project T3, Bus Rapid Transit-El Camino Real, will cost $50.0 million. Project T4, Caltrain Electrification, will cost $650.0 million. Project T5, Caltrain Service Upgrades, will cost $171.0 million. Project T8, Dumbarton Rail, will cost $278.0 million. Project T13, Palo Alto Intermodal Center, will cost $200.0 million. Project H85-02, SR 85 Noise Mitigation between I-280 & SR 87, will cost $7.0 million. Project H85-05, SR 85 NB to EB SR 237 connector ramp improvement, will cost $22.0 million. Project H85-09, Fremont Ave. improvements at SR 85, will cost $2.0 million. Project H85-10, SR 85 auxiliary lanes between Homestead Rd. and Fremont Ave., will cost $19.0 million. Project H101-19, US 101 SB auxiliary lane improvement between Ellis St. & SR 237, will cost $3.0 million. Project H237-01, SR 237/El Camino Real/Grant Rd. intersection improvements, will cost $3.0 million. Project H237-02, SR 237 WB to SB SR 85 connector ramp improvements, will cost $18.0 million. Project H237-03, SR 237 widening for HOV lanes between SR 85 and east of Mathilda Ave., will cost $36.0 million. Project H237-04, SR 237 WB on-ramp at Middlefield Rd., will cost $8.0 million. Project H237-05, SR 237 WB to NB US 101 connector ramp improvements, will cost $8.0 million. Project H237-06, SR 237/US 101/Mathilda Ave. Interchange improvements, will cost $13.0 million. Project H237-08, SR 237 EB auxiliary lanes from Mathilda Ave. to Fair Oaks Ave., will cost $5.0 million. Project H237-09, Lawrence Expwy./SR 237 auxiliary lane improvement, will cost $3.0 million. Project X06, Central Expwy.-widen between Lawrence Expwy. & Mary Ave. to provide auxiliary and/or acceleration/deceleration lanes, will cost $13.0 million. Project X07, Foothill Expwy.-replace Loyola Bridge in Los Altos. Also listed as R15 and B07 in the LSCR and Bicycle Program, will cost $10.0 million. Project X08, Foothill Expwy.-traffic/signal operational corridor improvements between Edith Ave. & El Monte Ave. including adjacent side street intersections & Grant Rd./St. Joseph Ave., will cost $1.5 million. Project X09, Foothill Expwy.-extend existing westbound deceleration lane at San Antonio Rd., will cost $0.5 million. Project X10, Lawrence Expwy.-Convert HOV to mixed flow lanes between US 101 & Elko Dr., will cost $0.1 million. Project X11, Lawrence Expwy.-Close median at Lochinvar Ave. & right-in-and-out access at DeSoto Ave., Golden State Dr., Granada Ave., Buckley St., and St. Lawrence/Lawrence Station on-ramp (not mapped), will cost $0.5 million. Project X18, Oregon Page Mill Expwy. corridor improvements, will cost $5.0 million. Project X19, Oregon Page Mill Expwy.-I-280/Page Mill Interchange modification, will cost $5.0 million. Project X20, Oregon Page Mill Expwy.-Alma Bridge Replacement Feasibility Study, will cost $0.3 million. Project R05, Mathilda at SR 237 corridor improvements, will cost $50.0 million. Project R07, Mathilda Caltrain bridge reconstruction, will cost $17.4 million. Project R23, Lawrence Expwy./Wildwood Ave. roadway realignment and traffic signal, will cost $4.4 million. Project R34, Magdalena Ave. & Country Club intersection signalization, will cost $0.4 million. Project R37, Java Drive bicycle shared use improvements, will cost $0.4 million. Project R39, Smart Residential Arterials Project, will cost $6.2 million. Project R60, Miramonte Ave. bikeway improvements, will cost $1.0 million. Project B09, Page Mill/I-280 Interchange bike improvements, will cost $5.0 million. Project B14, Adobe Creek Bike/Pedestrian Bridge replacement, will cost $0.5 million. Project B15, Stevens Creek Trail feasibility study, will cost $0.1 million. Project B22, Stevens Creek Trail, Reach 4 Central, will cost $4.0 million. Project B23, Stevens Creek Trail, Reach 4 South, will cost $5.0 million. Project B24, Stevens Creek Trail, Reach 4, Segment 2 North (Yuba Dr. to North Meadow), will cost $3.8 million. Project B25, Bicycle Boulevard/Lanes Network, will cost $5.0 million. Project B26, California Ave. Caltrain Undercrossing, will cost $9.0 million. Project B27, Homer Ave. Caltrain Undercrossing, will cost $5.6 million. Project B40, Bernardo Ave. Caltrain Undercrossing, will cost $6.5 million. Project B41, Borregas Ave. Bike Lanes (Weddell to Caribbean), will cost $0.2 million. Project B42, Borregas Ave. Bike/Pedestrian Overcrossings at US 101 & SR 237, will cost $6.5 million. Project B43, Evelyn Ave. Bike Lanes (Sunnyvale Ave. to Reed Ave.), will cost $0.4 million. Project B44, Sunnyvale East Drainage Trail (JWC Greenway to Tasman), will cost $0.5 million. Project B45, Sunnyvale Train Station North Side Access, will cost $1.8 million. Project S1000, Rengstorff Ave. Corridor Traffic Signal, will cost $0.4 million. Project S1101, City of Palo Alto Smart Residential Arterials Project, will cost $ 6.2 million. This project is also listed as a Local Streets and County Roads Project. Project S1401, City of Sunnyvale Traffic Adaptive Signal System on Major Arterials, will cost $2.8 million. Project S1402, City of Sunnyvale CCTV Camera Deployment $0.6 million. Project S3001, County of Santa Clara Traffic Operations System Improvements, will cost $18.0 million. Project S4030, Caltrans SR 237 Corridor TOS Elements & Ramp Metering, will cost $5.7 million. This project is covered by a project identified in the VTA Highway Program. Project S4040, Caltrans SR 85 Corridor TOS Elements and Ramp Metering, will cost $4.8 million. This project is covered by a project identified in the VTA Highway Program. End Table 2-6] Downtown San Jose Subarea The Downtown subarea consists of Downtown San Jose. Principal roadways include US 101, I-280, SR 87, SR 17/I-880, El Camino Real/The Alameda/Santa Clara Street and San Carlos Street. Transit service includes Guadalupe Light Rail, Caltrain commuter rail, Amtrak rail, Altamont Commuter Express, Highway 17 Express bus service and various express and local VTA bus lines. Travel Patterns in 2030 Downtown is one of five subareas with more inbound AM peak commuters (36,800) than outbound (24,300). Inbound trips come largely from the Central County (12,200 commuters) and East Valley (8,300 commuters) subareas. Outbound trips go mostly to the adjacent Northeast County (6,100 commuters), Central County (5,800 commuters) and West Valley (4,600 commuters) subareas. Investment Program Major capital investments in new transit services and sizeable roadway projects as well as significant pedestrian and bicycle projects define the downtown improvements. Bringing BART into downtown will connect Santa Clara County's urban center with the rest of the Bay Area, as well as other transit services like: Caltrain commuter rail, Amtrak, Altamont Commuter Express, Highway 17 Express Bus and VTA bus, BRT and light rail lines including the new Vasona light rail line (opening 2005). To improve automobile circulation, five one-way couplets will be changed to two-way traffic among other projects. The Los Gatos Creek Trail will be extended into downtown San Jose and will improve the area's connection to the existing bicycle network. [Graphic: A map of Santa Clara County highlighting the inbound and outbound AM peak hour travel between Downtown and the other subareas and gateways.] [Chart: In Downtown, 13,100 AM peak hour trips are internal, 36,800 trips enter the subarea and 24,300 leave the subarea] [Map: A map showing the locations of all of the VTP 2030 projects in Downtown] [Table 2-7 VTP 2030 Proposed Projects, Downtown. Project T1, Altamont Commuter Express Upgrade, will cost $22.0 million. Project T2, BART $4,193.0 million. Project T3, Bus Rapid Transit-Line 22, Stevens Creek Blvd., Monterey Hwy., will cost $50.0 million. Project T4, Caltrain Electrification, will cost $650.0 million. Project T5, Caltrain Service Upgrades, will cost $171.0 million. Project T7, Downtown East Valley, will cost $550.0 million. Project T9, Highway 17 Bus Service Improvements, will cost $2.0 Project H101-10, US 101/Mabury Rd./Taylor St. Interchange Environmental & Preliminary Engineering, will cost $3.0 million. Project H101-25, US 101 SB auxiliary lane widening: I-880 to McKee Rd./Julian St., will cost $8.0 million. Project H101-26, US 101 NB auxiliary lane widening: I-880 to McKee Rd./Julian St., will cost $9.0 million. Project H880-03, I-880/I-280/Stevens Creek Blvd. Interchange improvements-Phase I, will cost $14.0 million. Project R03, Coleman Ave. widening, will cost $14.0 million. Project R08, Autumn St. extension, will cost $10.0 million. Project R22, Downtown couplet conversions, will cost $20.0 million. Project R35, Park Ave. improvement, will cost $1.0 million. Project R49, ITS Enhancements on Bascom Ave., will cost $0.2 million. This project is also listed as an ITS project. Project B33, Los Gatos Creek Trail (Reach 5), will cost $6.4 million. Project S4060, Caltrans US 101 Corridor TOS Elements & Ramp Metering, will cost $3.0 million. This project is covered by a project identified in the VTP 2030 Highway Program. End Table 2-7] East Valley Subarea The East Valley subarea consists of Eastern San Jose and Eastern Milpitas. Principal roadways include US 101, I-680 and Capitol Expressway. Transit service includes the Alum Rock-Santa Teresa Light Rail line and VTA bus lines. Travel Patterns in 2030 More commuters will leave the East Valley subarea (56,100) than will enter (21,400) during the AM peak hour. Outbound trips will largely go to the Northeast County (16,200 commuters), Central County (11,100 commuters) and Downtown (8,300 commuters) subareas. Inbound trips will come largely from the Central County (7,300 commuters) and Northeast County (4,100 commuters). Investment Program The capital investments in the East Valley subarea are aimed at improving roadway efficiency and expanding transit options. New transit services including BART and a Downtown-East Valley Light Rail/BRT line will better connect this subarea with the rest of the county. Intelligent transportation systems (ITS) technologies will better manage traffic flow and light metering, reducing delays on US 101 and major commuter thoroughfares like Capitol Expressway, Story Road and King Road. Interchange improvements along US 101 will reduce delay, as well. [Graphic: A map of Santa Clara County highlighting the inbound and outbound AM peak hour travel between East Valley and the other subareas and gateways.] [Chart: In East Valley, 26,800 AM peak hour trips are internal, 21,400 trips enter the subarea and 56,100 leave the subarea] [Map: A map showing the locations of all of the VTP 2030 projects in East Valley] [Table 2-8 VTP 2030 Proposed Projects, East Valley. Project T2, BART, will cost $4,193.0 million. Project T3, Bus Rapid Transit, will cost $50.0 Project T7, Downtown East Valley, will cost $550.0 Project H101-10, US 101/Mabury Rd./Taylor St. Interchange Environmental & Preliminary Engineering, will cost $3.0 million. Project H101-14, US 101/Tully Rd. Interchange modifications, will cost $22.0 million. Project H101-15, US 101 SB widening from Story Rd. to Yerba Buena Rd., will cost $11.0 million. Project H101-16, US 101/Capitol Expwy. Interchange improvements, will cost $20.0 million. Project H680-01, I-680 HOV Lanes: Calaveras Blvd. to SR 84, will cost $25.0 million. Project X29, Capitol Expwy. street improvements-intersection modifications, left-turn lane, carpool lane adjustments & stripping modifications, will cost $2.0 million. Project R27, King Rd. pedestrian improvement at Barberry, will cost $1.0 million. Project R51, Alum Rock School District area traffic calming elements, will cost $2.0 million. Project B30, Coyote Creek Trail (Hwy 237/Bay Trail to Story Rd./Keyes St.), will cost $6.1 million. Project S2010, King/Story Roads Smart Corridor, will cost $3.0 million. Project S3001, County of Santa Clara Traffic Operations System Improvements, will cost $18.0 million. Project S4020, Caltrans I-680 Corridor TOS Elements & Ramp Metering, will cost $5.4 million. This project is covered by a project identified in the VTP 2030 Highway Program. Project S4060, Caltrans US 101 Corridor TOS Elements & Ramp Metering, will cost $3.0 million. This project is covered by a project identified in the VTP 2030 Highway Program. End Table 2-8] West Valley Subarea The West Valley subarea consists of Los Altos, Los Altos Hills, Los Gatos, Monte Sereno, Southern Cupertino, Saratoga, Campbell, Southern Santa Clara and Western San Jose. Principal roadways include I-280, SR 85, SR 17, Lawrence Expressway, San Tomas Expressway, Stevens Creek Boulevard, De Anza Boulevard, Saratoga Avenue and Winchester Boulevard. Transit service includes Caltrain commuter rail, Highway 17 Express Bus service and various express and local VTA bus lines. Travel Patterns in 2030 West Valley is one of five subareas with more inbound AM peak commuters (57,100) than outbound (54,200). Inbound trips come largely from the Central County (16,900 commuters) and Northwest County (11,900 commuters) subareas. Outbound trips go mostly to the adjacent Northwest County (15,500 commuters), Northeast County (11,100 commuters) and Central County (10,600 commuters) subareas. Investment Program The capital investments in the West Valley subarea consist of improved transit service, highway improvements, intelligent transportation systems (ITS) technologies, bicycle network connections and expressway and roadway upgrades. Upgrades to the Highway 17 Express bus and a new bus rapid transit (BRT) line along Stevens Creek Boulevard will improve transit service. Sound mitigation along the entire length of SR 85, and improvements to I-280 at SR 85/Foothill Expressway and SR 17 in Campbell should alleviate commute crunches. ITS improvements are coming to Lawrence Expressway, Foothill Expressway, Winchester Boulevard, Hamilton Avenue, Saratoga Avenue and Kiely Boulevard. Bicycle improvements to SR 9, the Stevens Creek Trail, the San Tomas Aquino Trail and the Los Gatos Creek Trail will be constructed. Widening and improvements to San Tomas Expressway and Lawrence Expressway will increase roadway capacity. Upgrades to De Anza Boulevard and Saratoga Avenue will improve commutes along these corridors. [Graphic: A map of Santa Clara County highlighting the inbound and outbound AM peak hour travel between West Valley and the other subareas and gateways.] [Chart: In West Valley, 53,300 AM peak hour trips are internal, 57,100 trips enter the subarea and 54,200 leave the subarea] [Map: A map showing the locations of all of the VTP 2030 projects in West Valley] [Table 2-9 VTP 2030 Proposed Projects, West Valley. Project T3, Bus Rapid Transit-El Camino Real & Stevens Creek Blvd., will cost $50.0 million. Project T4, Caltrain Electrification, will cost $650.0 million. Project T5, Caltrain Service Upgrades, will cost $171.0 million. Project T9, Highway 17 Bus Service Improvements, will cost $2.0 million. Project H17-01, SR 17 improvements, NB SR 17 auxiliary lane from Camden Ave. to Hamilton Ave., will cost $12.0 million. Project H85-02, SR 85 noise mitigation between I-280 & SR 87, will cost $7.0 million. Project H280-05, I-280 NB second exit lane to Foothill Expwy., will cost $1.0 million. Project H880-03, I-880/I-280/Stevens Creek Blvd. interchange improvements-Phase I, will cost $14.0 million. Project X11, Lawrence Expwy.-Close median at Lochinvar Ave. & right-in-and-out access at De Soto Ave., Golden State Dr., Granada Ave., Buckley St., St. Lawrence/Lawrence Station onramp, will cost $0.5 million. Project X12, Lawrence Expwy.-widen to eight lanes between Moorpark Ave. & Bollinger Rd. & south of Calvert Dr., will cost $4.0 million. Project X13, Lawrence Expwy.-optimize signal coordination along Lawrence Expwy.-Saratoga Ave. corridor, will cost $0.1 million. Project X14, Lawrence Expwy.-coordinate and optimize signal phasing and timing plans in I-280/Lawrence Expwy. Interchange area, will cost $0.1 million. Project X15, Lawrence Expwy.-prepare a Caltrans PSR for tier 1C project at the Lawrence Expwy/Calvert Dr./I-280 Interchange area, will cost $0.0 million. Project cannot be funded by fund source. PSR estimated cost $500,000. Project X21, San Tomas Expwy.-provide an additional WB right-turn lane at Monroe St., will cost $1.0 million. Project X22, San Tomas Expwy.-widen to eight lanes between Williams Rd. & El Camino Real, will cost $28.0 million. Project X23, San Tomas Expwy.-provide 2nd EB, WB & NB left-turn lanes at Hamilton Ave., will cost $2.0 million. Project X24, San Tomas Expwy.-at-grade improvements at SR 17/San Tomas, will cost $2.0 million. Project R21, Union Ave. widening from Los Gatos-Almaden Rd. to Ross Creek, will cost $1.7 million. Project R25, Campbell Ave. bicycle/pedestrian improvements, will cost $2.0 million. Project R29, Winchester Blvd. streetscape improvement, will cost $4.0 million. Project R31, Quito Rd. improvements, will cost $1.9 million. Project R34, Magdalena Ave./Country Club Dr. intersection signalization, will cost $0.4 million. Project R75, Moody Rd. improvements, will cost $0.2 million. Project R81, Wedgewood Ave. improvements, will cost $0.6 million. Project R89, Saratoga Citywide Signal Upgrade Project Phase II, will cost $0.5 million. Also listed as an ITS project. Project R91, Rancho Rinconada Neighborhood Traffic Calming Project, will cost $ 0.1 million. Project B01, Campbell Ave. improvements at Hwy 17 & Los Gatos Creek, will cost $1.5 million. Project B02, Los Gatos Creek Trail Expansion on west side (Hamilton Ave.-Campbell Ave.), will cost $2.0 million. Project B03, Los Gatos Creek Trail bridge& path improvements (Mozart-Camden), will cost $0.8 million. Project B10, Bollinger Rd. bicycle facility improvement, will cost $0.4 million. Project B11, Mary Ave. (I-280) bike/pedestrian overcrossing, will cost $7.1 million. Project B19, Hwy 9 bike lanes (Saratoga Ave.-Los Gatos Blvd.), will cost $1.7 million. Project B36, San Tomas Aquino Creek Trail (Hwy 237 to City Limits), will cost $17.0 million. Project B37, Santa Clara Intermodal Transit Center bicycle/pedestrian overcrossing, will cost $5.0 million. Also included in the VTP 2030 Livable Communities and Pedestrian Program. Project B38, Cox Ave. railroad grade crossings, will cost $0.5 million. Project B39, PGE De Anza Trail (Reach 3), will cost $2.5 million. Project S101, Hamilton Ave. Intelligent Transportation System, will cost $0.3 million. Project S102, City of Campbell traffic signal system upgrade, will cost $0.3 million. Project S103, Winchester Blvd. Intelligent Transportation System, will cost $0.3 million. Project S1200, City of Santa Clara Communications network upgrade, will cost $3.5 million. Project S1301, City of Saratoga citywide signal upgrade project, will cost $0.5 million. This project is also listed as a Local Streets and County Roads Project. Project S1401, City of Sunnyvale traffic adaptive signal system on major arterials, will cost $2.8 million. Project S3001, County of Santa Clara traffic operations system improvements, will cost $18.0 million. Project S4040, Caltrans SR 85 Corridor TOS elements & ramp metering, will cost $4.8 million. This project is covered by a Highway Program Project. Project S4050, Caltrans I-280 Corridor TOS elements & ramp metering, will cost $2.2 million. This project is covered by a Highway Program Project. Project S5004, Silicon Valley ITS program upgrades, will cost $27.0 million. This project is covered by a Highway Program Project. End Table 2-9] South County Subarea The South County subarea consists of Morgan Hill, San Martin, Gilroy, South San Jose and unincorporated areas of Santa Clara County. Principal roadways include US 101, SR 152, SR 25, SR 156 and Santa Teresa Boulevard. Transit service includes Caltrain commuter rail, Amtrak, and various express and local VTA bus lines. Travel Patterns in 2030 South County is one of five subareas with more inbound AM peak commuters (12,600) than outbound (8,000). Inbound trips come largely from Central County (3,900 commuters) and the Southern Gateway (3,400 commuters). Outbound trips will largely go to Central County (1,800 commuters) and the Southern Gateway (1,400 commuters). Investment Program The capital investments in the South County revolve around highway expansion, new transit service, significant intelligent transportation systems (ITS) technologies improvements along commute corridors and roadway improvements. US 101 will be widened southward to the San Benito County line. Interchange, roadway improvements and widening will improve SR 25 and SR 152 and better manage traffic flows through the southern gateway. The electrification of Caltrain as well as service upgrades and new South County service will provide a convenient and quick alternative to northbound commuters. ITS improvements along US 101, SR 152, Santa Teresa Boulevard and Monterey Road will reduce delay and congestion. Roadway projects will fill gaps and improve interconnectedness between major corridors. Butterfield Boulevard, DeWitt and Sunnyside and Hill Road will all be extended. [Graphic: A map of Santa Clara County highlighting the inbound and outbound AM peak hour travel between South County and the other subareas and gateways.] [Chart: In South County, 24,500 AM peak hour trips are internal, 12,600 trips enter the subarea and 8,000 leave the subarea] [Map: A map showing the locations of all of the VTP 2030 projects in South County] [Table 2-10 VTP 2030 Proposed Projects, South County. Project T4, Caltrain Electrification, will cost $650.0 million. Project T5, Caltrain Service Upgrades, will cost $171.0 million. Project T6, Caltrain South County, will cost $100.0 million. Project H25-02, SR 25/Santa Teresa Blvd./US 101 Interchange construction, will cost $85.0 million. Project H25-03, SR 25 upgrade to six-lane facility design, will cost $10.0 million. Project H101-20, US 101