DOCSLIB.ORG

FY 2020 and FY 2021 Biennial Budget

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
FY 2020 and FY 2021 Biennial Budget Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority Adopted Biennial Budget Fiscal Years 2020 and 2021 July 1, 2019 – June 30, 2020 and July 1, 2020 – June 30, 2021 Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority Santa Clara County, California Adopted Biennial Budget Fiscal Years 2020 and 2021 Adopted by the Board of Directors June 6, 2019 ABOUT VTA The Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) is an independent special district responsible for bus and light rail operation, regional commuter and inter-city rail service, Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) paratransit service, congestion management, specific highway improvement projects, and countywide transportation planning. As such, VTA is both an accessible transit provider and a multi-modal transportation planning and implementation organization involved with transit, roadways, bikeways, and pedestrian facilities. VTA provides services to cities throughout Santa Clara County including Campbell, Cupertino, Gilroy, Los Altos, Los Altos Hills, Los Gatos, Milpitas, Monte Sereno, Morgan Hill, Mountain View, Palo Alto, San Jose, Santa Clara, Saratoga, and Sunnyvale. The Government Finance Officers Association of the United States and Canada (GFOA) presented a Distinguished Budget Presentation Award to Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority for its biennial budget for the biennium beginning July 1, 2017. In order to receive this award, a governmental unit must publish a budget document that meets program criteria as a policy document, as an operations guide, as a financial plan, and as a communications device. This award is valid for a period of two years only. We believe our current budget continues to conform to program requirements, and we are submitting it to GFOA to determine its eligibility for another award. VTA FY 2020 & FY 2021 ADOPTED BIENNIAL BUDGET Table of Contents MESSAGE FROM THE GENERAL MANAGER/CEO .......................................................... 1 BUDGET GUIDE & DOCUMENT ORGANIZATION ........................................................... 5 SECTION 1 - INTRODUCTION TO VTA Organization Profile ............................................................................................................................................ 9 Board of Directors ............................................................................................................................................. 10 Organization Structure ...................................................................................................................................... 15 Executive Management Team ............................................................................................................................ 16 VTA’s Strategic Plan .......................................................................................................................................... 17 Long-Range Planning ........................................................................................................................................ 20 Funded Programs .............................................................................................................................................. 21 Appropriation Summary ..................................................................................................................................... 25 Operating Budget Development Process ........................................................................................................... 26 Operating Budget Calendar ............................................................................................................................... 28 Capital Budget Development Process ................................................................................................................ 29 Capital Budget Calendar ................................................................................................................................... 31 Budget Amendment & Transfer Process ............................................................................................................ 32 Resolution No. 2019.06.14 ................................................................................................................................. 33 SECTION 2 - VTA TRANSIT VTA TRANSIT OPERATING ........................................................................................................ 39 Overview ............................................................................................................................................................ 39 Operating Budget Assumptions .......................................................................................................................... 44 Comparison of Revenues and Expenses ............................................................................................................. 56 Sources and Uses of Funds Summary ................................................................................................................ 59 VTA Transit 10-Year Projection ........................................................................................................................ 60 Division Budget Summary .................................................................................................................................. 61 Office of the General Manager .......................................................................................................................... 62 Auditor General ................................................................................................................................................. 68 Office of the General Counsel ............................................................................................................................ 69 Finance & Administration Division ................................................................................................................... 73 External Affairs .................................................................................................................................................. 84 System Safety & Security Division ..................................................................................................................... 91 Operations Division ........................................................................................................................................... 96 Planning & Engineering Division .................................................................................................................... 104 Non-Departmental ........................................................................................................................................... 111 Performance Measures .................................................................................................................................... 112 CAPITAL PROGRAM OVERVIEW ............................................................................................... 118 Schedule of FY 2020 & FY 2021 Appropriation .............................................................................................. 120 Descriptions of FY 2020 & FY 2021 Appropriated Projects ........................................................................... 124 VTA Transit Total Available Appropriation ..................................................................................................... 160 VTA TRANSIT DEBT SERVICE.................................................................................................. 172 Debt Policy Overview ...................................................................................................................................... 172 Debt Service Schedule ...................................................................................................................................... 174 Overview of Outstanding Debt Issues .............................................................................................................. 175 SECTION 3 - 2000 MEASURE A TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM OVERVIEW ............................................................................................................................... 177 OPERATING BUDGET ASSUMPTIONS ........................................................................................ 178 COMPARISON OF REVENUES AND EXPENSES ............................................................................ 179 i VTA FY 2020 & FY 2021 ADOPTED BIENNIAL BUDGET SOURCES AND USES OF FUNDS SUMMARY ............................................................................... 180 CAPITAL BUDGET ASSUMPTIONS ............................................................................................. 181 SCHEDULE OF FY 2020 & FY 2021 APPROPRIATION ............................................................... 181 DESCRIPTIONS OF FY 2020 & FY 2021 APPROPRIATED PROJECTS .......................................... 182 TOTAL AVAILABLE APPROPRIATION ........................................................................................ 184 DEBT SERVICE ......................................................................................................................... 187 DEBT POLICY OVERVIEW ......................................................................................................... 187 Debt Service Schedule .....................................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Brooklyn Transit Primary Source Packet
    BROOKLYN TRANSIT PRIMARY SOURCE PACKET Student Name 1 2 INTRODUCTORY READING "New York City Transit - History and Chronology." Mta.info. Metropolitan Transit Authority. Web. 28 Dec. 2015. Adaptation In the early stages of the development of public transportation systems in New York City, all operations were run by private companies. Abraham Brower established New York City's first public transportation route in 1827, a 12-seat stagecoach that ran along Broadway in Manhattan from the Battery to Bleecker Street. By 1831, Brower had added the omnibus to his fleet. The next year, John Mason organized the New York and Harlem Railroad, a street railway that used horse-drawn cars with metal wheels and ran on a metal track. By 1855, 593 omnibuses traveled on 27 Manhattan routes and horse-drawn cars ran on street railways on Third, Fourth, Sixth, and Eighth Avenues. Toward the end of the 19th century, electricity allowed for the development of electric trolley cars, which soon replaced horses. Trolley bus lines, also called trackless trolley coaches, used overhead lines for power. Staten Island was the first borough outside Manhattan to receive these electric trolley cars in the 1920s, and then finally Brooklyn joined the fun in 1930. By 1960, however, motor buses completely replaced New York City public transit trolley cars and trolley buses. The city's first regular elevated railway (el) service began on February 14, 1870. The El ran along Greenwich Street and Ninth Avenue in Manhattan. Elevated train service dominated rapid transit for the next few decades. On September 24, 1883, a Brooklyn Bridge cable-powered railway opened between Park Row in Manhattan and Sands Street in Brooklyn, carrying passengers over the bridge and back.
    [Show full text]
  • Metropolitan Transportation Authority New York City
    CASE STUDY Metropolitan Transportation Authority New York City In 2019, Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) released a tender to Shared Mobility providers to develop a new scalable and sustainable on-demand transit proposal. At a glance Liftango was engaged by the MTA for a The MTA network comprises the nation’s simulation service to predict the uptake largest bus fleet and more subway and for an implemented on-demand service. commuter rail cars than all other U.S. Liftango’s simulation technology was transit systems combined. The MTA’s provided to MTA as a benchmark to operating agencies are MTA New York City measure the realism and efficiency of Transit, MTA Bus, Long Island Rail Road, tender proposals from shared mobility Metro-North Railroad, and MTA Bridges and providers. Essentially, enabling MTA to Tunnels. make an educated decision on whom they should choose as their on-demand provider. The Metropolitan Transportation Authority is North America’s largest transportation network, serving a population of 15.3 million people across a 5,000-square-mile travel area surrounding New York City through Long Island, southeastern New York State, and Connecticut. 01 The Problem MTA needed to provide a one of the largest growing As MTA’s first time launching better transport solution sectors in the next five to ten this type of project, there to the people of New York years. The census shows was some risk surrounding City’s outer areas. Why? that a number of people are launch. By engaging Liftango, Existing bus services being leaving for work between 3-6 the aim was to mitigate risk, less frequent than a subway pm and therefore returning simulate possible outcomes service or completely during the overnight period.
    [Show full text]
  • Southern California Rapid Transit District (SCRTD)
    Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority Law ---------------------------------------------------------------------- With corresponding provisions of the Southern California Rapid Transit District Law and Los Angeles County Transportation Commission Law Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority California Public Utilities Code Page 2 of 110 Introduction The Southern California Rapid Transit District, also known as the SCRTD or the “District” (1964-1993) was created by the State as the successor to the Los Angeles Metropolitan Transit Authority or “LAMTA” (1958-1964). LAMTA was the first publicly governed transit operator in Los Angeles and also responsible for the planning of a new mass transit system to replace the aging remnants of the transit systems built by Pacific Electric (1899-1953) and Los Angeles Railway (1895-1945). Unfortunately, the LAMTA had no ability to raise tax revenues or powers of eminent domain, and its board was appointed by the Governor, making the task building local support for mass transit improvements difficult at best. Dissatisfaction with the underpowered LAMTA led to a complete re-write of its legislative authority. While referred to in state legislation as a merger, the District law completely overwrote the LAMTA Act of 1957. The Los Angeles County Transportation Commission, also known as LACTC or the “Commission” (1977-1993) was created by the State in 1976 as a separate countywide transportation planning agency, along with transportation commissions in San Bernardino, Riverside, and Orange counties. At the time the District was initially created, there were no transit or transportation grant programs available from the State or Federal governments. Once funding sources became available from the Urban Mass Transit Administration, now the Federal Transit Administration, the California Transportation Commission, and others, the creation of county transportation commissions ensured coordination of multimodal transportation planning and funding programs.
    [Show full text]
  • Caltrain TIRCP Application Jan
    PENINSULA CORRIDOR JOINT POWERS AUTHORITY APPLICATION FOR 2018 TRANSIT AND INTERCITY RAIL CAPITAL PROGRAM FUNDS PROJECT NARRATIVE A. Project Title Page Project Title: Peninsula Corridor Electrification Expansion Project The Peninsula Corridor Electrification Expansion Project (EEP) includes a series of incremental investments in the 51-mile Caltrain Corridor between the 4th and King Station (San Francisco) and the Tamien Station (San Jose). These investments are focused on expanding and fully converting Caltrain’s mainline diesel fleet to electric trains. This investment builds on and leverages the existing Peninsula Corridor Electrification Project (PCEP) and supports the goals of the Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program (TIRCP), providing increased capacity and service flexibility, supporting state and interregional connectivity, and reducing greenhouse gas emissions through elimination of diesel service from the mainline Peninsula Corridor. In addition to providing immediate, direct benefits, the EEP also represents an incremental step within a larger program of development that will evolve the Peninsula Corridor in a way that supports the ridership, service levels, and connectivity goals contemplated in the draft 2018 State Rail Plan. The central component of Caltrain’s 2018 TIRCP application is the purchase of 96 additional Electric Multiple Units (EMU). This procurement will fully exercise all available options under Caltrain’s current contract with Stadler and will provide sufficient EMUs to fully electrify Caltrain’s mainline fleet, while also sustaining and expanding capacity to accommodate growing demand. In addition to requesting funds for the purchase of EMUs, Caltrain is also requesting a smaller amount funding for a series of associated projects that will equip the corridor to receive and operate a fully electrified fleet in a way that allows the railroad to reap the maximum benefit from its investments.
    [Show full text]
  • 2004 Draft EIS/EIR Chapter 4.2: Transportation and Transit
    Silicon Valley Rapid Transit Corridor Draft EIS/EIR 4.2 TRANSPORTATION AND TRANSIT 4.2.1 INTRODUCTION This section discusses existing and future transportation conditions in the SVRTC and quantifies the expected long-term transportation impacts of the No-Action, Baseline, and BART alternatives. Existing and projected future transit services, forecasts of transit patronage, and impacts on travel patterns and the transportation environment are described, as well as existing and projected vehicular traffic, circulation, parking, and non-motorized conditions in the corridor. Traffic operations under each of the project alternatives during the peak hour are evaluated, with emphasis on intersection level of service, and measures are identified for mitigating adverse impacts of the Baseline and BART alternatives on the roadway network. Short-term construction-phase impacts are discussed in Section 4.19, Construction. Future transit patronage and vehicular traffic volumes were developed using an enhanced version of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) regional model. Transportation modeling approaches, assumptions, baseline projects, and projections for existing conditions under the Baseline and BART alternatives are described in the Travel Demand Modeling Methodology Report, Travel Demand Forecasts Report, and three traffic impact analysis reports addressing the station areas in the cities of Milpitas, San Jose, and Santa Clara (Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc., 2003)1. These reports form the basis for much of the information in this section. 4.2.2 REGULATORY SETTING 4.2.2.1 Alameda County Congestion Management Agency Level of Service Policies The Alameda County Congestion Management Agency (ACCMA) Land Use Analysis Program requires a level of service analysis for roadway segments within a study area if 100 evening peak hour vehicle trips are generated by a proposed project (see Section 4.2.6.2 for definitions of level of service).
    [Show full text]
  • CENTRAL Total ±295,426 SF
    SANTA CLARA 2770-2890 De La Cruz Boulevard @CENTRAL Total ±295,426 SF Virtual Slideshow Availability Update Kelly Yoder Brandon Bain Bob Simpson Steve Horton +1 408 615 3427 +1 408 615 3416 +1 408 615 3421 +1 408 615 3412 LIC#: 01821117 LIC#: 01308375 LIC#: 01240540 LIC#: 01127340 REAL ESTATE PARTNERS SANTA CLARA Project Highlights @CENTRAL • Five-building high-image Office/R&D project totaling ±295,426 SF • Transformative project upgrades and renovations complete • Extensive exterior façade modifications with progressive image • State-of-the-art tech open ceiling and drop ceiling environments • Prominent corner location with excellent identity • Tremendous building and monument signage opportunities • Expansive asset with options for future growth • Energized collaboration areas dedicated to each building • Dock and grade level loading opportunities • SVP power savings between 27%-35% over PG&E SANTA CLARA 2800 de la cruz CENTRAL (1-Story) @ Full Building 18,717± sf 2830 de la cruz (3-Story) First Floor 23,639± sf Second Floor 31,588± sf Third Floor 31,549± sf Contiguous / divisible Option Second/Third Floors 63,137± sf Full Building 86,776± sf updated MAY 2019 SANTA CLARA Location @CENTRAL Milpitas W Caribbean Dr 237 W Tasman Dr Great Mall Lafayette St 2858 2860 2890 2830 Central Expressway 237 Tasman Dr 2800 Oakland Rd 2770 Ellis St S Whisman Rd 101 De La Cruz Blvd • Excellent access to Interstate 880 Montague Exwy and Highways 101 & 87 Central ExwyMathilda Ave 880 237 SANTA CLARA • Convenient access to San Jose Scott Blvd International
    [Show full text]
  • BLUE LINE Light Rail Time Schedule & Line Route
    BLUE LINE light rail time schedule & line map Baypointe View In Website Mode The BLUE LINE light rail line (Baypointe) has 2 routes. For regular weekdays, their operation hours are: (1) Baypointe: 12:29 AM - 11:46 PM (2) Virginia: 12:16 AM - 11:33 PM Use the Moovit App to ƒnd the closest BLUE LINE light rail station near you and ƒnd out when is the next BLUE LINE light rail arriving. Direction: Baypointe BLUE LINE light rail Time Schedule 17 stops Baypointe Route Timetable: VIEW LINE SCHEDULE Sunday 12:30 AM - 10:20 PM Monday Not Operational Virginia Station West Virginia Street, San Jose Tuesday Not Operational Children's Discovery Museum Station Wednesday 12:29 AM - 11:46 PM Convention Center Station Thursday 12:29 AM - 11:46 PM 300 Almaden Bl, San Jose Friday 12:29 AM - 11:46 PM San Antonio Station Saturday 12:29 AM - 11:47 PM 200 S 1st St, San Jose Santa Clara Station Fountain Alley, San Jose BLUE LINE light rail Info Saint James Station Direction: Baypointe Stops: 17 Japantown/Ayer Station Trip Duration: 33 min 15 Hawthorne Way, San Jose Line Summary: Virginia Station, Children's Discovery Museum Station, Convention Center Station, San Civic Center Station Antonio Station, Santa Clara Station, Saint James 800 North 1st Street, San Jose Station, Japantown/Ayer Station, Civic Center Station, Gish Station, Metro/Airport Station, Karina Gish Station Court Station, Component Station, Bonaventura North 1st Street, San Jose Station, Orchard Station, River Oaks Station, Tasman Station, Baypointe Station Metro/Airport Station 1740 North First
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix F Flooding and Drainage Assessment
    Appendix F Flooding and Drainage Assessment 870 Market Street, Suite 1278 San Francisco, CA 94102-2906 t. 415-433-4848 Schaaf & Wheeler f. 415-433-1029 CONSULTING CIVIL ENGINEERS s&[email protected] MEMORANDUM TO: Hannah Darst DATE: March 24, 2020 David J. Powers & Associates FROM: Caitlin Gilmore, PE JOB#: DPOW.100.18 SUBJECT: The San Jose Flea Market Mixed Use Development Flooding and Drainage Evaluation Updated INTRODUCTION This memorandum is an update to the previous analysis completed in September of 2005. David J Powers is preparing an EIR to develop 52 acres of residential units and office space with two new bridge crossings to the south side of the previously analyzed Flea Market site, south of Berryessa Road, east of Coyote Creek and adjacent to the new VTA/BART line. In addition to focusing on the south side of Berryessa Road, this update includes several changes which have occurred in the watershed; namely the completion of the BART/VTA track guideway and Berryessa Station, the improvements to Upper Penitencia Creek with bridge replacements and studies of the watershed completed on behalf of VTA and the Santa Clara Valley Water District. In addition, the phase of the Flea Market development on the north side of Berryessa Road is under construction. The objective of this study is to describe the existing flood and drainage conditions at the proposed San Jose Flea Market mixed use development project (north and south), the potential project constraints, and potential impacts of the proposed project. The project area includes Upper Penitencia Creek and is adjacent to Coyote Creek.
    [Show full text]
  • Agenda Michael J
    BOARD OF DIRECTORS 2014 TOM NOLAN, CHAIR JERRY DEAL, VICE CHAIR JOSÉ CISNEROS MALIA COHEN ROSE GUILBAULT ASH KALRA ADRIENNE TISSIER PERRY WOODWARD KEN YEAGER AGENDA MICHAEL J. SCANLON EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR PENINSULA CORRIDOR JOINT POWERS BOARD Bacciocco Auditorium, 2nd Floor 1250 San Carlos Avenue, San Carlos CA 94070 July 3, 2014 – Thursday 10:00 a.m. 1. Pledge of Allegiance 2. Call to Order/Roll Call 3. Public Comment Public comment by each individual speaker shall be limited to two minutes 4. Consent Calendar RESOLUTIONS Members of the public or Board may request that an item under the Consent Calendar be considered separately a) Approval of Minutes of Special Meeting of June 5, 2014 b) Approval of Minutes of Regular Meeting of June 5, 2014 c) Authorize Executing a Funding Agreement with the City of San Mateo to Provide $100,000 for the Hillsdale Station Capital Plan d) Authorize Executing a Construction and Maintenance Agreement with the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority and a First Amendment to Grant of Easement and Agreement Over a Portion of the Caltrain Corridor Near the Mountain View Caltrain Station 5. Chairperson’s Report 6. Report of the Citizens Advisory Committee 7. Report of the Executive Director a) Caltrain Modernization Update INFORMATIONAL 8. Acceptance of Statement of Revenues and Expenses for MOTION May 2014 9. Authorize Adoption of Revised Codified Tariff, Adoption of RESOLUTION Findings for a Statutory Exemption Under California Environmental Quality Act, and Approval of Associated Title VI Equity Analysis Page 1 of 3 Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board July 3, 2014 Agenda 10.
    [Show full text]
  • Understanding TOD (Golem)
    VTA’s Joint (TOD) Development Program SPUR: Understanding TOD June 7, 2018 12:30-1:30pm Overview • VTA’s Goals for TOD and Transit Oriented Communities • VTA’s Joint Development Portfolio • VTA Owned Properties: Opportunities and Challenges • How to support and get involved VTA’s Approach to Transit Oriented Communities Joint Development Policy Goals: 1.Revenue 2.Ridership 3.Neighborhood Strategies: • Public-Private TOD on VTA sites • Station area improvements • Partnerships to increase private TOD around stations TOD located in Milpitas adjacent to VTA Light Rail line 3 VTA’s Current Joint Development Portfolio 25 sites (+ BART Phase 2) 205 acres Potential Development: Residential: Commercial: 5,100+ units 4.3 million+ sq. ft. 1,800+ 13,000+ jobs affordable created 4 5 VTA Owned Properties - Opportunities • Catalyst to create transit oriented communities • Affordable housing • Workforce / apprenticeships • Complete Streets improvements to enhance multi-modal access Affordable Housing at Ohlone/Chynoweth Station 6 VTA Owned Properties - Challenges • Getting market based entitlements for residential mixed-use • Avoiding over-investment in parking, which reduces revenues • Winning neighborhood, political acceptance Example of TOD promoting multi-modal lifestyle at River View adjacent to VTA’s River Oaks Station, North • Creating credibility, momentum San Jose with developers 7 VTA Owned Properties - Approach • Identify opportunities, issues, replacement parking strategy • Engage community & build support • Competitive developer selection
    [Show full text]
  • Semi-Annual Report June 2017
    2000 Measure A Program Semi-Annual Report June 2017 2000 Measure A Program Semi-Annual Report – June 2017 Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Title Page 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND PROJECT COSTS A. Executive Summary .............................................................................1-2 B. Project Costs .........................................................................................1-5 C. Measure A Fund Exchange ................................................................1..-8 D. Funding................................................................................................1-.9 2 PROJECT SUMMARY REPORTS 1 Silicon Valley Rapid Transit 1. BART SV Program Development Implementation & 2-1-1 Warm Springs 2. BART SV Corridor Establishment and Maintenance ..........................2-1-2 3. Berryessa Extension Project SVBX - Phase 1 ................................2-1-3.... 4 Future Extension to Santa Clara – Phase II and NMF .........................2-1-4 5. BART Core Systems Modifications (BCS) ................................2-........1-5 6. Other Supporting Project ………………………………….. 2-1-6 2. Mineta San Jose Airport People Mover ..............................................2-2 3. Capitol Expressway Light Rail to Eastridge .......................................2-3 4. Low Floor Light Rail Vehicles.............................................................2-4 5. Caltrain – Capacity Improvements & Electrification ...........................2-5 6. Caltrain Service Upgrades ................................................................2...-6
    [Show full text]
  • 2017 Triennial On-Site Safety Review of Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (Vta)
    2017 TRIENNIAL ON-SITE SAFETY REVIEW OF SANTA CLARA VALLEY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY (VTA) RAIL TRANSIT SAFETY BRANCH SAFETY AND ENFORCEMENT DIVISION CALIFORNIA PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION 505 VAN NESS AVENUE SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94102 September 19, 2018 Final Report Daren Gilbert, Manager Rail Transit Safety Branch Safety and Enforcement Division 287047411 2017 TRIENNIAL ON-SITE SAFETY REVIEW OF SANTA CLARA VALLEY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY ACKNOWLEDGEMENT The California Public Utilities Commission’s Rail Transit Safety Branch (RTSB) conducted this system safety program review. Staff members directly responsible for conducting safety review and inspection activities include: Daren Gilbert, Rail Transit Safety Branch Program Manager Stephen Artus, Program and Project Supervisor Steven Espinal, Senior Utilities Engineer Rupa Shitole, CPUC Representative to VTA, Utilities Engineer Michael Borer, Rail Transit Operations Safety Section Supervisor Debbie Dziadzio, Senior Transportation Operations Supervisor Matthew Ames, Senior Transportation Operations Supervisor John Madriaga, Track Inspector Salvador Herrera, Track Inspector Michael Rose, Operating Practices Inspector Richard Fernandez, Operating Practices Inspector Adam Freeman, Equipment Inspector (Mechanical) James Matus, Equipment Inspector (Mechanical) Shane Roberson, Signal and Train Control Inspector Claudia Lam, Senior Utilities Engineer Specialist – Risk Assessment Jamie Lau, Utilities Engineer Arun Mehta, Utilities Engineer Howard Huie, Utilities Engineer Joey Bigornia, Utilities Engineer
    [Show full text]