POLICY ADVISORY COMMITTEE ***REVISED AGENDA***

Transcription

1 POLICY ADVISORY COMMITTEE COMMITTEE MISSION: Thursday, February 8, :00 PM VTA Conference Room B North First Street San Jose, CA ***REVISED AGENDA*** The Policy Advisory Committee (PAC) represents the prioritized transportation policy views of the Member Agencies, individually and collectively, to the VTA Board of Directors. The PAC proposes approaches to transportation issues identified by the Board, VTA staff, and the PAC itself. CALL TO ORDER 1. ROLL CALL 2. ORDERS OF THE DAY The quorum requirement for this meeting is: 9 3. PUBLIC PRESENTATIONS: This portion of the agenda is reserved for persons desiring to address the Committee on any matter not on the agenda. Speakers are limited to 2 minutes. The law does not permit Committee action or extended discussion on any item not on the agenda except under special circumstances. If Committee action is requested, the matter can be placed on a subsequent agenda. All statements that require a response will be referred to staff for reply in writing. 4. Receive Committee Staff Report. (Verbal Report) (Lawson) Receive Government Affairs Update. **Changes from previous version: (Changes are in red font) Revised recommendation language for Agenda Item #7 - City of Saratoga - Prospect Road Complete Streets, to remove programming of federal Surface Transportation Program (STP) funds to the San Jose Diridon Transportation Facilities Master Plan.

2 Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority Policy Advisory Committee February 8, Receive Chairperson's Report. (Verbal Report) (Miller) CONSENT AGENDA 6. ACTION ITEM -Approve the Regular Meeting Minutes of January 11, REGULAR AGENDA 7. ACTION ITEM - Recommend that the VTA Board of Directors reprogram $1,070,000 in One Bay Area Grant Cycle 2 funds to the City of Saratoga s Prospect Road Complete Streets Project. 8. INFORMATION ITEM - Receive presentation on the latest milestones in the implementation of Senate Bill 743 and the transition from Level of Service (LOS) to Vehicle-Miles-Traveled (VMT) in transportation impact analysis. (Deferred from the January 11, 2018 PAC meeting.) 9. INFORMATION ITEM - Receive an update on 2016 Measure B. (Verbal Report) 10. INFORMATION ITEM - Receive information on future framework for replacement parking policy. OTHER 11. Review PAC Work Plan. (Lawson) 12. ANNOUNCEMENTS 13. ADJOURN In accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, VTA will make reasonable arrangements to ensure meaningful access to its meetings for persons who have disabilities and for persons with limited English proficiency who need translation and interpretation services. Individuals requiring ADA accommodations should notify the Board Secretary s Office at least 48-hours prior to the meeting. Individuals requiring language assistance should notify the Board Secretary s Office at least 72-hours prior to the meeting. The Board Secretary may be contacted at (408) or board.secretary@vta.org or (408) (TTY only). VTA s home page is or visit us on Facebook (408) : 中文 / Español / 日本語 / 한국어 / tiếng Việt / Tagalog. All reports for items on the open meeting agenda are available for review in the Board Secretary s Office, 3331 North First Street, San Jose, California, (408) , the Friday, Monday, and Tuesday prior to the meeting. This information is available on VTA s website at and also at the meeting. Page 2

3 VTA Ad Hoc Financial Stability Committee Stakeholder Groups VTA Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC) VTA Committee for Transportation Mobility and Accessibility (CTMA) VTA Policy Advisory Committee (PAC) Santa Clara County City Managers Association Santa Clara County Chambers of Commerce Coalition Silicon Valley Leadership Group (SVLG) Transit Justice Alliance SPUR Amalgamated Transit Union Local 265(ATU) Service Employees International Union Local 521 (SEIU) Transportation Authority Engineers & Architects Association Local 21 (TAEA) American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees Local 101 (AFSCME) South Bay AFL-CIO Labor Council

4 Women s March January 20, 2018

5 Switch and Signal Work Photos

6 6 Policy Advisory Committee Thursday, January 11, 2018 MINUTES The Regular Meeting of the Policy Advisory Committee (PAC) was called to order at 4:04 p.m. by Chairperson Miller in Conference Room B-106, Valley Transportation Authority (VTA), 3331 North First Street, San Jose, California. 1. ROLL CALL Attendee Name Title Status Susan Landry City of Campbell Present Rich Waterman (Alternate) City of Campbell NA Rod Sinks City of Cupertino Present Barry Chang (Alternate) City of Cupertino NA Daniel Harney City of Gilroy Absent Cat Tucker (Alternate) City of Gilroy Absent Lynette Lee Eng City of Los Altos Present Jeannie Bruins (Alternate) City of Los Altos NA Michelle Wu Town of Los Altos Hills Present Gary Waldeck (Alternate) Town of Los Altos Hills NA Rob Rennie Town of Los Gatos Present Marcia Jensen (Alternate) Town of Los Gatos NA Vacant City of Milpitas - Vacant (Alternate) City of Milpitas - Vacant City of Monte Sereno - Curtis Rogers (Alternate) City of Monte Sereno NA Rich Constantine City of Morgan Hill Present Rene Spring (Alternate) City of Morgan Hill NA Lenny Siegel City of Mountain View Present Margaret Abe-Koga (Alternate) City of Mountain View NA Liz Kniss City of Palo Alto Present Cory Wolbach (Alternate) City of Palo Alto NA Magdalena Carrasco City of San Jose Absent Vacant (Alternate) City of San Jose - Kathy Watanabe City of Santa Clara Present Patrick Kolstad(Alternate) City of Santa Clara NA Howard Miller City of Saratoga Present Rishi Kumar (Alternate) City of Saratoga NA Glenn Hendricks City of Sunnyvale Present Nancy Smith (Alternate) City of Sunnyvale NA Mike Wasserman SCC Board of Supervisors Present A quorum was not present and a Committee of the Whole was declared.

7 6 2. ORDERS OF THE DAY There were no Orders of the Day. 3. PUBLIC PRESENTATIONS: John McAlister, VTA Board Member, made the following comments: 1) noted the importance of the PAC Committee and the responsibility of the Members; 2) commented how transportation plays a big role in the community; and 3) expressed appreciation for Member Constantine showing interest in a leadership role. Member Lee Eng arrived and took her seat at 4:03 p.m. and a quorum was declared. 4. Committee Staff Report Aaron Quigley, Senior Policy Analyst and Acting Staff Liaison, introduced Nuria I. Fernandez, General Manager/CEO. Ms. Fernandez provided a report on the accomplishments of 2017 and priorities for Member Sinks arrived and took his seat at 4:10 p.m. Member Kniss arrived and took her seat at 4:13 p.m. Members of the Committee and staff discussed the following: 1) the status of the 2016 Measure B funds; 2) impacts of the lawsuit on the SR 85 Corridor Study; 3) a funding disbursement plan once the lawsuit is settled; 4) the 2016 Measure B guidelines; 3) technology s role in the future of transportation; 5) accrued interest of the escrowed 2016 Measure B; and 6) VTA s retired bus program, specifically what happens when the buses are taken out of service; and any opportunities for schools to use them. A Member of the Committee requested staff to provide an offline report that would detail VTA s plan for the SR 85 Corridor study if the 2016 Measure B funds do not become available in the time planned. Ms. Fernandez stated that VTA always had a clear and transparent process in its programs. She indicated an update about 2016 Measure B will be agendized for a future meeting, and staff will address the Committee s questions surrounding funds, status of the lawsuit and the guidelines. Ms. Fernandez noted she looks forward to working with the Committee in the upcoming year. Public Comment Roland Lebrun, Interested Citizen, made the following comments: 1) recommended that there be a separate Board for the Congestion Management Agency (CMA) apart from the VTA Board; and 2) provided suggestions related to light rail express trains, 2016 Measure B and paratransit. Carlos Orellana, Senior Assistant Counsel, provided a brief status report regarding the 2016 Measure B lawsuit. Policy Advisory Committee Minutes Page 2 of 5 January 11, 2018

8 6 Mr. Quigley provided a brief report, highlighting the following: 1) summary of actions taken by the VTA Board of Directors (Board) at the January 4, 2018, meeting; and 2) announced the Government affairs written report was at the Members table and Public table; 3) reported about fare and service changes that went into effect on January 1, 2018; and 4) announced the new Member Orientation will immediately follow the PAC meeting held on February 15, Chairperson s Report There was no Chairperson s Report. CONSENT AGENDA 6. Regular Meeting Minutes of January 11, 2018 M/S/C (Wasserman/Constantine) to approve the Regular Meeting Minutes of January 11, REGULAR AGENDA 7. Election Process for 2018 PAC Committee Leadership: Conduct Elections Stephen Flynn, Advisory Committee Coordinator, provided a brief background and overview of the election process. Member Sinks provided a brief report from the nomination subcommittee, noting Members Constantine, Miller, Rennie and Sinks expressed interest in Chair and/or Vice Chair for Members Constantine, Miller, Rennie and Sinks addressed the Committee and shared their reasons why they are interested in a leadership position. On a vote of 9 ayes 3 and 0 abstains to elect Howard Miller as the Policy Advisory Committee Chairperson for RESULT: Elected 2018 Chairperson Agenda Item #4 AYES: Hendricks, Kniss, Lee Eng, Miller, Rennie, Siegel, Sinks, Watanabe, Wu NOES: Constantine, Landry, Wasserman ABSENT: Carrasco, Harney ABSTAIN: None On a vote of 7 ayes 5 and 0 abstains to elect Rod Sinks as the Policy Advisory Committee Vice Chairperson for NOTE: M/S/C MEANS MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED AND, UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED, THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY Policy Advisory Committee Minutes Page 3 of 5 January 11, 2018

9 6 RESULT: Elected 2018 Vice Chairperson Agenda Item #4 AYES: Hendricks, Kniss, Miller, Siegel, Sinks, Watanabe, Wu NOES: Constantine, Landry, Lee Eng, Rennie, Wasserman ABSENT: Carrasco, Harney ABSTAIN: None 8. Core Connectivity Program Update Aiko Cuenco, Transportation Planner III, provided an overview of the staff report and provided a presentation entitled "Core Connectivity Program Update," highlighting: 1) Background; 2) Findings; 3) Flexible; 4) Flexible Service Models = Low Productivity; 5) Microtransit Pilot Outcomes; 6) Program Implementation; 7) Demonstration Projects; 8) Grant Program for Community- Based Mobility Projects; and 9) Mobility Toolkit. Members of the Committee made the following comments: 1) inquired about the FLEX Pilot Program in Santa Clara; 2) referenced slide 8 of the presentation and encouraged staff to focus on the last bullet Demand response demonstration projects in order to gather new information to better form a policy and make decisions; 3) noted the first and last mile gap is a deterrent for the public to ride transit; 4) recommended staff seek opportunities for public-private partnerships; 5) commented about wanting to see more innovative models and solutions, including what the future of technology will look like in transportation; 6) encouraged staff to find ways to make the current system better, using the tools VTA already has available; 7) the need for VTA to hold accountable any partnerships as it relates to public and driver safety; and 8) expressed support for the program. Public Comment Member Hendricks left his seat at 5:22 p.m. Sheillina Brunston, Amalgamated Transit Union (ATU) Local 265, made the following comments: 1) thanked the Committee for their work; 2) reminded the Committee that when looking at first and last mile solutions, VTA already provides a service and to find ways to maximize VTA s ability to serve the public; 3) reported about the many drivers that have downtime, when that time could be used to serve the public to fill in first and last mile gaps; And 4) Private shuttle companies and transportation network companies need to be held to the same standards as VTA if servicing the public with public funds. Members Kniss, Constantine, and Wasserman left their seats at 5:37 p.m. and a Committee of the Whole was declared. On order of Chairperson Miller and there being no objection, the Committee of the Whole received an update on VTA's Core Connectivity Program and related implementation efforts. 9. (Deferred) Receive presentation on the latest milestones in the implementation of Senate Bill 743 and the transition from Level of Service (LOS) to Vehicle-Miles-Traveled (VMT) in transportation impact analysis. Policy Advisory Committee Minutes Page 4 of 5 January 11, 2018

10 6 10. I-280 Corridor Study Update OTHER Gene Gonzalo, Engineering Group Manager, and Shanthi Chatradhi, Associate Transportation Engineer, provided an overview of the staff report and distributed a presentation entitled I-280 Corridor Study, highlighting: 1) Project Development Process; 2) I-280 Corridor Study; 3) Study Objectives; 4) Data Collection ; 5) Public Engagement Responses; 6) Potential Solutions for Key Public Inputs; 7) Potential Reversible HOV/Express Lane Connector at I-280/SR85; 8) Evaluation Criteria; 9) Project Development Process; and 10) Summary. Discussion ensued about the following: 1) the importance for improvements to various corridors in Santa Clara County; 2) finding ways to use mass transit to help ease the congestion on I-280 in the San Jose - Cupertino area; and 3) including City of Campbell during VTA s outreach efforts; and 4) the timeline for the projects development process to completion. On order of Chairperson Miller and there being no objection, the Committee of the Whole received final report for I-280 Corridor Study. 11. Committee Work Plan Chairperson Miller requested staff provide an update on the following items: 1) the current Measures; 2) 2016 Measure B funds, including the status of the lawsuit and a funding plan for when funds are released; 3) different types of innovative solutions; and 4) VTA s retirement bus program. On order of Chairperson Miller and there being no objection, the Committee of the Whole reviewed the Committee Work Plan. 12. ANNOUNCEMENTS There were Announcements. 13. ADJOURNMENT On order of Chairperson Miller and there being no objection, the Committee meeting was adjourned at 6:06 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Theadora Abraham, Board Assistant VTA Office of the Board Secretary Policy Advisory Committee Minutes Page 5 of 5 January 11, 2018

11 Revised TAC Agenda Item #8 Revised PAC Agenda Item #7 Date: February 6, 2018 Current Meeting: February 7&8, 2018 Board Meeting: March 1, 2018 BOARD MEMORANDUM TO: THROUGH: FROM: SUBJECT: Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority Technical Advisory Committee Policy Advisory Committee General Manager, Nuria I. Fernandez Director - Planning & Programming, Chris Augenstein City of Saratoga - Prospect Road Complete Streets Policy-Related Action: No Government Code Section Applies: No ACTION ITEM RECOMMENDATION: Recommend that the VTA Board of Directors reprogram $1,070,000 in One Bay Area Grant Cycle 2 funds to the City of Saratoga s Prospect Road Complete Streets Project. BACKGROUND: At its June 6, 2013 meeting, the VTA Board of Directors approved the first cycle of projects for the One Bay Area Grant (OBAG) Program. This action provided $4,205,000 for construction of the City of Saratoga s Prospect Road Complete Streets project. The City of Saratoga funded all pre-construction phases with local money, and provided additional non-federal matching funds for the construction phase. The original project scope included reduction of road widths to calm traffic and accommodate sidewalks and bike lanes, and the installation of raised, landscaped pedestrian refuge medians as traffic calming and pedestrian safety measures. The project will also close sidewalk gaps with wide sidewalks, upgrade signalized intersections, restripe bike lanes, install bicycle detector loops, and significantly upgrade the existing bus stops and shelters. No vehicle travel lanes will be removed. In May 2017, Saratoga released the bid for the construction phase. However, bids came in significantly higher than anticipated. Saratoga staff contacted VTA staff for financial assistance;

12 however, no additional funds were available at that time. Without full funding the City of Saratoga was forced to reduce the original project scope by removing one partial and six full medians. Subsequently, in December 2017, funding has become available to cover the shortfall through shifts in other fund programs as discussed below. DISCUSSION: In January, 2017, the VTA Board of Directors approved the OBAG Cycle 2 Program of Projects which provided partial funding for the City of San Jose's West San Carlos Urban Village Streetscape project. And on November 2, 2017, the VTA Board of Directors approved $3.3 million of 2018 State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) funds to the West San Carlos Urban Village Streetscape project. In December 2017, VTA was notified by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) that VTA was required to program an additional $1,070,000 from the 2016 STIP to bicycle, pedestrian and/or livable communities projects to cover an obligation that was created by the State's deletion of $4,350,000 programmed to the City of Palo Alto's Adobe Creek Bicycle bridge in VTA Staff exercised discretion provided by the VTA Board of Directors to shift $1,070,000 in STIP funds to the West San Carlos Streetscape project from the US 101 Express Lanes Phase 5 project. This action leaves the West San Carlos Streetscape project over funded by $1,070,000 from OBAG 2. City of Saratoga staff contacted VTA staff immediately after the December 2017 VTA Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) meeting to request the funding made available by the above actions for the Prospect Road Complete Streets project scope that was deleted over the summer. VTA staff believes that this is an appropriate use of the excess OBAG 2 funding currently programmed to the West San Carlos Streetscape project, and recommends that the VTA Board reprogram $1,070,000 in OBAG Cycle 2 funds to the City of Saratoga s Prospect Road Complete Streets project. ALTERNATIVES: The VTA Board may consider other programming alternatives. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact to VTA as a result of programming funds to the City of Saratoga's Prospect Road Complete Streets project. Prepared by: Celeste Fiore Memo No ATTACHMENTS: 6401_Attachment A (PDF) Page 2 of 2

13 Attachment A City of Saratoga - Prospect Road Complete Streets Project Limits 7.a

14 8 Date: January 12, 2018 Current Meeting: February 8, 2018 Board Meeting: N/A BOARD MEMORANDUM TO: THROUGH: FROM: SUBJECT: Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority Policy Advisory Committee General Manager, Nuria I. Fernandez Director - Planning & Programming, Chris Augenstein Update on SB 743 and LOS-to-VMT Transition FOR INFORMATION ONLY BACKGROUND: Senate Bill (SB) 743, approved by the California legislature in September 2013, includes changes to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and Congestion Management Program (CMP) law related to the analysis of transportation impacts. The bill directs the Governor s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to develop alternative metrics to replace the use of vehicular level of service (LOS) for evaluating the transportation impacts of projects under CEQA. These changes are likely to have significant implications for VTA and Member Agencies. On November 27, 2017, OPR took a long-waited major step in the implementation of SB 743 by transmitting its proposed CEQA Guidelines implementing SB 743 to the California Natural Resources Agency for formal rule-making. At the same time, OPR released an updated Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA. These materials are described further in the Discussion section below, and are available at < Between December 2013 and January 2016, OPR released three earlier rounds of draft guidance on implementing SB 743. VTA staff brought Information items to TAC, PAC and CMPP after each of these rounds, in April 2014, September 2014, and February VTA is bringing this item to January 2018 TAC, PAC and CMPP to share information on the implementation of SB 743, provide an overview of VTA s recent and upcoming efforts in this area, and receive committee input to help shape any comments that VTA may submit during the rule-making process. VTA also strongly encourages Member Agencies to become familiar with SB 743 and OPR's November 2017 guidance, and to submit their own comments as appropriate. VTA staff is available to help with this education process if needed.

15 8 DISCUSSION: Key changes to CEQA analysis of transportation impacts, effects on CMP and local transportation analysis, and steps in the SB 743 rule-making process and implementation in Santa Clara County are described below. SB 743 Changes to CEQA Analysis of Transportation Impacts For a number of years, environmental review of proposed projects under CEQA has relied on vehicular LOS, a measure of vehicular delay or congestion, as a primary measure of transportation impact. Lead Agencies analyze LOS when preparing transportation analysis of proposed projects, disclose impacts if the LOS exceeds an established threshold, and identify mitigation measures for these impacts where feasible. SB 743 calls for OPR to develop new significance criteria to replace LOS in CEQA transportation analysis for projects. The legislation states that once the new criteria are adopted, Automobile delay, as described solely by level of service or similar measures of vehicular capacity or traffic congestion, shall not be considered a significant impact on the environment in the locations where the new criteria will apply (21099 (b) (2)). SB 743 Effects on CMP and Local Transportation Analysis State CMP law calls for the use of vehicular LOS in monitoring the performance of key transportation facilities and in analyzing transportation impacts of proposed land use developments, in urbanized counties that have a CMP. VTA, as the Congestion Management Agency (CMA), maintains the CMP for Santa Clara County in partnership with its 16 Member Agencies. The VTA CMP establishes a minimum standard of LOS E for CMP facilities. This threshold applies when a Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) is prepared for CMP purposes. Additionally, many Member Agencies have established local LOS thresholds for non-cmp facilities. SB 743 amends CMP law to reinstate the ability of cities and counties to designate Infill Opportunity Zones where the CMP LOS standard would not apply ( ). These areas may be established in Transit Priority Areas or high quality transit corridors with 15-minute or better service frequencies. A previous provision in CMP law allowing the establishment of Infill Opportunity Zones expired in No Member Agency in Santa Clara County had utilized that provision prior to that date. SB 743 does not preclude local agencies from applying LOS in General Plan policies, zoning codes, conditions of approval, or any other planning requirements pursuant to the police power or other authority. In other words, local agencies can retain LOS for a number of purposes, including transportation impact analysis studies, but cannot apply it to CEQA analysis. SB 743 State Rule-Making Process and Implementation Timeline Along with its November 2017 transmittal of the proposed CEQA Guidelines to the Secretary of Natural Resources, OPR staff identified the anticipated timeline for the rule-making process; that Page 2 of 4

16 8 the Natural Resources Agency rule-making process should take approximately six months, and will include a formal 45-day public comment period. Following this rule-making process, the Guidelines will go to the Office of Administrative Law for a legal review of one to two months, after which they will go into effect. OPR anticipates this will occur in early Fall Once the new CEQA Guidelines go into effect, an opt-in period will start during which Lead Agencies may begin using the newly adopted Guidelines; OPR notes that agencies are free to switch from LOS to VMT any time before the rule-making process is complete. OPR has specified that use of the new Guidelines will be mandatory for all Lead Agencies on January 1, SB 743 Implementation and the LOS-to-VMT Transition in Santa Clara County The changes to transportation analysis in SB 743 will have significant implications for VTA as a CMA, transit agency, and CEQA Lead Agency on transit and roadway capital projects. In addition, Member Agencies will also be affected in their role as CEQA Lead Agencies. As noted in the Background section, VTA staff has been active in sharing information and facilitating discussion with Member Agencies on SB 743 since its adoption. VTA staff has also submitted comment letters to OPR on their draft guidance, and anticipates submitting a letter during the formal rule-making period in early In recent months, VTA has discussed LOS-to-VMT issues and ideas with the Land Use / Transportation Integration (LUTI) and Systems Operations & Management (SOM) Working Groups of the VTA TAC, as well as a number of individual Member Agencies. In these discussions, staff has received strong support and numerous requests for VTA to play a lead role in helping with LOS-to-VMT implementation in Santa Clara County. VTA staff is in the process of developing a work plan for LOS-to-VMT efforts over the coming 18 to 24 months, leading up to the January 2020 mandatory adoption date. The City of San Jose has been actively preparing to transition from the use of LOS to VMT as the primary metric in transportation analysis for San Jose under CEQA. San Jose staff has engaged in an extensive stakeholder outreach process and is planning to bring a new city transportation analysis policy for Council approval in February More information is available at < Other VTA Member Agencies have indicated that they are monitoring SB 743 implementation, with some planning to switch at the start of the optin period and others planning to wait until the mandatory adoption date. ADVISORY COMMITTEE DISCUSSION/RECOMMENDATION: This item was on the Regular Agenda at the January meeting of the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC). Members of the Committee had the following comments and questions: 1) thanked VTA for taking a leadership role and sharing information on this topic; 2) commented that agencies will need to find other tools to address local operational issues, and that VMT analysis will place greater emphasis on maintaining a comprehensive travel demand model; and 3) noted that the City of San Jose is planning to designate certain areas as Infill Opportunity Zones, and asked to confirm what this means in terms of CMP requirements. Staff acknowledged comments 1) and 2), and for 3) staff noted that San Jose will be the first agency in Page 3 of 4

17 8 Santa Clara County to designate IOZs and VTA staff will need to confirm exactly what this means in terms of LOS analysis for development projects as well as CMP LOS monitoring. This item was on the Regular Agenda at the January meeting of the Policy Advisory Committee (PAC) but was deferred to a future meeting. Prepared By: Rob Swierk Memo No Page 4 of 4

18 PAC Item No. 8 Update on SB 743 and LOS-to-VMT Transition VTA Policy Advisory Committee February 2018

19 Background: LOS and VMT Vehicular Level of Service (LOS) is a way of measuring transportation performance that focuses on delay and congestion; letter scale from A to F Vehicle-Miles-Traveled (VMT) measures the total amount of vehicular travel across the system, rather than at specific points; usually expressed per person 2

20 Background: VTA Guidance on LOS Analysis VTA in its Congestion Management Agency role has provided an established framework for LOS analysis 3

21 Transportation Analysis of Development Projects The three-legged stool CMP (Congestion Management Program) 4

22 Transportation Analysis of Development Projects How SB 743 is changing things SB 743 changes start here but will ripple to here CMP (Congestion Management Program) and here 5

23 Senate Bill 743 Overview SB 743 primarily changes CEQA: Directs Governor s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to establish new CEQA criteria for transportation impacts Automobile delay, as described solely by level of service or similar measures shall not be considered a significant impact on the environment in the locations where the new criteria will apply (21099 (b) (2)) New primary metric will be VMT aligns with climate goals Nov draft guidelines sent for formal rule-making; expected mandatory date of January 1,

24 SB 743 CMP and Local Practice SB 743 and Congestion Management Programs (CMPs): Reinstates the ability of cities and counties to designate Infill Opportunity Zones (IOZs) where CMP LOS standard would not apply SB 743 and Local Practice SB 743 does not preclude local agencies from applying LOS in policies, codes, conditions of approval, etc. 7

25 VTA Perspective on SB 743 Key benefits: Streamline transit, bicycle, and pedestrian projects Promote/streamline TOD/Transit-Oriented Development (support ridership/revenue for transit) Help cities/counties align transportation analysis with community values Some challenges and opportunities with implementation e.g., consistency/transition 8

26 VTA Activities to Date on SB through first half 2017: Getting informed and sharing information Gathering input from Member Agencies Providing VTA input to OPR/state New effort starting Fall 2017: Fostering discussion about how cities, County and VTA can work together on implementation Working toward consistent methods/guidelines 18 to 24 month timeline guidance by later

27 VTA s Goals and Objectives for LOS-to-VMT Transition Goal: Steer VTA through the LOS-to-VMT transition, and play a leadership role in guiding Member Agencies Objectives: A. Take a leadership role B. Move county in overall progressive and pragmatic direction C. Reform VTA s practices focusing on CMA and CEQA Lead Agency roles D. Provide guidance on thresholds and methodology 10

28 Next Steps Near-Term Confirm VTA Work Plan and Schedule Form Ad Hoc Working Group (w/member Agencies) (both Transportation/Engineering and Planning) VTA Webinar January 23, 2018 Possible regional PDA Assistance Confirm key questions and begin to explore in-depth Updates at VTA Committees later

29 12 Questions and Discussion

30 TAC Item #9 CAC Item #10 PAC Item # Measure B Update February Advisory Committees February 2018

31 Status of Lawsuit February 2018 Update Currently awaiting Plaintiff to file brief March 2018 VTA has 30 days to respond Plaintiff has 20 days to respond Working through appeals process 6-12 months before resolution 2

32 Sales Tax Receipts February 2018 Update Approximately $117 Million on a cash basis* Interest earned - $155k* *As of December 31,

33 Local Streets & Roads February 2018 Update Definition, Eligible Use of Funds, Design Standards, and Distribution through TAC and CIPWG Draft Master Agreement circulating internally Advance amount, as approved by BOD, is in addition to FY18 and FY19 allocation amount Local Agency allocation amounts do not expire and will carryforward 4

34 BART Phase II February 2018 Update No 2016 Measure B action 5

35 Bicycle/Pedestrian February 2018 Update Draft Master Agreement for Education & Encourage in development Capital projects competitive grant program in development Planning projects competitive grant program initial development 6

36 Caltrain Grade Separation February 2018 Update VTA, Caltrain and Cities staff have met throughout 2017 Recent meeting: VTA, Caltrain and Cities staff January 2018 Implementation Plan on hold pending resolution of lawsuit 7

37 Caltrain Corridor Capacity Improvements February 2018 Update VTA and Caltrain staff have met regularly through 2017 South County Rail Service Study being scoped 8

38 Highway Interchanges February 2018 Update Discussions to clarify non-2016 Measure B contributions 9

39 County Expressways February 2018 Update VTA and County staff meetings to discuss implementation of Program Category 10

40 SR 85 Corridor February 2018 Update Transit Guideway Study Task 1 - Travel Market Analysis & Corridor Constraints Analysis: Underway with other funding Task 2 Alternatives Development Study will pause in March 2018 unless additional funding is identified for Task 2 11

41 Transit Operations February 2018 Update Innovative Mobility Solutions Competitive Grant Program in development 12

42 Complete Streets Reporting Requirements February 2018 Update June 1, 2017 Board Approval Working with Member Agencies to ensure Council approval of Complete Streets Resolutions 13

43 Questions? 14

44 10 Date: January 29, 2018 Current Meeting: February 8, 2018 Board Meeting: N/A BOARD MEMORANDUM TO: THROUGH: FROM: SUBJECT: Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority Policy Advisory Committee General Manager, Nuria I. Fernandez Chief Financial Officer, Raj Srinath Formulation of a Joint Development Replacement Parking Policy FOR INFORMATION ONLY BACKGROUND: VTA s Joint Development (JD) Portfolio contains 25 properties that the VTA Board has designated as priority sites for Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) projects with the goal of generating revenues, increasing ridership, and catalyzing transit-oriented communities. All of these sites, except for two, consist of Park and Ride lots, and it is envisioned that JD projects would be built on a portion of each of these lots, consistent with local plans and zoning. Parking is a significantly underutilized resource at VTA. VTA has a total of 7,525 parking stalls located at JD Park and Ride lots. Less than 3,800 of those spaces are actively used as of October (Attachment A contains a breakdown by station.). Transit agency experience throughout the US has shown that the cost of 100% replacement of parking spaces used for JD projects is one of the largest impediments to the feasibility of JD projects, with the potential to prevent projects and eliminate revenue generation. Previous committee discussions have highlighted the need for further evaluation of how to create optimal JD projects that reduce the need for replacement parking, while at the same time ensuring that VTA maintains sufficient parking to accommodate current and future transit riders. This includes ensuring that VTA can accommodate future desired growth in rail transit riders. A VTA replacement parking policy would provide guidance for County residents, local agencies, developers, transportation planners, and others on how to best manage the dual objectives of creating JD projects, including affordable housing, while supporting future ridership growth.

45 10 DISCUSSION: Staff, working with a multi-disciplinary development and transportation planning consultant team has conducted research to assess both opportunities and constraints to developing JD sites on a portfolio wide and individual site basis. This includes evaluation of current and future parking demand and supply. Parking demand is dynamic, and varies by station location, as well as transit service (e.g. stations where there is both VTA light rail and Caltrain service). Riders of commuter shuttles are increasingly utilizing VTA Park and Ride lots, which is a consideration pursuant to the Commuter Shuttle Policy recently adopted by the Board of Directors. Given these considerations, any replacement parking policy should provide flexibility to accommodate unique conditions on a site-by-site basis, while at the same time establishing a consistent process for evaluating parking demand and the parking supply that need to be provided for transit riders and residents and workers in JD projects. Another consideration is a generational and cultural shift already underway in individual car usage, and the impact of Transportation Network Companies (Uber, Lyft, etc.); car sharing services; and increased uses of other modes of transportation. For example, garage operators in San Francisco report a decrease of 10% to 25% in parking demand over the past few years due to these factors. Research on other agency practices for JD replacement parking and Transportation Demand Management (TDM), including BART; Portland TriMet; LA Metro; Washington, DC WMATA; and King County, WA Metro has highlighted a range of best practices and strategies for replacement parking. These include: Developing clear station access goals and priorities for all modes of transportation (pedestrian, bicycle, carpool, private vehicle, etc.); Shared parking for use by transit riders and occupants of JD projects; Use of paid parking and parking pricing to shift demand; Coordination with Transportation Network Company (TNC s) and car share solutions to address first and last mile challenges; Station specific analysis, coordinated with local jurisdictions, to address the specific station area context, transit ridership goals, and provide cost-benefit analysis; Encouragement of no parking minimums by local jurisdictions; and Replacement parking standards established on a site by site basis, with evaluation of ridership gains from JD projects as well as excess parking capacity, to determine projectspecific replacement parking requirements. The chart on the following page summarizes how various agencies use different replacement parking and TDM tools: Page 2 of 3

46 10 Agencies Defined Access Priorities Shared Parking Paid Parking TNC Coordination Local Jurisdiction Coordination No Parking Minimums (Jurisdictions) Site by Site Review BART TriMet LA METRO WMATA King County Metro Staff will provide a presentation at the meeting that provides additional examples and insight into considerations related to replacement parking, TDM, and provision of parking to meet future transit needs. Some of the topics for discussion could include: Station area access priorities (pedestrian, bicycle, carpool, private vehicle, etc.); Framework for analyzing tradeoffs between JD replacement parking and transit ridership; Considerations for implementation of paid parking; and Other policy or local factors that will need to be addressed. Discussion with the Advisory Committees will be used to inform and shape staff s preparation of a draft JD replacement parking policy to be added to VTA s Joint Development Policy. Such a draft policy would be presented as an action item to the Advisory and Standing Committees prior to final consideration by the Board of Directors. Prepared By: Ron Golem & Jessie O'Malley Solis Memo No Page 3 of 3

47 10.a ATTACHMENT A: PARK & RIDE UTILIZATION Joint Development Portfolio Park and Ride Lot Usage October Station Stalls Occupied Stalls Almaden Alum Rock Berryessa/N. San Jose BART Not in Service Not in Service Blossom Hill Branham Capitol Cerone N/A N/A Cottle Curtner Evelyn n/a n/a Gilroy * Hostetter Alder VTA Block n/a n/a Milpitas Transit Center (new) Not in Service Not in Service Morgan Hill* Ohlone River Oaks N/A N/A Diridon N/A N/A San Martin* Santa Clara* Santa Teresa Snell Tamien** Total 7,525 3, Light Rail Park and Ride Lots Usage (Operations, Oct. 2017) * Caltrain Station **Caltrain and Light Rail Station Note: limited additional parking surveys indicate that parking by riders of commuter shuttles usage is a factor at some VTA Park and Ride lots. For example, 10% of the occupied parking at Tamien Station is utilized by commuter shuttle riders; at Ohlone/Chynoweth commuter shuttle riders represent approximately 30% of Park and Ride lot usage.

48 TAC Item No. 10 CAC Item No. 9 PAC Item No. 10 Joint Development Replacement Parking Advisory Committees February 2018

49 Agenda Background on Parking and Joint Development Considerations for Replacement Parking Policy Policy recommendations 2

50 Park & Ride Utilization October 2017 Park & Ride Supply/Occupancy Occupancy Supply Occupancy at JD Park & Ride 3,751 Supply at JD Park & Ride 7,525 VTA Operations, October

51 Benefits of Transit-Oriented Development TOD residents use transit more regularly: Bay Area: 42% of residents who live and work within ½ mile of rail and ferry stops commute by transit Only 4% of those living further away 1 30% less Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) per day than those living further away 2 1 Weisbrod and Reno, Economic Impact of Public Transportation Investment, American Public Transportation Association, TransForm and California Housing Partnership Corporation, Why Creating and Preserving Affordable Homes Near Transit Is a Highly Effective Climate Protection Strategy (2013). 4

52 Benefits of Transit-Oriented Development (cont.) Joint development ground lease revenue Increased ridership and farebox revenue Fiscal revenues Catalyst for additional TOD around stations Example of TOD promoting multi modal lifestyle at River View adjacent to VTA s River Oaks Station 5

53 Study Analysis Team Introduction: Strategic Economics and Nelson/Nygaard Best practices related to parking and TDM at light rail stations based on review of peer agencies (BART, TriMet, LA METRO, WMATA, King County Metro) Estimate the potential impacts and fiscal benefits of joint development on ridership and revenues Examine approaches to replacement parking 6

54 Ridership and Revenue Impacts Prototype: Mixed Use Residential Medium Density Podium mid rise apartments du/acre 10,000 20,000 sq. ft retail Nearby examples: LINQ Apartment Homes, The Verdant, Fruitdale Station, The Pierce 7

55 Estimated Transit Ridership by Replacement Parking Scenario Annual Transit Riders 300, , , , ,000 50,000 0 Prototype 2: Mixed Use Residential Mid-High Density Park and Ride Scenario (No JD) JD + No Replacement Parking JD + Replace Utilized Parking Only JD + Replace 75% of Parking Supply JD + Replace 100% of Parking Supply 8

56 Estimated Net Annual Revenue to VTA, by Replacement Parking Scenario Annual Revenue to VTA $1,500,000 $1,000,000 $500,000 $0 -$500,000 -$1,000,000 Prototype 2: Mixed Use Residential Mid-High Density Park and Ride Scenario (No JD) JD + No Replacement Parking JD + Replace Utilized Parking Only JD + Replace 75% of Parking Supply JD + Replace 100% of Parking Supply 9

57 Replacement Parking Policy Considerations Model current and future transit parking demand Establish access priorities Evaluate Transportation Demand Management (TDM) tools 10

58 Parking Demand Forecast 8000 Current Parking Supply Park & Ride Demand Occupancy, Oct Demand (Free) 2018 Demand (Paid) 2025 Demand (Free) 2025 Demand (Paid) *Paid parking assumes $2.50 at LRT, $5.50 at Caltrain + 3% growth/year. **Estimated demand net of shuttle parking 11

59 Best Practice Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Multi modal access policy Do not require 1:1 replacement parking No minimum parking ratios Shared use parking agreements BART Station Access Policy,

60 Best Practice TDM (cont.) Demand shift: High Demand Lots Lower Demand Lots Paid parking Local permitting Unbundled parking Support for bike and car share programs 13

61 Station-Level Replacement Parking Analysis Parking demand (current and future) Station access planning/tdm measures Ridership impacts of parking and TOD Opportunities for shared parking 14

62 Discussion What are the most important considerations for preparing a JD Replacement Parking Policy? What is needed to set multimodal station area access priorities? What TDM tools are most important? 15

63 PAC WORK PLAN February - August 2018 Doc ID Origin Short Title 6401 Division - Planning and Programming / Marcella Rensi City of Saratoga - Prospect Road Complete Streets; San Jose Diridon Transportation Facilities Master 6406 Dept - Real Estate / Ron Golem Formulation of a Joint Development Replacement Parking I Policy 6380 Dept - Transportation Planning / Chris Augenstein Update on SB 743 and LOS-to-VMT Transition I PAC 2/8 A BOD 3/1 A PAC 3/8 BOD 4/5 PAC 4/12 BOD 5/3 PAC 5/10 BOD 6/7 PAC 6/14 BOD 6/22 PAC 7/12 BOD 8/ Division - Planning and Programming / Jane Shinn 2016 MB Update I 6413 Dept - Transportation Planning / Jim Unites Transit Service Guidelines Policy Update A A 5633 Dept - Transportation Planning / Chris Augenstein Countywide Bicycle Plan: Public Review Draft D 6271 Division - Engineering and Transportation Program Delivery / Suja Prasad Measure A Semi-Annual Report ending December 31, 2017 I I 6137 Division - Planning and Programming / Chris Augenstein Google North Bayshore Transportation Access Study - Draft Report I I 6399 Dept - Transportation Planning / Chris Augenstein Development Review Annual Report for 2017 I I 6419 Division - Planning and Programming / Marcella Rensi Programmed Project Monitoring - Quarterly Report I I 6283 Division - Operations / Lalitha Konanur Transit Operations Performance Report - Q2 FY 2018 I 6384 Dept - Project Development / Casey Emoto Transportation Technology Strategic Plan Development Status Report I I 6420 Division - Planning and Programming / Marcella Rensi FY2018/19 TDA3 Project Priorities A A 6421 Division - Planning and Programming / Marcella Rensi 2018/19 TFCA Program Manager Fund A A 6284 Division - Operations / Lalitha Konanur Transit Operations Performance Report - Q3 FY 2018 I 1 of 1 2/1/2018