MOBILITY PARTNERSHIP Wednesday, March 9, 2016 MINUTES CALL TO ORDER The Mobility Partnership Meeting was called to order at 9:30 a.m. in the Gilroy Police Department Community Room, 7351 Rosanna Street, Gilroy, CA 95020. 1. ROLL CALL Attendee Name Title Representing Status Terri Aulman Member County of Santa Clara Present Margie Barrios Member County of San Benito Present Larry Carr Member County of Santa Clara Present Jerry Muenzer Vice -Chairperson County of San Benito Present Perry Woodward Chairperson County of Santa Clara Present Ignacio Velasquez Member County of San Benito Present A quorum was present. 2. PUBLIC PRESENTATIONS There were no public presentations. 3. ORDERS OF THE DAY Member Carr arrived at the meeting at 9:32 a.m. and took his seat. Received the following introductions from Mobility Partnership members: Perry Woodward, Mayor of City of Gilroy; Jerry Muenzer, County of San Benito Supervisor, Council of San Benito County Governments (SBCOG) Chairperson; Ignacio Velasquez, Mayor of City of Hollister, SBCOG Director; Margie Barrios, County of San Benito Board of Supervisors Chairperson; Terri Aulman, Council Member of City of Gilroy; Larry Carr, Council Member of City of Morgan Hill. Agency Staff and Project Consultants in attendance: John Ristow, Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) Director of Planning and Program Development; Casey Emoto, VTA Deputy Director of Planning and Program Development; Veronica Lezama, Transportation Planner, Council of San Benito County Governments (SBCOG); Chris Metzger, VTA Project Manager; Eileen Goodwin, Project Consultant; Nick Saleh, Caltrans District 4 Division Chief; Richard Rosales, Caltrans District 5 Deputy Director. Mobility Partnership Page 1 of 5 March 9, 2016
4. CONSENT AGENDA On General Consensus and there being no objection, Mobility Partnership Regular Meeting Minutes of December 17, 2015 has been approved. 5. REVIEW AND APPROVE CHANGES IN MOBILITY PARTNERSHIP AND MEETING LOGISTICS Chairperson Woodward welcomed new members Terri Aulman and Larry Carr. Members agreed that the next meeting be scheduled for May 11, 2016 (Wednesday). Other meeting dates deferred to next meeting. 6. REPORTS FROM VTA AND SBCOG STAFF Mr. Ristow, Ms. Goodwin, and Ms. Lezama provided updates on high speed rail, SR 25 interim study, and proposed sales tax measures for Santa Clara and San Benito counties, and potential funding sources. Discussions: 1. Mr. Ristow noted that a portion of SR 152 Trade corridor could potentially overlap with the future High Speed Rail (HSR) project. High speed rail s section from Merced to San Jose is now in accelerated environmental clearance process to determine those alignments. Mr. Ristow plans to invite HSR staff in a future meeting to discuss the developments and schedule of HSR. An engineering firm has now been contracted for environmental clearance work. Chairperson Woodward explained that HSR might need a new corridor and it may go to the same area as the project which would be a great opportunity on same corridor alignment for this project. 2. Ms. Goodwin explained SBCOG convened a stakeholder group in support of the San Benito County sales tax ballot measure. Stakeholder group decided to look at SR 25 with more modest improvements that could be delivered in the near term. SBCOG hired an engineering firm to look at safety and operational enhancements in five (5) to ten (10) -year time frame, capacity improvements - widening of passing lanes that could be delivered in existing alignment, and alternative modes that would take traffic out of SR 25. Final report is expected in May 2016. Mobility Partnership Page 2 of 5 March 9, 2016
Ms. Lezama noted that the estimated cost of improvements to the SR 25 corridor is $130 million. SBCOG is also moving forward to amend the Regional Transportation Plan to include the identified projects and will be on the SBCOG Board agenda this month. Chairperson Woodward explained that an environmentally cleared plan was approved by the VTA Board in 2013 for US 101/SR 25 interchange. Discussed with Mayor Licardo and Carl Guardino to include the US 101/SR 25 Interchange project in the ballot measure this fall. 3. Mr. Ristow discussed VTA s proposed sales tax measure and potential inclusion of the US 101/SR 25 Interchange project. VTA Board of Directors will have a workshop on April 22, 2016 wherein it will discuss program of projects and funding scenarios. One half (½) cent on sales tax for 30 years is projected to generate $6.5 Billion to fund various projects. Ms. Lezama noted that San Benito is moving forward on its own one half (½) cent on sales tax measure for 30 years. It will earmark 50% of revenues ($120 Million) to Highway 25 for safety improvements and to reduce congestion. San Benito County Board of Supervisors already approved the measure for the June 2016 ballot. Vice-chairperson Muenzer inquired regarding the safety aspect of US 101/SR 25 interchange discussed at the SBCOG Board meeting, specifically a proposed deceleration lane on southbound 101 prior to SR 25 off-ramp and if there s a conflict with VTA s approved plan. 4. Mr. Ristow provided an update on potential funding sources such as Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) Goods Movement program freight movement plan. Nationwide plan requires 40% match in funding. VTA is trying to tap into the program and put US 101/SR 25 Interchange project on a list sent to MTC in pursuit of federal funds. Ms. Adamson of the Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments (AMBAG) mentioned that AMBAG is conducting a 5-county study related to freight particularly the US 101 corridor and which also prioritizes east-west connection in San Benito County. Final report expected by end of March 2016. 7. PRESENTATION ON PROJECT ELEMENT COSTS FOR THE US 101 IMPROVEMENT PROJECT BETWEEN MONTEREY STREET AND SR 129; AND THE PROPOSED PHASE 1 FOR THE US 101/SR 25 INTERCHANGE Mr. Metzger discussed the project element costs for the US 101 improvement project and a potential Phase 1 for the US 101/SR 25 interchange. The environmentally cleared project in 2013 covers all the US 101 roadway improvements from Monterey Street to SR 129 (including the US 101/SR 25 interchange). Mobility Partnership Page 3 of 5 March 9, 2016
Discussions: 1. Mr. Carr inquired about the current Castro Valley Road connection to US 101 north of the US 101/SR 25 interchange. Mr. Metzger noted that in the ultimate project, Castro Valley Road will be turned into a culde-sac with a driveway to the Adagio Wedding Facility. For the Phase 1 project, this is still being studied and will be looked at more closely should funding become available. 2. Ms. Barrios asked about funding and timeline of Phase 1 Project. Mr. Ristow explained that it has been proposed to the Board that this project be included in the sales tax measure. If the sales tax measure passes in November 2016, tax collection would begin in April 2017. Project initiation can begin soon after. If no federal fund is used for this Phase 1 project, there will be no need for NEPA process. Chairperson Woodward noted he is requesting $180 million to construct the ultimate interchange. 3. Ms. Barrios requested that San Benito Country representatives be at the VTA Board meeting when discussion is held on the US 101/SR 25 Interchange project. VTA to forward meeting information to SBCOG staff. 8. PRESENTATION ON SR 152 TRADE CORRIDOR PROJECT ELEMENT COSTS AND ALIGNMENT OPTIONS Mr. Metzger discussed the SR 152 Trade Corridor project element costs and alignment options. Discussions: 1. Mr. Muenzer inquired on the need for improvement as far east as I-5 noting the Central Valley s current non-involvement on this project. Mr. Emoto explained this started as a four county study that considered SR 152 as far east as SR 99 with funding approved by California Transportation Commission (CTC). CTC advised that project needs to extend to I-5 interchange (Merced County). 2. Mr. Carr inquired about the potential truck traffic increase on US 101 north of the US 101/SR 25 interchange if SR 152 is improved and attracts more traffic. Mr. Emoto will provide the truck traffic study at the next meeting. 3. Mr. Ristow noted that an engineering team is under contract to do project work but currently on hold due to absence of funding for the next level. Mobility Partnership Page 4 of 5 March 9, 2016
Mobility Partnership members were asked to provide direction on the alignments in order for VTA to engage the engineering firm to restart project work to aid in the alignment decision. Additional information will be given to the members so the Mobility Partnership members can agree upon policy directions. Mr. Emoto proposed that more quantitative information regarding the alignments be provided at the next meeting. 4. Mr. Carr asked if VTA can provide recommendation on the preferred alignment and the technical explanation behind that recommendation. Mr. Metzger noted that recommendations on alignment are dependent on overall project goals to be agreed upon by the Mobility Partnership. Mr. Velazquez requested to look at the southern options to understand the potential economic benefits. 5. Ms. Barrios requested that project study information be presented at the next meeting. 6. Mr. Carr asked if San Benito County considers the alignment as potential growth opportunity. Ms. Barrios answered on the affirmative. 7. Ms. Lezama requested for more information on access points. 9. JOINT POWER AGREEMENT (JPA) CONCEPT FOR FACILITY DEVELOPMENT AND MANAGEMENT Ms. Goodwin presented a primer on the formation and purpose of a JPA. The partnership may consider a JPA in the future to secure and manage funds specifically for the SR 152 Trade Corridor. 10. DISCUSSION ON NEXT STEPS Agenda item not discussed. 11. ADJOURNMENT On order of Chairperson Woodward, and there being no objection, the meeting was adjourned at 11:00 a.m. Respectfully submitted, Rebecca de Leon VTA Highway Program Mobility Partnership Page 5 of 5 March 9, 2016