From: VTA Board Secretary
VTA Daily News Coverage for Monday, April 29, 2019 1. Milpitas Police Department Eyeing BART Contract (Milpitas Beat) 2. Chief of troubled Muni system to step down in August, under pressure from mayor (San Francisco Chronicle) 3. Presidential hopeful Kamala Harris gets ‘more specific,’ calls for ban of ‘right to work’ laws (Bizpacreview.com) 4. SEPTA, VTA seek public input on proposed budgets (Progressive Railroading) 5. 2019 Bike Commuter of the Year Winners Announced (Chestnut Post) Milpitas Police Department Eyeing BART Contract (Milpitas Beat) At April 2, 2019’s City Council meeting, Milpitas Police Chief Armando Corpuz addressed the City Council in regard to a request from the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) for supplemental law enforcement at the upcoming Milpitas and Berryessa BART stations. Milpitas’ new BART station is scheduled to open this coming December. At present, VTA is contracted with the Santa Clara County Sheriff’s Office to provide supplemental law enforcement services for VTA properties, which include the Light Rail and bus stations, as well as the Milpitas and Berryessa BART stations. That contract, however, is set to expire on June 30, 2019. Through its research, the Milpitas Police Department has come to expect that the BART station’s presence will have a public safety impact, as well as an accordant impact on public resources. If the Milpitas PD gets the VTA contract for Milpitas’ station, they’ll get added funding from the VTA for resources including equipment and personnel. Whereas the BART Police Department is responsible for the interior of every BART station, what’s at stake here is the surrounding area and property, which is controlled by the VTA. The VTA will decide which applicant to award the contract to. While Bernice Alaniz, Director of Business Operations and Communications for BART Silicon Valley, told The Milpitas Beat that the other applicants are confidential, she did emphasize that “Safety for the public, passengers, and our employees is first and foremost. Safety has been a priority from the minute those shovels hit the ground and will continue as we deliver service.” Councilmember Carmen Montano offered Chief Corpuz her blessing, along with whatever help the Council might be able to offer. Councilmember Bob Nuñez echoed Montano’s sentiments, making the key point that “When the calls come out, you’re the first one on the scene anyway.” In other words, incidents around the new BART station requiring a law enforcement presence will first and foremost spur the presence of the Milpitas PD, so it only makes sense for them to go after the contract. Council unanimously approved the Chief’s request to apply. Back to Top Chief of troubled Muni system to step down in August, under pressure from mayor (San Francisco Chronicle) The head of San Francisco’s Municipal Transportation Agency is stepping down amid the fallout from a 10-hour meltdown that choked the city on Friday, drawing anger from City Hall. “The employment agreement I have with the SFMTA Board of Directors ends in August, and it’s become clear that this is the right time for a change,” Ed Reiskin wrote in a note to colleagues on Monday. He said he will resign this summer, shortly before his contract expires. His announcement coincided with a scorching letter from Mayor London Breed — the latest in a series of missives to the city’s main transit board — calling for a national search to find a new director. The failure of an overhead wire that caused the subway to collapse on Friday appeared to be the breaking point for Breed, who was already scrutinizing the agency. “While unplanned outages and service disruptions come with a system as complex as ours, it is our proactive work to prevent these outages and disruptions from occurring and responding to them head-first when they do that defines strong leadership,” Breed wrote. “San Franciscans deserve robust contingency plans that are ready to execute, strong communication plans that are ready to deploy, and a visibly engaged management team that can steer the system through turbulence,” she continued. “Yet recent incidents at the SFMTA have shown that existing leadership is not up to the task.” Reiskin took the job in 2011, a novice to the transportation world with plenty of experience running other embattled departments — he’d headed the city’s 311 call center for complaints and the Department of Public Works. An avid cyclist and public transit rider known for wearing secondhand suits, Reiskin cut an unassuming figure. He endeared himself to many San Francisco residents while attracting criticisms from others who wanted a tougher, more visionary leader. But Reiskin, who earns $342,483 a year, has come under increasing pressure as Muni’s challenges mount. Last summer, a retrofit of the Twin Peaks tunnel slowed down service throughout the system and highlighted a chronic driver shortage at the agency. Those problems escalated over the ensuing months, as lawsuits and employee complaints exposed a culture of bullying and intimidation within the agency. The former director of the Muni bus and subway line abruptly retired in October, just as the SFMTA was trying to roll out a new fleet of rail cars, which are racking up rider complaints and concerns about safety. These problems illustrate the heavy demands on any leader of a transportation department, in a city that’s constantly growing. Breed acknowledged those challenges in her letter, noting that San Francisco failed to adequately invest in its transit system for decades, and the strain is starting to show. Yet she also criticized Reiskin and other SFMTA leaders for appearing “paralyzed” as issues piled up. The agency hesitated to crack down on its management until Breed hired an ombudsman to intervene. Managers hedged when questions arose about door sensors on the new Siemens rail cars, after a woman’s hand got stuck earlier this month, sending her tumbling onto the tracks. And it wasn’t until 9:30 p.m. Friday that the agency explained the day-long collapse in its subway system, which elicited new questions about the maintenance of its overhead wires. Meanwhile, the shortage of bus and train operators persists. The operators organized a labor action last week, refusing to work on their days off as they negotiate a new three-year contract. It caused delays on more than a dozen bus lines. Malcolm Heinicke, who chairs the SFMTA’s Board of Directors, praised Reiskin Monday for eight years of “dedication and persistence.” “The way Ed is departing really speaks to his character,” Heinicke said. “He’s not complaining about the situation. He’s not saying he was mistreated — none of that. He’s saying, ‘It’s time for me to leave at the end of my contract.’ But he’s going to carry through and work hard to the end.” Heinicke put Muni under a microscope after taking over as chair this year, demanding monthly performance reports for the light rail and buses. He said that in previous years the board had been fixated on big picture plans rather than day-to-day service, which is what stands out most to commuters. “The challenge is that we have an aging system that wasn’t designed perfectly,” Heinicke said. “But we’ve all been on the system when it runs properly, and we all know how great that can be.” Back to Top Presidential hopeful Kamala Harris gets ‘more specific,’ calls for ban of ‘right to work’ laws (Bizpacreview.com) (mention of VTA case) Democrat presidential candidate Sen. Kamala Harris indicated Saturday that if elected president, she intends to continue catering to the interests of powerful, politically connected unions over those of individual workers by banning what are known as right-to-work laws. Speaking at the so-called National Forum on Wages and Working People, she specifically said that wants to use “legislation” and “the bully pulpit” to strengthen the alleged rights of unions. “Let’s be more specific — it has to be about banning right-to-work laws,” the 2020 hopeful said. Listen: Right-to-work laws protect individual workers from bullying by unions. In states that lack right-to-work laws, unions may force fees on all workers, even those who prefer to not be in a union. Imagine for instance that you work as a plumber for a local company, and you and your co-workers generally enjoy your work and are happy with your pay. Then suddenly a group of politically connected bureaucrats descend into town and demand you join their union. Suppose though that you and your coworkers don’t want to join because you don’t want to pay their ridiculously exorbitant $450 annual fee. In a state that lacks right-to-work protections, you and your coworkers would have no other choice but to bend the knee and sign up. If you lived in one of the following mostly Republican-operated states, on the other hand, you’d have the right to tell the bureaucrats to bugger off and leave you and your co-workers alone:
Alabama
Arizona
Arkansas
Florida
Georgia
Idaho
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Michigan
Mississippi Nebraska
Nevada
North Carolina
North Dakota
Oklahoma
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming Notice that Harris’s home state of California isn’t on the list … Because of the state’s lack of right-to-work laws, an estimated 5,000 local government employees were forced to pay “millions of dollars in fees” to one of the most powerful unions in the country, the Service Employees International Union. Led by William Hough of the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA), last year these 5,000 workers reportedly tried to fight back by filing suit against the SEIU with the help of the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation. “Hough has worked at the VTA since 2005. He exercised his right to refrain from joining SEIU Local 521 because he did not wish to support it in any way. However, he and other non-union member employees were forced to pay union fees as a condition of employment under state law,” the foundation wrote in a press release at the time of the suit’s filing last August. “California’s law authorizes SEIU Local 521 and its affiliates to extract union fees from non-union members as a condition of employment. In the lawsuit, Hough claims that the applicable statute, and any other statute that authorizes Local 521 to collect forced union fees from public employees without their affirmative consent, violates the First Amendment. He asks the court to declare those laws unconstitutional.” In the liberal utopia envisioned by Harris, such lawsuits would be dead on arrival, regardless of the state. In fact, as it stands the Democrat-led House is reportedly planning to introduce legislation that would essentially repeal and invalidate all currently active right-to-work laws. “The legislation, dubbed the ‘Protecting the Right to Organize Act’ includes several other changes that would benefit unions. A House Education and Labor Committee source confirmed that Democrats plan to unveil the bill in a matter of weeks,” the Washington Examiner reported earlier this month. Given the 2020 contender’s relentless promotion on social media of unions, it’s probably fair to assume that she’s a zealous supporter of this planned legislation. Back to Top
SEPTA, VTA seek public input on proposed budgets (Progressive Railroading) (VTA mention) The Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority (SEPTA) is seeking public feedback on its proposed fiscal-year 2020 capital budget and FY2020- 2031 capital program.
Two public hearings will be held today; the public can submit comments about the proposals online.
Through the capital budget and program, the authority aims to advance its "Rebuilding the System" initiative that calls for renewing critical infrastructure, upgrading the fleet, expanding rail capacity and making technological improvements.
Covering the 12-month period from July 1, 2019, to June 30, 2020, the FY2020 capital budget is proposed at $675 million, including all anticipated state funding.
SEPTA had prepared a version of the budget that deferred dozens of critical improvement projects due to a lawsuit challenging the use of Pennsylvania Turnpike funds for public transportation, authority officials said in a press release. Although a federal judge dismissed the lawsuit April 4, the decision has been appealed, they added.
Should full funding be restored, SEPTA plans to advance a number of major initiatives, including communications and signal system improvements; safety and security upgrades; a fare modernization project; vehicle purchases and overhauls; a bridge improvement program; stations, loops and parking improvements; and upgrades to maintenance facilities, shops and offices.
Meanwhile, Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) officials plan to hold public meetings on May 6, 8 and 9 to review and solicit comments on the agency’s proposed FY2020 and FY2021 biennial budget.
The authority is proposing operating budgets of $505.4 million in FY2020 and $509.9 million in FY2021, and a combined capital budget of $216.7 million for the two fiscal years. The budget does not propose fare increases.
Staff members presented the proposed biennial budget to the VTA's board April 19 and will seek approval at the June 6 board meeting. If approved, the budget will be implemented July 1. Back to Top
2019 Bike Commuter of the Year Winners Announced (Chestnut Post) This week Bay Area Bike to Work Day (BTWD) organizers named the winners of the 2019 Bike Commuter of the Year awards. Given to individuals for inspiring bicycling in their Bay Area communities, the Bike Commuter of the Year award recognizes a winner from each of the nine San Francisco Bay Area counties for their commitment to bicycling as their primary mode of transport. The 2019 winners include Sergeant Dave Thompson from Sonoma County, a 27-year veteran of the Sonoma County Sheriff’s Office. Since 2014, he’s been making the 16-mile round-trip commute from his home in Windsor to the Sheriff’s Office in Santa Rosa just part of his regular day. “While coworkers may arrive in the office grumbling that they need coffee to get going, I just rode eight miles in the fresh air – that’s MY coffee!” In San Mateo County, Avana Andrade’s work on San Mateo County’s Climate Action Plan has given her a keen awareness that transportation is one of the county’s largest sources of emissions. She practices what she preaches and shares her love of bike commuting – even during this year’s fierce winter storms – with people who say that the joy she exudes is infectious and inspiring. Here is the complete list of 2019 Bike Commuter of the Year award winners: . Alameda County: Carol Lahti has been bike commuting in the Bay Area for 23 years – first in Hercules and now in Albany, but she’s been riding since childhood. You’ll see her biking early in the morning to catch the ferry to work at Genentech in South San Francisco and late at night on her ride home. To Carol, her commute feels like vacation every day.
. Contra Costa County: John Cunningham, a longtime cyclist and principal planner for Contra Costa County’s Transportation Planning Division, literally pedals the talk to help make infrastructure improvements for cyclists and pedestrians throughout the county. But it’s not all about work for him. “By riding my bike to work I save money, stay healthy, and reduce my stress levels at the same time!” says John.
. Marin County: Brian Lehman has been bike commuting to work for 15 years. His 15-mile round trip commute from his home in Santa Venetia to his job as publications manager for the California Film Institute in downtown San Rafael is his way of making an impact on the environment. According to Brian, “I have not used a car to commute since late 2004 and have not owned a car since 2013!”
. Napa County: Aileen Carroll fell in love with bike commuting while at college in San Louis Obispo, and made a conscious choice to live within biking distance of her job at Van Winden’s Garden Center. Her two- mile commute is often the best part of her morning, and always a good way to unwind after the workday. And Dave Kearney Brown, a Napa native and 3rd grade teacher at Napa Valley Language Academy fondly recalls his first bike – a blue Sting Ray with a banana seat and butterfly handlebars. He rode that bike everywhere, and still rides everywhere, proudly noting that he recently went three months using just a single tank of gas in his car.
. San Francisco County: Ricky Ramos moved to San Francisco in 2011 as an SFSU student and he’s been biking all over the Bay Area ever since. For first time commuters, Ricky says, “You don’t have to be an avid biker to start biking to work – the joy of riding on two wheels starts with just one day!”
. San Mateo County: Avana Andrade (see above) empowers others to get out of their cars and onto their bikes by offering advice and teaching them things like how to fix a flat tire.
. Santa Clara County: Marc Graci committed to riding his bike eight miles round trip from Campbell to his job as a math teacher at Discovery Charter School in San Josefor the whole 2018-19 school year. Winter rains didn’t stop him and his goal is now in sight. He’s even incorporated biking into some of his lessons!
. Solano County: Paul Meltzer traded in his car for a multi-modal commute by bike and train – 44 miles round trip – from his home in Fairfield to his job at the Shell Oil Refinery in Martinez – a true commitment to lowering his carbon foot print and making a difference for the environment and getting a work out. “Biking to work is a great way to get exercise, and I’ve even persuaded some of my colleagues to give it a try.”
. Sonoma County: Sergeant Dave Thompson’s (see above), commitment doesn’t stop with his daily commute; he gives back to the cycling community as a volunteer with the Sonoma County Bicycle Coalition’s Safe Routes to School program. Each winner will receive a set of panniers from Mike’s Bikes, a laminated, boxed set of San Francisco Bay Trail map cards from the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) and a cycling jersey from the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). You can read all about the winners at https://bayareabiketowork.com/bike-commuters-of-the-year/. Many of the winners will be honored on Bike to Work Day — the Bay Area’s premier bicycling celebration — on Thursday, May 9, 2019. The awards are part of many events scheduled during the San Francisco Bay Area’s National Bike Month celebration this May. Take the pledge to ride on BTWD 2019 – May 9 Bay Area Bike to Work Day is May 9! We encourage everyone to take the pledge to ride on Bike to Work Day 2019 and help break our Bike to Work Day ridership record! Go here to find your county and take the pledge today. And when riders take the pledge, they can enter into a drawing for a fabulous vacation package to the Alaskan Kenai Peninsula, donated by Exodus Travel and Alaska Airlines! Complete information about BTWD 2019 can be found at bayareabiketowork.com. There’s still time to sign up to participate in the Bay Area Bike Challenge! The Challenge gets underway May 1 – but there’s still time to sign up as an individual or as part of a team of up to 10 friends, family members, coworkers or neighbors. Participants compete for top honors and bragging rights by collectively riding thousands of miles all month long. The Challenge runs through May 31. To register, visit https://www.lovetoride.net/bayarea?locale=en-US. Bay Area Bike to Work Day encourages local residents to try commuting on two wheels for the first time and celebrates those who regularly bike and is presented by MTC (the transportation planning, financing and coordinating agency for the nine-county San Francisco Bay Area), 511 (the region’s traveler information system) and Alaska Airlines. Bike to Work Day 2019 also receives regional support from the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD), Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART), Clif Bar and Exodus Travels, as well as many sponsors at the local level. Bike to Work Day’s media sponsor is NBC Bay Area-KNTV/Telemundo 48. In addition to BAAQMD, prizes for the Bike Commuter of the Year winners were donated by the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) and Mike’s Bikes. Back to Top
Conserve paper. Think before you print.
From: VTA Board Secretary
VTA Daily News Coverage for Tuesday, April 30, 2019 1. VTA buses crash in San Jose, sending 10 passengers to hospital (San Francisco Chronicle) 2. Bus Crash (KCBS Radio) 3. 2 VTA Buses Collide, Hospitalizing Multiple Passengers (Campbell Patch) 4. Update: 13 people injured when VTA buses collide in San Jose (Mercury News) 5. Multiple People Injured in Crash Between VTA Buses (NBC Bay Area) 6. Multiple injured when VTA buses collide in San Jose (KRON 4 News) 7. Caltrain tax falls short in poll Palo Alto Daily Post VTA buses crash in San Jose, sending 10 passengers to hospital (San Francisco Chronicle) A collision involving two Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority buses in San Jose on Tuesday morning left “approximately” 13 people with injuries and sent several people to the hospital, authorities said. Around 6:40 a.m., two VTA buses crashed into each other in a “rear end collision” near The Alameda and West Julian Street, agency spokeswoman Holly Perez said. San Jose police responded to the scene, where roughly 13 passengers suffered non-life-threatening injuries, police said. Ten passengers were taken to the hospital. VTA buses traveling westbound on the 22 and 522 lines were re-routed for about two hours as authorities cleared the area. The two buses involved in the crash were towed from the scene. Police do not suspect alcohol or drugs were a factor in the crash. Back to Top
Bus Crash (KCBS Radio) (Link to audio)
2 VTA Buses Collide, Hospitalizing Multiple Passengers (Campbell Patch) The crash was reported shortly before 7 a.m. at the corner of The Alameda and West Julian Street. Multiple people were taken to a hospital after a crash between two Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority buses in San Jose on Tuesday morning, a VTA spokeswoman said. The crash was reported shortly before 7 a.m. at the intersection of The Alameda and West Julian Street, VTA spokeswoman Holly Perez said. One bus rear-ended the other, causing injuries to passengers on board, Perez said. She did not immediately know how many people were injured or hospitalized, but said none of the injuries are believed to be life-threatening. The intersection reopened by about 9 a.m. and the crash remains under investigation by San Jose police, according to Perez. Back to Top
Update: 13 people injured when VTA buses collide in San Jose (Mercury News) Crash happened Tuesday morning on The Alameda Thirteen people were injured Tuesday morning when two Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority buses were involved in a collision on The Alameda, according to San Jose police. Two Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority buses, including the one pictured, were involved in a crash on April 30, 2019 on The Alameda in San Jose, injuring 13 people. (Mark Gomez/Bay Area News Group.) At about 6:40 a.m., two buses were involved in a crash on The Alameda at Julian Street. San Jose police initially reported that “approximately 12 passengers sustained non-life-threatening injuries and were transported to local hospitals.” Later Tuesday morning, San Jose police provided new information, saying 13 people were injured, including 10 taken to hospitals with injuries that were not life-threatening. While the crash remains under investigation, VTA spokeswoman Holly Perez said initial reports indicate the buses were involved in a “rear end” situation. San Jose police said it does not appear alcohol or drugs were factors in the crash. Traffic was shut down in the westbound direction of Santa Clara Street for a few hours following the crash. Check back for more information on this story. Back to Top
Multiple People Injured in Crash Between VTA Buses (NBC Bay Area) Multiple people were taken to a hospital after a crash between two Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority buses in San Jose on Tuesday morning, a VTA spokeswoman said. The crash was reported shortly before 7 a.m. at the intersection of The Alameda and West Julian Street, VTA spokeswoman Holly Perez said. One bus rear-ended the other, causing injuries to passengers on board, Perez said. She did not immediately know how many people were injured or hospitalized, but said none of the injuries are believed to be life-threatening. The intersection reopened by about 9 a.m. and the crash remains under investigation by San Jose police, according to Perez. Back to Top
Multiple injured when VTA buses collide in San Jose (KRON 4 News) A number of people were injured when two VTA buses collided in San Jose Tuesday morning. A VTA bus rear-ended another VTA bus at around 6:55 a.m. at the intersection of The Alameda and Julian, according to officials. Some passengers were taken to the hospital with unknown injuries. It’s unclear how many people were injured in the crash. The cause of the crash is under investigation. Line 22 and Line 522 are being rerouted in the Westbound direction due to the accident. Line 22 and Line 522 WESTBOUND: From Santa Clara Street, buses will turn right on Stockton, left on Taylor, right on Alameda to regular route. Back to Top
Caltrain tax falls short in poll Palo Alto Daily Post A survey commissioned by Caltrain shows that if the commuter railroad were to put a tax on the ballot, it wouldn’t get enough votes to pass. Caltrain hired EMC Research of Oakland to poll 1,416 likely voters to see if they would support either an eighth-of-a-cent or a quarter-cent sales tax hike. The eighth-of-a-cent hike would raise $100 million a year, and the quarter- cent $200 million. Such taxes would require a two-thirds, or 66.7%, approval in the three counties that Caltrain serves: San Francisco, San Mateo and Santa Clara. According to EMC’s polling, only 63% of respondents said they would vote for a Caltrain tax. Once EMC gave the respondents some arguments in favor of Caltrain and how the tax would help the trains, 66% said they’d vote for the tax, still just a bit short of the needed two-thirds supermajority. But, after EMC read some arguments against the tax, only 55% of respondents said they’d vote for the tax. Opposition arguments tested EMC warns that the tax is vulnerable to opposition, and the opponents would use an argument like this: “The new gas tax and bridge tolls are already supposed to be going toward transit, but there’s just no way public transit improvements are going to significantly relieve the terrible traffic on our clogged freeways or roads.” EMC also anticipates opponents would say that tech companies in the area ought to pay for improvements in the area, “and it’s just not fair to saddle the taxpayers with a 30-year tax to subsidize a public transit system that only serves a small number of high-income tech commuters.” But EMC said a tax hike stands a better chance of winning if proponents said it would reduce traffic on the freeways and El Camino Real, reduce air pollution and that the tax would have a detailed expenditure plan. Despite the poll, EMC says Caltrain officials shouldn’t lose hope. “While it’s not quite at the required two-thirds support today, with the right environment and effort, a sales tax measure for Caltrain may be feasible in 2020,” EMC’s report says. Support strongest in San Mateo County A tax had the most support in San Mateo County (68%), followed by San Francisco (67%) and Santa Clara County (60%). Chief Communications Officer Seamus Murphy said in a memo to the Caltrain board that the tax would “provide Caltrain with a dedicated funding source.” Currently, Caltrain is subsidized by transit agencies in the three counties it serves. Caltrain’s Board of Directors will review EMC’s poll data at 10 a.m. Thursday (May 2) at 1250 San Carlos Ave. in San Carlos. Back to Top
Conserve paper. Think before you print.
From: VTA Board Secretary
VTA Board of Directors:
Attached you will find comments for the following Agenda Items for the May 2, 2019 Board of Directors meeting attached and on our website via the link below: Agenda Item #8.2 – 2019 New Transit Service Plan Agenda Item #9.3 – Items of Concern and Referral to Administration
The following PowerPoint presentations can now be viewed on our website via the link below: Agenda Item #8.2 – 2019 New Transit Service Plan Agenda Item #9.1.B – BART Silicon Valley Program Update
You may review the entire packet with the revised items on our website.
Thank you,
VTA Office of the Board Secretary Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority 3331 N. First Street San Jose, CA 95134 [email protected] (e-mail) (408) 321.5680 (telephone) (408) 955.0891 (fax)
Conserve paper. Think before you print.
From: VTA Board Secretary
VTA Board of Directors and Advisory Committee Members:
Please share this blogpost (text is below) about Eastridge to BART Regional Connector with your network and/or constituents.
Thank you.
------
Milestones Approaching for Eastridge to BART Regional Connector Project 5/1/2019 5:39 PM | Kathleen Podrasky
In the coming weeks, community members will see a flurry of activity along the light rail extension corridor to East San Jose . VTA is on the path to approve the Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report-2 (SEIR-2) – a formal document and process that addresses design and engineering updates made since 2016.
This project will extend light rail by 2.4 miles along Capitol Expressway in San Jose from the existing Alum Rock Transit Center to the Eastridge Transit Center. The extension includes elevated tracks along Capitol Expressway, an elevated station at Story Road, and a ground-level station at the Eastridge Transit Center. This revised design is safer and will allow light rail service to travel at faster speeds avoiding vehicle traffic intersections.
The updates to the light rail design and engineering required VTA to develop a second Draft SEIR. The report focuses on how the design changes could impact the environment (noise, vibration, and traffic), and makes recommendations for mitigating those impacts.
In June of 2018, VTA hosted a public scoping meeting, followed by a circulation of the Draft SEIR-2 and a public meeting in October of 2018. VTA staff received over 60 comments from the community, City of San Jose, and County of Santa Clara. The Final SEIR-2 set for release in mid-May thoroughly addresses every comment received.
In the meantime, project updates have been presented to neighborhood associations, VTA’s Eastridge to BART Regional Connector Policy Advisory Board, the Capitol Program Committee, and the VTA Board of Directors. These meetings and the feedback received have contributed to VTA’s understanding of the various stakeholders and the concerns of citizens, all of which help support this project moving forward.
Once the Final SEIR-2 is released in mid-May, it will be available on the project web page. The VTA Board is then scheduled to consider approving the environmental document at its June 6 meeting.
Over the next couple of weeks, the community will see the first visible field work. Notices have been delivered to residents and businesses along the corridor sharing information in multiple languages about the geotechnical boring for utility investigations taking place at various locations on Capitol Expressway and streets adjacent to the expressway.
VTA staff continues to meet with neighborhood associations, identifying and reaching out to stakeholders, and responding to inquiries. Community Outreach and Public Engagement and Engineering staff will present a project update to the Tully Ocala Cunningham King Neighborhood Association on May 6, and the Thompson Creek Neighborhood Association on May 9.
If your neighborhood association, HOA, PTA, or other community group would like us to make a presentation on this project, or any other VTA project, contact Community Outreach and Public Engagement at 408-321-7575, or email us at [email protected].
Board Secretary’s Office Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority 3331 North First Street, Building B San Jose, CA 95134-1927 Phone 408-321-5680 [email protected]
Conserve paper. Think before you print.
April 29th, 2019 VTA Board of Directors 3331 North First Street San Jose, CA 95134
Dear Chairperson Teresa O’Neill, Vice Chairperson Cindy Chavez and the VTA Board,
On behalf of the current and future transit riders of Almaden, Blossom Hill and Santa Teresa, I highly encourage the board to accept staff’s new recommendation to merge Routes 63 and 64 to provide coverage further south and to convert the current Route 13 into a much improved Route 83. The residents of San Jose’s District 10 need frequent and reliable bus service to connect with the essential services provided by doctor’s offices, health clinics, grocery stores, and schools. Saving Route 64 and moving forward with Route 83 is a great way to start.
For background purposes, I am a Board Member of the Almaden Valley Community Association (AVCA), member of the District 10 Leadership Coalition, founding member of the Friends of Guadalupe Oak Grove Park and a resident of District 10 along with my wife and daughter. I attended three meetings on VTA’s New Transit Service Plan and met frequently with neighbors and leaders in the area. My neighbors explained to me the history of VTA service in District 10 and their hopes for the future of service. Their message was clear: Almaden needs these lifeline routes, which offer the only transit option for many of our seniors and students.
I applaud the work of staff members such as Jaye Tyree and Kermit Cuff who worked with residents to establish the best plan with community input and the resources available. The engagement process was impressive as your team received 1,520 comments and suggestions via email and from direct in-person conversations, 6,400 engagements on Twitter, 1,500 engagements on Facebook and thousands of visits to your website. It is clear that staff worked tirelessly to identify win-win solutions with residents and I can confidently say that a number of District 10 residents are happy with the updated proposal that preserves bus service in our valley.
However, there is still plenty of work to do. We understand that VTA is in a financial bind and will need to continue to re-evaluate future service. Our neighbors in Almaden, Santa Teresa, and Blossom Valley are ready to continue to work with VTA to ensure that the best possible solutions move forward and the service needs of our neighbors are satisfied. I look forward to working with you and your staff in the future to achieve our shared goals.
Please feel free to reach out to me for any reason.
Warm Regards,
Matt Mahan AVCA Board Member, Member of the District 10 Leadership Coalition, Founding Member of the Friends of River Oak Guadalupe Park and D10 Resident [email protected] MONICA MALLON 14854 Union Ave, San Jose, CA 95124 (408) 805-0566 [email protected]
May 1, 2019
VTA Board of Directors 3331 North First Street San Jose, CA 95134
Dear VTA Board,
I am unable to attend the board meeting on Thursday because my dad is graduating from college at the same time. So I wanted to write a letter to express my final thoughts on the New Transit Service Plan.
As I am sure you already know from my previous public comments, I am against the proposed elimination of route 65 and the lack of investment in bus service. I hope that you will consider reallocating Measure B funds to provide the level of bus service that various ballot measures have promised over the years. Transit has the power to change lives and save our environment. Highway expansions will fill up, but a significant investment in bus service could get people out of their cars. I was born in 1997, so I have many more years of life left. My generation will have to deal with the negative environmental impacts of our car-dependent culture in ways that your generation won’t.
This isn't just about saving a route that people in my community rely on to get around. I would actually like to see us have a world-class transit system that would appeal to choice-riders and transit-dependent riders.
On Thursday, you will have the power to vote to follow the status quo and continue to prioritize BART and highway expansions over bus service, or you can vote to expand bus service and enter a new era.
Please do the right thing. My generation is counting on you.
Sincerely,
Monica Mallon Agenda Item 8.2
2019 New Transit Service Plan Final Staff Recommendation
VTA Board of Directors May 2019 1 2 3 Increase Integrate BART Improve Ridership Stations into Cost‐Effectiveness Transit Network
Goals of the 2019 New Transit Service Plan 2 2008 –today Current transit plan
2017 Next Network transit plan adopted (never implemented)
2018 VTA Board direction to develop modified Next Network plan
2019 2019 New Transit Service Plan
New network implemented with BART Phase 1 opening
3 2019 New Transit Current Service Next Network Service Plan 1.66 M 1.81 M 1.67 M service hours service hours service hours
70/30 83/17 90/10 ridership/coverage ridership/coverage ridership/coverage
4 Intensive Community Engagement (January and February)
YouTube Live Virtual Meeting, 6 Public Meetings 26 Community Social Media Campaign Discussions
multilingual flyers + project website over 1,500 comments received + newspaper ads
5 Title VI and Paratransit Analyses
Title VI Service Equity Analysis VTA Access Paratransit Analysis geographic analysis of service changes in geographic analysis of fixed route relation to vulnerable communities service changes’ impacts on Access service availability causes no disparate impact to minority communities no impact to VTA Access weekday service area (same as Next Network) causes no disproportionate burden to low‐income communities
6 Light Rail Plan compared to Next Network... Shortened to Baypointe
No change
No change
Replaced with bus route
NO CHANGE FROM DRAFT PLAN
7 change 1 from draft plan Route 22
Draft Plan Final Plan Discontinue trips between Maintain trips between 1 –4 am 1 –4 am
Strong demand for mobility on overnight trips, particularly for service workers and low‐income residents
8 change 2 from draft plan Express Bus Program
Draft Plan Final Plan Reduce Express Bus Defer all cuts, program expenses by half achieve savings with (eliminate some routes and partnership Express individual trips on others) program in early 2020
Staff currently working on Express Bus study transition to partnership model in early 2020 (third‐party subsidy to support service)
9 change 3 from draft plan Route 42
Draft Plan Final Plan no changes Modify route to serve San Jose VA Mexican Consulate Carrington College Northeastern University San Andreas Regional Center
10 Final Plan Modify route to serve San Jose VA Mexican Consulate Carrington College Northeastern University San Andreas Regional Center
11 changes 4 + 5 from draft plan Routes 63, 64, and Almaden Valley
Draft Plan Final Plan replace Almaden light rail Consolidate 63, 64, 80 with bus Route 80 and into Route 64 discontinue Route 13 (with two branches 64a, 64b) and maintain Route 13 (now #83)
Consolidation reduces operating cost and improves efficiency, resources used to maintain Route 13 service as Route 83 (suggestion from community)
12 Draft Plan Final Plan 13 change 6 from draft plan Route 522
Draft Plan Final Plan improve early morning Defer improvements until and evening frequency demand warrants and from 20 to 15 minutes resources permit
Ridership demand on these trips does not justify additional frequency at this time
14 change 7 from draft plan Route 66
Draft Plan Final Plan no changes Improve midday frequency north of Milpitas BART from 30 to 15 minutes
Expand the Frequent Network north in Milpitas and better BART connections
15 Local Transit Service at Milpitas
buses + trains 36 will depart Milpitas per hour
16 Local Transit Service at Berryessa
buses 32 will depart Berryessa per hour
17 Blue Line and Route 65
Blue Line Route 65 (San Jose –Leigh Ave) #4 of Top 5 comments on draft plan #5 of Top 5 comments on draft plan Blue Line turnback at Baypointe very low ridership and remains in final plan does not meet minimum productivity staff will monitor light rail transfers at route is not included in final plan Milpitas BART
18 Major Changes Already Adopted in Next Network Plan
More High‐Ridership Service Less Low‐Ridership Service +New light rail Orange Line ‒ Discontinue 17 +Light rail frequency improvements ‒ Discontinue 34 +New Rapid 523 and Rapid 500 ‒ Discontinue 45 + Establish extensive Frequent Network ‒ Discontinue 58 + Frequency and span improvements on 17 Frequent routes ‒ Discontinue 88 + Frequency and span improvements on ‒ Discontinue Limited 304, 321, 328, 330 10 Local routes ‒ Discontinue Fremont BART Express Buses +New Cupertino—Sunnyvale Rapid bus 120, 140, 180, 181 +Better service to SJC, Gavilan, De Anza, Lockheed Martin, SJSU, Kaiser San Jose, West Valley College, Valley Fair, Next Network Mission College, Alviso is foundation for this plan +8 new routes
19 Jobs Within a 1‐Hour Transit Ride of Milpitas BART
Palo Alto Milpitas
Mt View
Sunnyvale Santa San Jose Clara today 326,000 Cupertino proposal
431,000 (+105,000) Los Gatos 20 Jobs Within a 1‐Hour Transit Ride of Downtown Mountain View
Palo Alto Milpitas
Mt View Sunnyvale
San Jose Santa today Clara 316,000 Cupertino proposal 363,000 (+47,000) Los Gatos 21 Jobs Within a 1‐Hour Transit Ride of De Anza College
Palo Alto Milpitas Mt View
Sunnyvale Santa Clara San Jose
Cupertino today 415,000 proposal 477,000 (+62,000) Los Gatos 22 Residents Within a 1‐Hour Transit Ride of SJSU
Palo Alto Milpitas
Mt View
Sunnyvale Santa San Jose Clara today Cupertino 902,000 proposal 943,000 (+41,000)Los Gatos 23 Additional Residents Within an Hour Transit Ride of…
Palo Alto Milpitas no change +37,000 Mountain View Morgan Hill +47,000 no change Los Altos Sunnyvale no change +84,000 Santa Clara (Caltrain) +95,000 San Jose (SJSU) Cupertino (De Anza) +41,000 +62,000 Campbell +76,000 Gilroy Saratoga no change +8,000 Los Gatos +99,000 24 Residents Near Frequent Transit
Palo Alto Milpitas
Mt View
Sunnyvale Santa San Jose Morgan Clara Hill today 570,000 Cupertino Los Gatos Gilroy
25 Residents Near Frequent Transit
Palo Alto Milpitas
Mt View
Sunnyvale Santa San Jose Morgan Clara Hill today 570,000 Cupertino proposal Los Gatos Gilroy 836,000 (+266,000) 26 Jobs Near Frequent Transit
Palo Alto Milpitas
Mt View
Sunnyvale Santa San Jose Morgan Clara Hill today 380,000 Cupertino Los Gatos Gilroy
27 Jobs Near Frequent Transit
Palo Alto Milpitas
Mt View
Sunnyvale Santa San Jose Morgan Clara Hill today 380,000 Cupertino proposal Los Gatos Gilroy 584,000 (+204,000) 28 More Cost‐Effective Service 7‐9% 1% higher ridership higher service hours after 24 months
compared to today’s network
29 Transit Performance Monitoring Program
Transit Performance Monitoring Program minor changes ‐ monitoring implemented quarterly ‐ reporting ‐ analysis service change major recommendations driven by changes data and policy implemented annually (with full public engagement process)
30 Next
May Staff recommendation to VTA Board of Directors June > July > Implementation activities (scheduling, signage, passenger materials, August > service marketing campaign, operator training, etc.) September > Late 2019 New service starts when BART service begins
Quarterly Transit Performance Report + Analysis + Service Changes
31 Extra Slides Average Bus Speed, Systemwide gradual but persistent slowdown in transit speed 14.1 MPH 1988 increased cost of service 12.8 MPH 2005 service cuts 12.6 MPH 2001 fewer riders (more driving) 11.6 MPH 2016 increased congestion Next Step is Fast Transit Program
33 Original Next Network Light Rail Plan
34 Productivity for VTA Express Bus & VTA Local Bus 15 42% riders onboard full each bus trip (seats occupied)
19.2 11% $8.33 6.3 3% $33.09 boardings farebox cost per boarding per hour recovery
35 Route 65
current service 13.1 $1,250,000 boardings marginal cost per hour of service
Next Network 12.3 $830,000 boardings marginal cost per hour of service (est.)
36 Gilroy Service
Route 17 6.8 boardings per hour
37 Boardings per Hour 80
70
60
50
40
30
20 15 10
0 65 17 46 22 23 53 73 66 72 64 25 54 70 77 82 26 71 40 57 31 55 68 47 61 10 39 60 88 52 81 62 32 16 42 18 63 27 45 65 89 35 37 19 48 58 13 14 34 49 17
901 902 900 201 522 323 304 321 330 38328 Agenda Item 9.1.B BART Silicon Valley Program Update – Phase I, Berryessa Extension
VTA Board of Directors Meeting May 2019 VTA’s BART Silicon Valley Program Phase I: Berryessa Extension – Current Activities
VTA/Contractor Status • Civil/Structural is completed, remaining punch list work to be completed in June • Stations continue in final pre-revenue cleaning and turn over, closeout of final campus contracts late 3rd quarter • Traction Power System re-energized and stable with test trains running since March 30 • Railroad Intrusion Detection System (RIDS) anomalies continue, but will not impact start of BART Phase 3 testing
2 VTA’s BART Silicon Valley Program Phase I: Berryessa Extension – Current Activities
VTA/Contractor Status (cont.) • Other communications and controls systems in final Phase 2 testing and documentation, scheduled to be completed by the end of this week • Outstanding discrepancies are being addressed and will continue until BART starts Phase 3 testing in June. • RIDS gaps/enhancement and fire telephone will be completed during Phase 3
3 VTA’s BART Silicon Valley Program Phase I: Berryessa Extension – Current Activities
BART Scope • BART informally began advance Phase 3 testing in November 2018 and will officially start Phase 3 testing in June after migration of the Project Test Center (PTC) to Operations Control Center (OCC) is complete o BART received new OCC system controls equipment, VTA will support as required o VTA will continue supporting BART as well as complete outstanding work from Phase 2 throughout Phase 3 testing period • Current Master schedule including BART scope supports revenue operations in December 2019
4 VTA’s BART Silicon Valley Program Phase I: Berryessa Extension – Current Activities
Critical work remaining after June start of BART Phase 3: • Engineering, installation and testing on enhanced RIDS system • Completion of additional RIDS sensors in “gap” areas • Resolution of fire telephone system interface with OCC • Completion of Operations and Maintenance (O&M) manuals as well as associated training programs for BART operations • BART Pre Revenue Operations (3 months) • Preparation of documentation for California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) submittals
5 Berryessa Extension Project Schedule 2018 2019
October NovemberQ4 December January FebruaryQ1 March April Q2 May June July Q3August September October Q4 November December
FIELD FUNCTIONAL TESTING
PHASE 1 SYSTEM INTEGRATION TESTING (UON(Including Replacements UON replacements) Complete) ✓ Turnover to BART in June for Start of BART 6 month-Phase III Testing and Pre Revenue PHASE 2 SYSTEM INTEGRATION TESTING Operations window
✓ Train Control Series 24 Retest Complete Traction Power Re Energized
PTC to OCC
OCC Submit final System Certification Package to CPUC
Legend PHASE 3 SYSTEM INTEGRATION TESTING VTA Scope
BART Scope PRE-REVENUE OPERATIONS Deadline for Dec 31 Revenue Operations Forecast Passenger Service Date
| - - Oct. - - |- - Nov. - -|- - Dec. - | Report: April 2019 6 Questions?
7
Date: April 30, 2019
TO: General Manager/CEO Nuria Fernanadez
FROM: Chair O’Neill and Director Liccardo
SUBJECT: Light Rail Options
Recommendation:
Direct the General Manager to:
1. Following the Board discussion at the February workshop, move forward with a comprehensive study to analyze alternative technologies for the future of our 42-mile light rail system, and return to the Board through relevant committees with some preliminary options before the end of the calendar year.
2. If funds are needed for such a study, identify the funding need through the current budget process, so that the Board may consider approval as part of the current budgetary process.
3. Concurrently assess the likely cost of future light rail car capital replacement both near- and long-term, so that the Board can fully understand the scope, timing and impact of this upcoming decision point.
Discussion:
As discussed in our February Future of Transportation study session, transit agencies globally are rapidly exploring technological alternatives to standard—and very expensive—rail systems. After nearly $1.5 billion in investment in the VTA’s light rail — and facing the end of the useful life of many of our 30-year-old rail cars—we need to ask ourselves whether we should continue investing in a system that has declining ridership, very high costs per rider, constrained flexibility, and among the very lowest fare box returns of any urban system in the United States.
With advanced age of our rail cars, we face major capital decisions in the next few years, and we should make our decision on a technology before we order hundreds of millions of dollars in new light rail vehicles that simply replace the current technology with more of the same. We should be looking at a range of new potentially advantageous technologies, including rail vehicles that don’t require catenary lines, and “rubber tire” alternatives that could deliver more flexibility, high service levels, and less cost. For that reason, we urge staff to move
forward, and to return to the full Board with at least preliminary options, including relative advantages, tradeoffs and overall costs, for us to consider before the end of the year.
VTA needs to ensure that all our future capital investments will best serve the need to provide an integrated, comprehensive transportation system for all the residents of Santa Clara County. The information gained from this effort will help inform the Board’s decision on how to meet our commitments to all communities in Santa Clara County most effectively, rather than merely repeating what we have done before.
From: VTA Board Secretary
VTA Board of Directors:
Attached is a memorandum from Chief Operating Officer Inez Evans regarding VTA ridership for March 2019.
Thank you.
Office of the Board Secretary Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority 3331 N. First Street San Jose, CA 95134 408.321.5680 [email protected]
Conserve paper. Think before you print.
Sa nta Clara Valley Transportation Authority
Writer's Direct Telephone: (408) 321-7005
TO: VTA Board of Directors
THROUGH: Nuria I. Fernandez ~111M General Manager/CEO l/(1:3
FROM: Inez Evans ~ ~ ~ Chief Operating Officer ~~ (A)""
DATE: May 2, 2019
SUBJECT: VTA Ridership for March 2019
March 2019 total monthly system ridership for bus and light rail was 2,997,742, a decrease of 2.1% over March 2018. March 2019 had one less weekday than March 2018.
Bus ridership was down 2.4%. Light Rail ridership was down 1.0%. The average weekday ridership for the system was up by 1.0%. The core routes recorded an overall average weekday ridership improvement of 0. 7% over March 2018. Local routes recorded an average weekday increase of 5.7%. March 2019 total monthly ridership recorded a 16.1% increase compared to February 2019. Ridership change from March to February typically averages +13.0%.
Special events: There was one soccer game at the Levi's Stadium (Mexico National team versus Paraguay) that recorded 7,306 riders who rode VTA to the event. There was one soccer game in March 2018 that recorded 8,430 riders that took VTA to the event.
Percent Percent Mar-2019 Mar-2018 Feb-2019 Ridership Change Change Bus 2,298,811 2,356,001 -2.4% 1,990,460 15.5% Light Rail 698,931 705,892 -1.0% 614,387 13.8% System 2,997,742 3,061,893 -2.1% 2,604,847 16.1%
Forty-eight of the 69 bus routes, or 70%, did not meet the weekday standards as defined in the Service Design Guidelines. Nine of the 18 core routes, or 50%, met the weekday standards as defined in the Service Design Guidelines.
3331 North First Street Administration 408-321 - 5555 San Jose, CA 95134-1927 Customer Service 408-321-2300 Solutions that move you The core routes and light rail stations that had the most average weekday ridership declines are shown in the tables below:
Percent Route Mar-2019 Mar-2018 Difference Change 22 9,437 10,037 (600) -6.0% 66 5,287 5,396 (109) -2.0% 71 1,726 1,783 (57) -3.2% 23 6,519 6,568 (49) -0.7% 70 4,165 4,210 (45) -1.1% Totals 27,134 27,994 (860) -3.1%
Percent Station Mar-2019 Mar-2018 Difference Change Mountain View Station 233 412 (365) -34.2% Diridon Station 1,047 1,216 (249) -36.8% Winchester Station 267 311 (214) -27.3% Bascom Station 165 189 (125) -35.9% Middlefield Station 434 457 (120) -49.0% Totals 2,146 2,585 (1,073) -34.4%
The fiscal year-to-date total system ridership for bus and light rail recorded a 2.7% decrease. Light Rail recorded an increase of 0.4% this Fiscal Year.
Ridership (Current) (Prior) Percent Jul' 18-Mar'19 Jul' 17-Mar' 18 Change Bus 20,306,096 21,077,635 -3.7% Light Rail 6,358,883 6,335,752 0.4% System 26,664,979 27,413,387 -2.7% From: VTA Board Secretary
VTA Board of Directors:
The May 2, 2019 Board Regular Agenda Packet has now been updated to include presentations exhibited and public/reading folder materials distributed at the meeting for the following agenda items:
Agenda Item #4 – Public Comments Agenda Item #6.2 – Policy Advisory Committee (PAC) Meeting Summary Agenda Item #8.2 – 2019 New Transit Service Plan = Staff presentation and public comments Agenda Item #8.3 – Future of Transportation Workshop – Next Steps = Staff presentation Agenda Item #9.1 – General Manager’s Report Agenda Item #9.1.A – Government Affairs Update Agenda Item #9.1.B – Silicon Valley Rapid Transit (SVRT) Program Update = Staff presentation Agenda Item #9.3 – Items of Concern or Referral to Administration Agenda Item #9.4.D – Caltrain JPB Meeting Summary
You may access the updated agenda packet on our website here. (Please note that you may need to refresh your browser to view the updated content.)
Thank you.
Office of the Board Secretary Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority 3331 North First Street, Building B San Jose, CA 95134-1927 Phone 408-321-5680
Conserve paper. Think before you print.
5/2/2019 -5:38 PM
I am unable to attend tonight's meeting due to previous commitments, but as an elected official representing thousands of East San Jose residents, I wanted to send the message below. Please forward to the Board of Directors. Also, please confirm receipt of this message at . Thank you.
My name is Ernesto Bejarano and I am a Governing Member of the Alum Rock Union School District Board of Trustees, encompassing most of what is commonly known as East San Jose.
As a life long East Side resident and advocate, and a representative of thousands of hard working families on our side of town, it is incomprehensible to think that this body is considering allocating resources in a way that supports the continued intentional isolation and disenfranchisement of our community.
I have heard from many constituents, and access to reliable transportation is vital in our area, potentially more so than anywhere else in the region. Our families rely on public transportation to get to medical appointments, employment, school, and recreation. In addition, our families support and are an integral part of most of the industries that make Silicon Valley prosperous, as employees who depend on the VTA light rail and bus system to get to work and back home to their children and families.
I implore you to carefully consider your commitment to VTA lightrail to BART in East San José, as the repercussions of diverting resources elsewhere will have countless negative impacts valley-wide.
Thank you.
From: VTA Board Secretary
VTA Board of Directors:
We are forwarding you the following:
From Topic Assemblymembers Kansen Chu and Ash Letters of Support for Capitol Expressway Kalra, County Supervisor Susan Ellenberger, Light Rail Extension – Alum Rock Light Rail and Members of the Public Station to Eastridge Transit Center City of Morgan Hill Comments Regarding Caltrain Business Plan
Thank you.
Office of the Board Secretary Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority 3331 N. First Street San Jose, CA 95134 408.321.5680 [email protected]
Conserve paper. Think before you print.
April 26, 2019
Chairperson Teresa O’Neill Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority 3331 N. First Street San Jose, CA 95134
Re: Capitol Expressway Light Rail Extension – Alum Rock Light Rail Station to Eastridge Transit Center
Dear Chairperson O’Neill:
As one of the largest and most populous cities in California, public transportation is an important aspect in the city of San Jose. Many people depend and use public transportation daily in order to get around for commuting and recreational purposes. Therefore, completing the Capitol Expressway light rail extension (or Extension), which will connect the Alum Rock Light Rail Station to the Eastridge Transit Center, is highly essential.
Over the years, various funding, such as the 2000 Measure A, has been allocated towards the Extension. Most recently, I personally advocated for a portion of the revenue from Regional Measure 3 and Senate Bill 1 to be dedicated to completing the Extension. I applaud the already established bus rapid transit (BRT) system that connects the Alum Rock Station to the Eastridge Transit Center. Now, it is time to complete the light rail extension, which has been planned for many years.
Completing the Extension will provide significant benefits, especially for residents in East San Jose. This will greatly increase mobility in the area by connecting residents to the larger public transportation system in the region. When I was on the San Jose City Council, I advocated for a covered pedestrian bridge to connect the light rail station and BART station in Milpitas. The bridge improved safety and access to transit in the area. Furthermore, there have been many discussions about closing the nearby Reid-Hillview Airport and building affordable housing in its place. I also support for this space to be use for affordable housing. With the possibility of more housing in the area, the light rail extension will be a crucial system that will improve the livelihoods of the community residents. There are growing concerns that the money allocated to this Extension will be diverted to other projects. This will greatly delay the Extension and decrease access to public transportation for those who live in East San Jose. The Extension will connect community members to their schools, workplace, and the greater region. It will also break down transportation barriers that could limit housing options, especially for those that rely on public transportation. Therefore, I strongly urge the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority to prioritize funding for and to complete the Capitol Expressway light rail extension.
Sincerely,
KANSEN CHU Assemblymember, Assembly District 25
CC: Board of Director Members, Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority Board Secretary, Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority Jim Lawson, Director of Government Relations, Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority
May 2, 2019
Chairperson Teresa O’Neill Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority 3331 North First Street San José, CA 95134
RE: Capitol Expressway Light Rail Extension – Alum Rock Light Rail Station to Eastridge Transit Center
Dear Chairperson O’Neill,
As the State Assemblymember representing nearly half of San José, and as the former Chair of VTA, I am respectfully requesting the Board to prioritize the Capitol Expressway light rail extension from the Alum Rock Station to the Eastridge Transit Center. San José is the third largest city in California and as we lead by example in our public transportation innovation and strategy, it is important that we as elected officials stay true to representing the needs of our communities.
Over the years, funding has been allocated towards this extension, which will greatly benefit our East San José residents, whom I represent. With the recent concerns regarding the diversion of these funds, we must remember our commitment to serving our community. Often times, when planning public transportation needs, we talk about connecting the “last mile”. But for many of our residents in East San José, it’s not about the “last mile”. It’s about the “first mile”: the first mile to get from home to school, to work, to childcare, to the doctor. If we do not build this extension, we will create a barrier and isolate many members of our community.
I hope that the VTA board will consider prioritizing the Capitol Expressway light rail extension from the Alum Rock Station to the Eastridge Transit Center to help our residents with their “first mile” to improve their access and livelihood in San José.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
ASH KALRA
From: Brenda Franca-Serpa Sent: Thursday, April 25, 2019 5:38 PM To: VTA Board Secretary
Dear VTA Board Members,
The 2000 Measure A bond, a half-cent transit sales tax promoted by the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) Board of Directors, passed by a 70.3 percent vote on November 7, 2000.
My husband and I live in District 8 and voted for Measure A. My husband worked in Milpitas and looked forward to taking the light rail from Eastridge to work and back. There are many District 8 residents working in Milpitas and up the peninsula who would utilize the Eastridge to BART Regional Connector/Capitol Expressway Light Rail.
From 2006 to present, we paid the half-cent sales tax and patiently waited for construction of the Eastridge to BART Regional Connector to commence. Light rail never came to Eastridge because VTA did not do its job of providing it per Measure A.
Here is what the Community of East San José/District 8 wants out of the VTA:
• VTA board of directors, stop delaying the Eastridge to BART Regional Connector/Capitol Expressway Light Rail Project by prioritizing projects in your area over a nineteen-year-old promise made to voters of 2000 Measure A. District 8 residents pay VTA taxes and demand that you fulfill your promise of completing the Eastridge to BART Regional Connector.
o The Eastridge to BART Regional Connector was the second priority and a commitment the VTA board keeps voting down the priority list and this is not what was mandated in Measure A. I do not know the legality of asking the electorate to vote for a tax based on promises not kept, but as a voter, unless the Eastridge to BART Regional Connector is completed, I will never vote for another VTA tax again and will rally my District 8 community to vote in kind as well.
• Complete the Eastridge to BART Regional Connector because one hundred thousand District 8 residents have been paying VTA taxes for nearly a decade and expected the project to be completed more than a decade ago.
• Complete the Eastridge to BART Regional Connector because the bus hub at Eastridge Shopping Center is the most widely used in San José and the light rail will convey more people from D8 to their jobs, appointments, errands, etc., will be well- utilized, will reduce traffic congestion, and air pollution from automobiles. Note, not everyone in District 8 owns an automobile, but they pay the VTA tax and would utilize the Eastridge to BART Regional Connector, so it is a question of equity and fairness that the project be completed as promised nearly twenty years ago.
• Do not delay the completion of the Eastridge to BART Regional Connector by stonewalling the VTA taxpaying residents of District 8 any longer. The 2008 recession reduced the sales taxes collected for the light rail/BART projects and we do not want the Eastridge to BART Regional Connector /Capitol Expressway Light Rail Project delayed because of another recession.
• Do not delay the completion of the Eastridge to BART Regional Connector by studying alternatives to the light rail system that should connect with BART. We traveled to Europe and stayed for two months and utilized their excellent rail system. Unless VTA brings BART to Eastridge, light rail is the next most economical, logical, and studied option.
• Fulfill the promise you made to District 8 residents in November 2000 when residents voted for Measure A bond. Two-thirds of the funding to complete the Eastridge to BART Regional Connector come from Measure A bond funds which are ready to be put to work completing this project and one-third of the funds comes from Regional Measure 3—so the funds to complete this project exists.
• East San José residents lack representation on the VTA Board, which is weighted in favor of cities to the north, south, west and obviously San José districts other than District 8. The VTA board should be comprised of members from all districts of San José because that is the only way East San José will get equitable treatment. Two VTA board members actively support the Eastridge to BART Regional Connector: SCC Supervisor Cindy Chavez and SJC Councilmember Magdalena Carrasco. The only explanation that accounts for delaying the completion of the Eastridge to BART Regional Connector is there are VTA board members who are against it, preferring to push it to the bottom of the priority list because doing so benefits the areas they represent.
District 8 residents do not want VTA to stonewall this much needed Eastridge to BART Regional Connector any longer by studying the project or asking for residents’ input. Let this be the end of the discussion and the end of studying the matter—VTA Board Members, do what Measure A mandates and complete the Eastridge to BART rail connector.
Best regards,
Brenda Serpa
District 8 resident
From: Marilyn Langley Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2019 2:33 PM To: VTA Board Secretary
Dear Members of the VTA Board of Directors:
I’m delighted to have learned about the Eastridge to BART connector from a recent post on Nextdoor. I live in District 8, and have been commuting by bus and light rail from Eastridge to Cisco Way nearly every day since January. The proposed extension of the light rail to Eastridge will provide valuable connectivity from Evergreen to BART, and will also make the light rail much more accessible and appealing. It could noticeably reduce congestion in the South and East Bay.
The current terminus of the light rail in Alum Rock is pretty hard to reach by car. Parking is not plentiful, and Capitol Expressway is very highly congested due to the daily backup between the 680 interchange and Ocala Avenue. The timing of the bus/light rail connection can add more than 20 minutes to the trip. But once on the light rail, the trip is very efficient. This connection will save me a few hours a week, time which I would much rather spend with my family, or benefitting one of San Jose’s largest employers. Without the bus segment, I am sure many more of my neighbors will join me on the train.
I can’t make it to Thursday’s VTA Board meeting, but I wanted to write in enthusiastic support of this extension. I sincerely hope you will grant the remaining approvals required to proceed on schedule.
Best regards, Marilyn Langley San Jose District 8 resident and Cisco employee
From: Chavez, Lorena Sent: Thursday, May 02, 2019 12:19 PM To: Torres, Omar
5/2/19
To whom it may concern,
My name is Lorena Chavez, and I was born and raised in East San Jose. We have waited too long for the light rail expansion to the East Side. With the current traffic conditions, our public transportation system is not ideal for many working-class families who have children in schools, access to and from our job/schools is not suitable with our current public transportation system. I urge you to support our East San Jose community and expand the light rail to our underserved population. We need this transportation project as it is already fully funded and it is an injustice to our community if we cannot get our much deserved Eastridge extension.
In partnership, Lorena Chavez
From: Rodriguez, Monica Sent: Thursday, May 02, 2019 2:59 PM To: VTA Board Secretary
Hello,
Please find attached a collection of letters in support of the Eastridge to BART Light Rail project for today’s public comment.
Many thanks, Monica
Monica Rodriguez Council Assistant City of San Jose | Office of Councilwoman Sylvia Arenas – District 8 O: 408.535.4968 | E: [email protected] 200 East Santa Clara Street – 18th Floor, San Jose, CA 95113
From: Ernesto Bejarano
I am unable to attend tonight's meeting due to previous commitments, but as an elected official representing thousands of East San Jose residents, I wanted to send the message below. Please forward to the Board of Directors. Also, please confirm receipt of this message at [email protected] Thank you.
My name is Ernesto Bejarano and I am a Governing Member of the Alum Rock Union School District Board of Trustees, encompassing most of what is commonly known as East San Jose.
As a life long East Side resident and advocate, and a representative of thousands of hard working families on our side of town, it is incomprehensible to think that this body is considering allocating resources in a way that supports the continued intentional isolation and disenfranchisement of our community.
I have heard from many constituents, and access to reliable transportation is vital in our area, potentially more so than anywhere else in the region. Our families rely on public transportation to get to medical appointments, employment, school, and recreation. In addition, our families support and are an integral part of most of the industries that make Silicon Valley prosperous, as employees who depend on the VTA light rail and bus system to get to work and back home to their children and families.
I implore you to carefully consider your commitment to VTA lightrail to BART in East San José, as the repercussions of diverting resources elsewhere will have countless negative impacts valley-wide.
Thank you.
From: Camille Fontanilla Sent: Thursday, May 2, 2019 6:13:53 PM To: Torres, Omar Subject: VTA
Sorry these are so late...we’ve been slammed...
Here is one so far
Dear VTA Board of Directors,
I am a lifelong resident of East San Jose. I grew up riding public transportation with my family to trips, doctor’s appointments, work and school. Now, as an adult mother, I still see and know the necessity of having public transportation as a necessity for our community. Please do not negate our families’ needed and the opportunity of transportation that is need for living and thriving economically in an already struggling city.
-Dilza
From: Camille Fontanilla Sent: Thursday, May 2, 2019 6:18:35 PM To: Torres, Omar Subject: VTA
Camille Llanes-Fontanilla, MPA Executive Director SOMOS Mayfair www.somosmayfair.org
Dear VTA Board,
Buses are democracies in action! There are few spaces remaining where people of all backgrounds share space as one. However over the years our transit system has increasingly become 2 tiered—the average income of a cal train is 70K compared that to a bus at $25k. The mayors decision to disinvest in the east side is classist, racist and anti-immigrant. He wants to take the funds that the people voted for. These funds are intended to increase transit services to a community that is majority working class people of color.
Today we are rethinking cities where transit system is becoming critical to building sustainable communities yet intentional decisions are being made about who gets to thrive in this city. A thriving bus system is one while all of us are able to build connections across the corners of our city regardless of class, gender, religion, sexual orientation, race, etc. Shame on the Mayor for taking away what belongs to the people.
-Diana
From: Camille Fontanilla Sent: Thursday, May 2, 2019 6:41:36 PM To: Torres, Omar Subject: Letter to VTA
Dear VTA Board,
My name is Camille Llanes-Fontanilla and I am both a resident of east San Jose and the Executive Director of SOMOS Mayfair.
As a lifelong resident of east San Jose, I have and continue to experience the challenges related to having limited public transportation access, infrastructure and frequency needed to make public transportation a viable option for me and my family.
I have a desire to use public transportation, as it aligns with my personal values of equity, environmental stewardship and connecting with others in community. However, for professional reasons, I need an affordable and efficient mode of transportation that can get me to multiple points throughout San Jose and the Valley. And while public transportation is a preferred option for me; for many of my neighbors, it is the ONLY source of transportation, relied upon for educational and economic opportunities, as well as critical services and needs.
This is why I continue to vote YES on ballot measures related to increasing transportation investments in east San Jose. I have payed these taxes in hopes that my family and my broader community can benefit from it. But once again, policy makers are considering further eroding trust with our east San Jose community. This is unacceptable and unconscionable.
Please keep your commitments to our community and invest in public transportation in east San Jose.
Camille Llanes-Fontanilla, MPA Executive Director SOMOS Mayfair https://gcc01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=www.somosmayfair.org&data=02%7C01%7C Omar.Torres%40sanjoseca.gov%7C07341e76ed9245f8efa508d6cf687cbf%7C0fe33be061424f969b8d78 17d5c26139%7C0%7C1%7C636924445011693936&sdata=IyI5OkM71bH9wlXFinqSEXuwWEDgSDCy r1%2FCHODBErc%3D&reserved=0
From: Karie Fraley Sent: Thursday, May 2, 2019 4:44:27 PM To: Torres, Omar Subject: Please save lightrail
Hello,
I am a 31 year old woman who works in tech in Palo Alto and am moving to the east side of San Jose, so that I can utilize the 103 bus line to get to work.
The company I work for provides us with a free VTA eco pass. I love being able to use my bike/public transit to get around in San Jose. Being trapped in a car is horrible and it's bad for the environment. I like using the lightrail when it's too hot to ride my bike long distances.
I really hope you decide to keep the lightrail.
Thank you,
Karie Fraley
17575 Peak Avenue Morgan Hill, CA 95037-4128 TEL: (408) 779-7271 FAX: (408) 779-3117 www.morganhill.ca.gov
April 8, 2019
The Peninsula Corridor Joint Power Board 12509 San Carlos Ave. San Carlos, CA 94070
RE: Caltrain Business Plan
Dear Caltrain Board:
On behalf of the Morgan Hill City Council, I would like to thank the Caltrain Board for engaging Morgan Hill and the rest of the communities in South Silicon Valley on the Caltrain 2040 Business Plan efforts. I want to take this opportunity to acknowledge Sebastian Petty and Casey Fromson for their diligent efforts on the outreach and communications. Your staff has been very helpful and attentive. We appreciate their partnership and their good work.
The purpose of our letter is to share some comments on the Caltrain 2040 Business Plan and request a response on how these issues listed herein can be incorporated into the final 2040 Business Plan. We have also included some comments/questions regarding existing and near future train service we hope you can respond to.
1. LEVEL OF SERVICE
Under the current Moderate and High Growth Scenarios listed in the Draft Business Plan, Morgan Hill would get two trains per hour during weekday peak times and one train per hour during non-peak and weekends. We are pleased to see increased service under these two scenarios. As indicated in your most recent update, the number of available Caltrain riders in our community is much larger than the number of riders currently using the Morgan Hill Caltrain Station. We believe many of our residents are traveling to a station in San Jose due to the limited train service in Morgan Hill.
We must work to provide adequate service to Morgan Hill and surrounding communities. As you well know, communities south of San Jose are growing at faster rates than other communities, providing housing for the growing Bay Area workforce. Morgan Hill has been growing at a steady rate of approximately 2%. Gilroy is the fastest growing City in Santa Clara County and many people are commuting to communities south of Gilroy due to the high costs of housing.
Highway 101 no longer seems to be a viable commuting option as it is severely congested. Local streets like Monterey Road and Hale Avenue are bearing the brunt of this congestion and have become regional transportation corridors (without regional funding to manage the wear and tear).
We recognize that in order to move people efficiently we need a public transit system that offers consistent service. We recommend 2 trains per hour during peak time and one train during non- peak times be identified as the minimum level of service acceptable for South County.
We request that this increased level of service be implemented as soon as feasible. Morgan Hill’s train ridership has gone up 70% since 2011 and we believe that the demand will grow as the Diridon station grows with the expansion of Google and Adobe. We are also increasing jobs in Morgan Hill. Currently, we have 6.2 million square feet of industrial space and another 2 million of job square feet in the pipeline. Our Downtown is quickly transforming into the transit-oriented development center envisioned in our Specific Plan. We have over a dozen projects that range from luxury market rate apartments to a boutique hotel. The parking lot at the Caltrain Station is filled with train riders as well as corporate shuttle bus riders. Morgan Hill needs increased train service now.
2. ELECTRIFICATION
The service level assumptions stated in the Draft Caltrain Business Plan are based on the electrification of the entire system. The electrification of the South County corridor is currently envisioned through a blended system with High-Speed Rail. The assumption is that High-Speed Rail will secure usage or ownership of the tracks from Union Pacific Rail Road (UPRR), electrify the right-of-way and share the electrified track system with Caltrain. It is our recommendation that the Caltrain Business Plan should acknowledge the efforts, goals and aspirations of High-Speed Rail. However, the Caltrain Business Plan should stand on its own and plan for the electrification of the tracks independent from High-Speed Rail’s efforts. We recommend that the Caltrain Business Plan include a plan for electrification of the South County corridor independent of High-Speed Rail’s plans for electrification.
It is important to clarify that the most paramount issue for Morgan Hill is increased service. While we believe electrification of the system is important for the long-term viability of Caltrain, Morgan Hill needs and wants additional service today, regardless of the form (diesel locomotive or electrified train). We support electrification but not at the expense of delaying added service to South County.
3. MORGAN HILL TRAIN STATION
The electrification of the tracks will require improvements to the Morgan Hill station. These improvements include adding a second platform and replacing the at grade crossing with an underground crossing. The City of Morgan Hill requests the immediate attention of Caltrain, High- Speed Rail and VTA to engage on the planning of the Caltrain Station so that the City can best plan for the future Transit Station and adjacent sites (sites that would be impacted by these improvements). Regardless of what agency (High-Speed Rail or Caltrain) cause the improvements to the Station, we all benefit by collaborative developing design solutions for the station. This work cannot wait. Therefore, we request that Caltrain lead the effort in the design of the new Station and bring together the agencies that need to be part of the discussion and planning.
It is important to note that the Caltrain Station offers over 400 parking spaces of which approximately half are used by corporate buses that are a big part of the transportation eco-system in Morgan Hill.
4. SERVICE ENHANCEMENTS
Residents in South County were promised a fourth train under Measure B approved in 2016. Unfortunately, this fourth train cannot be operational until the locomotive rehab work is done. It is our understanding that the fourth train will be running by 2021. We are anxious to have this train operational. Please confirm the date by which the fourth train is expected to be available. Also, please let us know when we can expect information about the proposed schedule (timeslot) for this fourth train.
Finally, the existing third train is to be rescheduled to an earlier timeslot to increase ridership. Please confirm expected date of when this schedule will take place and what is the new timeslot recommended for this third train.
5. HIGH-SPEED RAIL & GRADE SEPARATIONS
High-Speed Rail is scheduled to announce their preferred alignment and issue the project EIR report by the end of 2019. High-Speed Rail’s EIR will environmentally clear a certain amount of train capacity for high speed trains along the corridor. We want Caltrain’s projected service (as envisioned in the Draft Caltrain Business Plan 2040) be accounted for in High-Speed Rail’s Draft EIR.
We do not know when (if ever) High-Speed Rail will be constructed and operated. In the interim, we want Caltrain to be able to use the environmental capacity cleared by High-Speed Rail.
Finally, the projected level of train service added to South County between Caltrain and High-Speed Rail warrant a conversation about pedestrian and vehicular safety. Tennant Avenue and Dunne Avenue in Morgan Hill have some of the highest Average Daily Trip (ADT) crossings in the entire Bay Area. We request that High-Speed Rail, VTA and Caltrain join us on a productive conversation about the need (if any) of grade crossings in Morgan Hill.
Morgan Hill and surrounding communities are growing fast without the support of much needed public transportation services. We are supportive of Caltrain’s efforts to plan for a service that meets the needs of all customers and communities alike. We believe public transit is one of the ways we can be just and equitable. South County is long overdue to receive adequate, fair and just service. We urge you to move forward with your business plan and consider us your friend, advocate and ally as you move forward with these efforts. We thank you for allowing us an opportunity to comment of the Draft Business Plan.
We hope you find this information useful. Please feel free to contact me or Edith Ramirez, Economic Development Director at [email protected] with any questions or clarifications for the above.
Sincerely,
Rich Constantine Morgan Hill Mayor
Cc: Morgan Hill City Council, [email protected] Valley Transportation Agency Board of Directors, [email protected] California High-Speed Rail Authority Board Members, [email protected] Gilroy City Council, [email protected] California Department of Transportation, Laurie Berman, Director, [email protected] California State Transportation Agency, Brian C. Annis, Secretary, [email protected] California State Transportation Agency, Chad Edison, Deputy Secretary, [email protected]
From: VTA Board Secretary
VTA Board of Directors and VTA Advisory Committees:
Attached for your information is a community meeting notice on the Blossom Hill Station Joint and Transit-Oriented Development . The meeting will be held on Wednesday, May 15, 2019, 7:00 p.m. at the Del Robles Elementary School, Multi-Purpose Room, 5345 Avenida Almendros, San Jose.
Thank you.
Office of the Board Secretary Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority 3331 N. First Street San Jose, CA 95134 408.321.5680 [email protected]
Conserve paper. Think before you print.