congestion management program & planning...

CONGESTION MANAGEMENT PROGRAM & PLANNING

COMMITTEE

Thursday, October 20, 2016

10:00 AM

PLEASE NOTE CHANGE IN MEETING ROOM LOCATION

VTA Conference Room B-106

3331 North First Street

San Jose, CA

AGENDA

3331 North First Street ∙ San Jose, CA 95134-1927 ∙ Administration 408.321.5555 ∙ Customer Service 408.321.2300

CALL TO ORDER

1. ROLL CALL

2. 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.

3. ORDERS OF THE DAY

CONSENT AGENDA

4. ACTION ITEM - Approve the Regular Meeting Minutes of September 15, 2016.

REGULAR AGENDA

5. ACTION ITEM - Adopt a resolution authorizing the General Manager to submit and

execute grant applications and agreements, certifications, assurances, and other

documents as necessary to receive funding from the California Department of

Transportation (Caltrans) under the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Section 5311

Non-Urbanized Area Formula Grant Program.

6. ACTION ITEM - Adopt the Countywide Bicycle Plan Prioritization Criteria.

Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority

Congestion Management Program & Planning Committee October 20, 2016

7. INFORMATION ITEM - Receive a presentation on expansion plans for bike share in

Santa Clara County.

8. INFORMATION ITEM - Receive 2016/2017 VTA On-board Survey Questionnaire.

OTHER ITEMS

9. Items of Concern and Referral to Administration.

10. Review Committee Work Plan. (Gonot)

11. Committee Staff Report. (Gonot)

12. Chairperson's Report. (Herrera)

13. Determine Consent Agenda for the November 3, 2016 Board of Directors Meeting.

14. ANNOUNCEMENTS

15. 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) 321-5680 or

[email protected] or (408) 321-2330 (TTY only). VTA’s home page is

www.vta.org or visit us on www.facebook.com/scvta. (408) 321-2300: 中文 / Español

/ 日本語 / 한국어 / tiếng Việt / Tagalog.

Disclosure of Campaign Contributions to Board Members (Government Code Section 84308) In

accordance with Government Code Section 84308, no VTA Board Member shall accept, solicit,

or direct a contribution of more than $250 from any party, or his or her agent, or from any

participant, or his or her agent, while a proceeding involving a license, permit, or other

entitlement for use is pending before the agency. Any Board Member who has received a

contribution within the preceding 12 months in an amount of more than $250 from a party or

from any agent or participant shall disclose that fact on the record of the proceeding and shall not

make, participate in making, or in any way attempt to use his or her official position to influence

the decision. A party to a proceeding before VTA shall disclose on the record of the proceeding

any contribution in an amount of more than $250 made within the preceding 12 months by the

party, or his or her agent, to any Board Member. No party, or his or her agent, shall make a

contribution of more than $250 to any Board Member during the proceeding and for three

months following the date a final decision is rendered by the agency in the proceeding. The

foregoing statements are limited in their entirety by the provisions of Section 84308 and parties

are urged to consult with their own legal counsel regarding the requirements of the law.

Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority

Congestion Management Program & Planning Committee October 20, 2016

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) 321-5680, the Monday,

Tuesday, and Wednesday prior to the meeting. This information is available on VTA’s website

at http://www.vta.org/ and also at the meeting.

NOTE: THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS MAY ACCEPT, REJECT OR MODIFY

ANY ACTION RECOMMENDED ON THIS AGENDA.

CONGESTION MANAGEMENT PROGRAM & PLANNING COMMITTEE

Thursday, September 15, 2016

MINUTES


CALL TO ORDER

The Regular Meeting of the Congestion Management Program & Planning Committee (CMPP)

was called to order at 10:02 a.m. by Chairperson Herrera in Conference Room B-106, 3331 North

First Street, San José, California.

1. ROLL CALL

Attendee Name Title Status

Magdalena Carrasco Vice Chairperson Absent

Jose E Esteves Alternate Member N/A

Glenn Hendricks Member Present

Rose Herrera Chairperson Present

Teresa O'Neill Member Present

Raul Peralez Alternate Member Absent

* Alternates do not serve unless participating as a Member.

A quorum was present.

2. PUBLIC PRESENTATIONS

There were no Public Presentations.

3. ORDERS OF THE DAY

There were no Orders of the Day.

CONSENT AGENDA

4. Regular Meeting Minutes of August 18, 2016

M/S/C (O’Neill/Hendricks) to approve the Regular Meeting Minutes of

August 18, 2016.

5. Fiscal Year 2016 State Route (SR) 237 Express Lanes Annual Report

M/S/C (O’Neill/Hendricks) to receive an update on SR 237 Express Lanes Fiscal Year

2016 annual report.

4

Congestion Management Program & Planning Committee Minutes Page 2 of 6 September 15, 2016

6. Programmed Project Monitoring - Quarterly Report

M/S/C (O’Neill/Hendricks) to receive the Programmed Projects Quarterly Monitoring

Report for April-June 2016.

RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS] – Consent Agenda MOVER: Glenn Hendricks, Member

SECONDER: Teresa O’Neill, Member

AYES: Hendricks, Herrera, O’Neill

NOES: None

ABSENT: Carrasco

REGULAR AGENDA

7. Capitol Light Rail Extension to Eastridge: Funding Plan

Jim Unites, Executive Manager, Transit Planning & Capital Development, provided an

overview of the staff report, highlighting proposed funding plan.

Members of the Committee emphasized the project’s importance with its nexus to VTA’s

BART Silicon Valley Extension and expressed support of renaming the project to highlight

its significance to the regional transit network.

Chairperson Herrera suggested that VTA could draft a letter of support to the Metropolitan

Transportation Commission (MTC) for the inclusion of this project in its Regional

Transportation Plan Preferred Investment Strategy.

M/S/C (Hendricks/O’Neill) to approve submitting a recommendation to the Board of

Directors to approve the funding plan for the Capitol Light Rail Extension to Eastridge.

Further, the Committee expressed support of renaming the project to highlight its regional

significance to the transit network, and requested VTA draft a letter of support to MTC for

the inclusion of the project in its Regional Transportation Plan Preferred Investment

Strategy.

RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS] – Agenda Item #7 MOVER: Glenn Hendricks, Member



NOES: None

ABSENT: Carrasco

8. Third-party Agreements of Voluntary Contributions and Programming of

(Vehicle Registration Fee (VRF) Funds to Transportation Improvement Projects

Gene Gonzalo, Engineering Manager, provided a brief overview of the staff report.

Members of the Committee commended VTA for their work and collaboration with local

agencies to achieve solutions to transportation challenges.

4


M/S/C (Hendricks/O'Neill) to approve submitting a recommendation to the Board of

Directors to authorize the General Manager to:

Negotiate and enter into cooperative funding agreements with the City of Santa

Clara in the amount of $16.164 million for its voluntary contribution;

Negotiate and enter into cooperative funding agreements with the City of

Sunnyvale for an amount up to $11.380 million to help fund mutually defined

regional transportation improvements to be delivered by the Santa Clara Valley

Transportation Authority;

Approve $4 million in Vehicle Registration Fee matching funds for the SR 237

Express Lanes Phase 2 project.




NOES: None

ABSENT: Carrasco

9. Vehicle Registration Fund Advance: City of Gilroy North First Street Paving

Marcella Rensi, Transportation Planning Manager, gave a brief overview of the staff report,

noting funding proposal.

Members of the Committee and staff engaged in a discussion regarding the funding

agreement and repayment strategy.

Members of the Committee commended VTA, noting the effort as an exemplary model of

interagency cooperation.

M/S/C (Hendricks/O’Neill) to approve submitting a recommendation to the Board of

Directors to approve up to a $5.5 million advance of Vehicle Registration Fee (VRF)

Program funding to the City of Gilroy for the First Street repaving project and authorize

the GM to sign the appropriate agreements.




NOES: None

ABSENT: Carrasco

4


10. 2016 Transportation Systems Monitoring Program Report

Murali Ramanujam, Transportation Engineering Manager, provided a brief background

and overview of the TSMP Report, highlighting performance indicators. He noted next

steps, including launch of webpage dedicated to the program.

Members of the Committee made the following comments: 1) roadside litter and graffiti is

a persistent issue and balancing resource allocation may involve difficult choices between

road maintenance and clean-up efforts; 2) there is a funding category in the current ballot,

Measure B, that could help address local streets and roads maintenance issues; 3) requested

data concerning the City of Sunnyvale on each of the performance indicators noted on the

report; 4) suggested creative ways to help address litter and graffiti, such as use of

technology, potential creation of a central litter/graffiti reporting system, and engaging

community volunteer programs; 5) noted importance of bikeway connections as part of the

transportation network; and 6) complimented staff on a comprehensive and informative

report.

Nuria I. Fernandez, General Manager and CEO, noted closer coordination between

appropriate agencies is important in addressing freeway and roadside litter and graffiti.

She suggested that information about Caltrans’ freeway litter and graffiti clean-up efforts

be included as part of the District 4 Director’s next annual report to the VTA Board of

Directors.

On order of Chairperson Herrera and there being no objection, the Committee received

information from the 2016 Transportation Systems Monitoring Report.

11. Next Network: Light Rail Service Plan Recommendation

Jason Kim, Senior Project Manager, provided a brief overview of the staff report.

Members of the Committee offered the following comments: 1) the recommended light rail

operating plan map could illustrate how the Orange Line (Alum Rock - Mountain View)

and the planned Capitol Light Rail Extension to Eastridge Project would connect Santa

Clara County’s eastern communities to BART Silicon Valley and jobs in the North County;

2) expressed support of color coding of the light rail lines and route changes; 3) requested

a breakdown of ridership data according to peak and off-peak commute times; 4) noted the

importance of frequency to transit network efficiency and reliability; 5) improvements to

the Green Line (Winchester - Old Ironsides) could demonstrate positive effects of pocket

track investment at the Great America Station; 6) asked if there was a way to quantify and

highlight service quality improvement, such as improvement in travel times, as a measure

of success beyond improved ridership; and 7) expressed appreciation of staff for their great

work.

Public Comment

Roland Lebrun, Interested Citizen, asked for consideration of a Commuter Express Service

(Yellow Line) stop at the Tamien Station to connect Caltrain Baby Bullet passengers with

the light rail.

On order of Chairperson Herrera and there being no objection, the Committee reviewed

the recommended 2017 Light Rail Operating Plan.

4


12. VTA Complete Streets Policy Development

Chris Augenstein, Deputy Director of Planning, gave a brief background and overview of

VTA’s Complete Streets policy development.

Members of the Committee and staff engaged in a discussion regarding the following:

1) correlation between the National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO)

guidelines and Complete Streets; 2) suggested staff reach out to City of Sunnyvale staff

regarding what the city needs to do to adopt the MTC resolution on Complete Streets; and

3) suggested staff evaluate how certain elements of Vision Zero could be included in

VTA’s Complete Streets Policy.

Ms. Fernandez noted safety is of paramount importance to VTA. Staff will determine

which Member Agencies have adopted Vision Zero and evaluate next steps.


and discussed the development of VTA's Complete Streets Policy.

OTHER ITEMS

13. Items of Concern and Referral to Administration

Chairperson Herrera requested staff explore how VTA could adopt Vision Zero, or some

components of the initiative.

14. Committee Work Plan


the Committee Work Plan.

15. Committee Staff Report

There was no Committee Staff Report.

16. Chairperson's Report

There was no Chairperson’s Report.

17. Determine Consent Agenda for the September 1, 2016 Board of Directors Meeting

CONSENT:

Agenda Item #5., Receive an update on SR 237 Express Lanes Fiscal Year 2016 annual

report.

Agenda Item #6., Receive the Programmed Projects Quarterly Monitoring Report for

April-June 2016.

Agenda Item #7., Approve the funding plan for the Capitol Light Rail Extension to

Eastridge.

4


Agenda Item #8., Authorize the General Manager to:

Negotiate and enter into cooperative funding agreements with the City of Santa

Clara in the amount of $16.164 million for its voluntary contribution;

Negotiate and enter into cooperative funding agreements with the City of

Sunnyvale for an amount up to $11.380 million to help fund mutually defined

regional transportation improvements to be delivered by the Santa Clara Valley

Transportation Authority;

Approve $4 million in Vehicle Registration Fee matching funds for the SR 237

Express Lanes Phase 2 project.

Agenda Item #9., Approve submitting a recommendation to the Board of Directors to

approve up to a $5.5 million advance of Vehicle Registration Fee (VRF) Program funding

to the City of Gilroy for the First Street repaving project and authorize the GM to sign the

appropriate agreements.

Agenda Item #10., Receive information from the 2016 Transportation Systems

Monitoring Report.

Agenda Item #11., Review the recommended 2017 Light Rail Operating Plan.

Agenda Item #12., Review and discuss the development of VTA's Complete Streets

Policy.

REGULAR:

None.

18. ANNOUNCEMENTS

There were no Announcements.

19. ADJOURNMENT

On order of Chairperson Herrera and there being no objection, the meeting was

adjourned at 11:16 a.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Michelle Oblena, Board Assistant

VTA Office of the Board Secretary

4

Date: October 5, 2016

Current Meeting: October 20, 2016

Board Meeting: November 3, 2016

BOARD MEMORANDUM

TO: Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority

Congestion Management Program & Planning Committee

THROUGH: General Manager, Nuria I. Fernandez

FROM: Interim Director - Planning & Program Development, Carolyn M. Gonot

SUBJECT: FTA Section 5311 Non-Urbanized Area Grant Program


Policy-Related Action: No Government Code Section 84308 Applies: No

Resolution

ACTION ITEM

RECOMMENDATION:

Adopt a resolution authorizing the General Manager to submit and execute grant applications

and agreements, certifications, assurances, and other documents as necessary to receive funding

from the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) under the Federal Transit

Administration (FTA) Section 5311 Non-Urbanized Area Formula Grant Program.

BACKGROUND:

Since 2004, VTA has applied for and received funds from the FTA Section 5311 Non-Urbanized

Area Formula Grant Program. Caltrans manages the program and apportions the funds to each

non-urbanized area region based on the size of the rural population. The purpose of the program

is to provide funds for transit projects outside of the urban boundary with a population of 50,000

or less. VTA provides transit service on Route 68, which operates outside the urban boundary

along portions of Monterey Highway between the San Jose urbanized area and the Gilroy-

Morgan Hill urbanized area.

Caltrans requires all applicants to submit a resolution approved by their governing body

authorizing the submittal of the grant application. The resolution is valid for three fiscal years.

The previous resolution adopted by the Board covered fiscal years 2014, 2015 and 2016.

DISCUSSION:

In April 2016, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) developed the annual

Program of Projects for submittal to Caltrans. Caltrans then submits a statewide program to FTA

5

of 2

for approval. VTA’s current Section 5311 Non-Urbanized Area formula annual apportionment

is $76,355. In May 2016, VTA requested these funds for operating and maintenance costs

incurred as a result of providing fixed route bus service on Route 68 outside of the urban

boundary within Santa Clara County.

Route 68 provides vital access for transit riders to jobs, schools, hospitals, and area business, as it

is the primary public fixed route bus service that connects the San Jose Urban area with the

Gilroy/Morgan Hill urban area. Route 68 originates in the northern and southern portions of the

two urbanized areas and runs through the non-urbanized area. In addition, Route 68 directly

connects with other VTA fixed route bus and light rail service in the northern and southern

portions of Santa Clara County providing important interregional connections for passengers to

the San Francisco and Monterey/Santa Cruz Bay Area.

Caltrans has accepted our request for funds for Route 68. VTA is waiting to execute an

agreement and submit the necessary documentation to request reimbursement of these funds,

which will continue to help defray operating costs (bus operator, field supervision/management

wages and benefits, fuel, tires, insurance, etc.) and maintenance activities (typically, but not

limited to, routine upkeep, minor repairs, parts, supplies, and labor/administrative costs) of Route

68.

This memorandum follows through the requirement of grant recipients to adopt a Governing

Body Resolution authorizing the submittal and execution of grant applications and agreements,

certifications, assurances, and other documents as necessary to obtain the federal grant funds. If

adopted, the resolution would be valid for fiscal years 2017, 2018, and 2019.

ALTERNATIVES:

The Board of Directors could elect not to accept the grant and fund the Route 68 operating and

maintenance costs entirely with local funds. However, the FTA Section 5311 funds are available

only for non-urbanized areas and VTA does not have other projects eligible for this grant

funding.

FISCAL IMPACT:

Approximately $76,000 will be available annually for VTA’s 2017 and future Operating

Budgets to support the costs of operating bus service on Route 68.

Prepared by: Lorena Bernal Vidal

Memo No. 5740

5

Resolution No. ________

RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS

OF THE SANTA CLARA VALLEY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY (VTA)

AUTHORIZING THE FEDERAL FUNDING UNDER FEDERAL TRANSIT

ADMINISTRATION SECTION 5311 PROGRAM (49 U.S.C. SECTION 5311) WITH

THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

WHEREAS, the United States Department of Transportation is authorized to make grants to

states through the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) to support capital and operating

assistance projects for non-urbanized public transportation systems under Section 5311 of

the Federal Transit Act (FTA C 9040.1F); and

WHEREAS, the California Department of Transportation (Department) has been

designated by the Governor of the State of California to administer Section 5311 grants for

transportation projects for the general public for the rural transit and intercity bus; and

WHEREAS, the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) desires to apply for

said financial assistance to permit operation of service in Santa Clara County; and

WHEREAS, the VTA has, to the maximum extent feasible, coordinated with other

transportation providers and users in the region (including social service agencies).

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AND ORRDERED that the VTA Board of

Directors does hereby authorize the General Manager, or her designee, to file and execute

applications and agreements on behalf of VTA with the Department to aid in the financing

of capital/operating assistance projects pursuant to Section 5311 of the Federal Transit Act

(FTA C 9040.1F), as amended.

That the General Manager is authorized to execute and file all assurances or any other

document required by the Department.

That the General Manager is authorized to provide additional information as the Department

may require in connection with the application for the Section 5311 projects.

That the General Manager is authorized to submit and approve the request for

reimbursement of funds from Caltrans for the Section 5311 project(s).

5.a

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA)

Board of Directors on ______________.

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

__________________________

Cindy Chavez, Chairperson

Board of Directors

Attest:

_____________________

Elaine Baltao, Board Secretary

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

_______________________

Robert Fabela, General Counsel

5.a




BOARD MEMORANDUM





SUBJECT: Countywide Bike Plan Prioritization Criteria


Policy-Related Action: No Government Code Section 84308 Applies: No

ACTION ITEM

RECOMMENDATION:

Adopt the Countywide Bicycle Plan Prioritization Criteria.

BACKGROUND:

As the Congestion Management Agency for Santa Clara County, VTA is responsible for

countywide transportation planning efforts including bicycle planning. The VTA Board of

Directors adopted the Santa Clara Countywide Bicycle Plan (CBP) in 2008. The CBP guides the

development of major bikeways by identifying Cross County Bicycle Corridors (CCBC) and

other projects of countywide or intercity significance. In September 2015, VTA started the

process of updating the CBP.

The CBP scope of work and schedule were presented to VTA Advisory Committees in

November 2015, and the VTA Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee (BPAC) received a

comprehensive update on the plan’s progress at its June 2016 meeting. In addition to these

formal updates, regular updates are to the BPAC as part of the monthly staff report, and meetings

with Member Agency staff have been conducted to discuss proposed modifications to the CCBC

network.

DISCUSSION:

As part of the CBP update, VTA is proposing criteria for identifying CCBC segments and other

spot locations of high value for bicyclists. Once high value areas are identified, VTA will

identify potential infrastructure and operational improvements that can improve bicycling in

these areas.

6

of 4

Proposed Prioritization Framework

Under the proposed prioritization framework the following criteria will score high:

1. Projected bicycle ridership numbers - CCBC segments that have high projected ridership

2. Transit access - CCBC segments that provide first/last mile access to major transit stops

3. Employment access - CCBC segments that serve commuters

4. Equity - CCBC segments that serve Communities of Concern

5. Safety - CCBC segments that have a history of collisions or areas with high Level of

Traffic Stress

6. Destinations - CCBC segments that serve many destinations (schools, retail, parks, etc.)

7. Community support - CCBC segments that are supported by public outreach

Details of the proposed prioritization criteria are described in Attachment A.

Methodology for Combining Scores

For each criterion, the project team will develop a map showing how the criterion varies across

the CCBC network. Sores for each criterion will then be weighted based on the percentages

provided in Attachment A, and added together to produce a composite map (score) that shows

areas of high to low priority. Figure 1 provides a conceptual illustration of this process. The

resulting composite map will be used to identify CCBC segments or spot locations that are of

high value to bicyclists.

Figure 1: Conceptual illustration of how prioritization criteria will be mapped and

combined

VTA Travel Demand Model

The first four criteria rely on outputs from VTA’s travel demand model. The model inputs

include demographics, origins, destinations, the time it takes to complete a trip, and

6

of 4

characteristics of the transportation network (including the bicycle network). These inputs are

used to predict how many trips people will make, where they will travel, what mode they will

use to travel, and what specific route they will take.

Using the Analysis to Identify High Priority Projects

Using the results of the prioritization process, VTA will identify several locations that provide

high value for bicyclists and need improvement. Locations could consist of an entire CCBC, a

portion of a CCBC or spot improvements along a CCBC, or locations where a new bicycle and

pedestrian bridge or freeway interchange improvement is needed.

NEXT STEPS:

VTA will use the criteria to identify high value locations along the CCBC network, and develop

conceptual improvement plans for five to seven of these high value locations. Proposed high-

value projects will be shared with committees and Member Agency staff in early 2017.

FISCAL IMPACT:

There is no fiscal impact to VTA of adopting the Countywide Bicycle Plan Prioritization

Criteria.

ADVISORY COMMITTEE DISCUSSION / RECOMMENDATION

The Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee received this item at its October 12, 2016

meeting and unanimously recommended approval of the staff recommendation to the VTA

Board of Directors, subject to addressing the following comments: 1) recognize the importance

of closing gaps in the bicycle network, 2) recognize the importance of destinations that are not

located within Metropolitan Transportation Commission’s designated Communities of Concern

but serve people with disabilities and low-income persons (e.g. medical centers, high density

housing targeting disabled or low income communities, retail and employment areas), 3) use a

scale for scoring criteria when possible, rather than a binary yes-no designation, 4) define how

different scales of retail will be measured (e.g. large retail centers such as Valley Fair Mall

versus small retail such those along El Camino Real), and 5) develop a scoring rubric to better

define equity and destinations criteria.

The board report has been modified to address these comments. The committee had the

following additional comments: 1) asked for clarification on the method the VTA travel model

uses to predict bicycle mode split, as well as data sources used, 2) noted that 60% the weighting

is based on the VTA travel model and requested VTA keep close track of how well the travel

model predicts bicycling behavior as county conditions change, 3) asked for clarification about

the Level of Traffic Stress designation, 4) asked if the model assumes Bus Rapid Transit on El

Camino Real is in operation in ten years, and 5) asked if VTA was requesting input from

Caltrans and the County Roads and Airports, 11) suggested that VTA could compare model

outputs from 2016 to projections of 2026 to identify high-value gap closure projects.

Prepared by: Lauren Ledbetter

6

of 4

Memo No. 5763

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment A - Criterion (DOCX)

6

Attachment A: Proposed Prioritization Criteria for the Countywide Bicycle Plan

Criterion Assessment Percent of

Total Score

Projected Bicycle Ridership Numbers

1 Has potential to serve many

bicyclists.

Projected ridership in 2026, calculated by the VTA travel

demand model, assuming the entire Cross County Bicycle

Corridor (CCBC) network is built out.

20%

Transit Access

2 Serves first mile/ last mile

transit access.

Projected number of bicyclists traveling from major transit

stops in 2026, calculated by the VTA travel demand model,

assuming the entire CCBC network is built out.

15%

Employment Access

3 Serves commuters. Projected number of commuter bicyclists in 2026,

calculated by the VTA travel demand model, assuming the

entire CCBC network is built out.

15%

Equity

4 Serves Communities of Concern

(COC).*

Projected number of bicyclists traveling from COC’s in

2026, calculated by the VTA travel demand model,

assuming the entire CCBC network is built out.

10%

Safety

5 Provides opportunity to

improve safety in a corridor

with high number of collisions.

Bicycle collision density, with fatal and severe injury

collisions weighted higher than other types of collisions.

Data from Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System,

most recent five years of data.

10%

6 Provides opportunity to

improve a corridor with high

Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress

(LTS).

Current LTS as calculated based on roadway factors such

as posted speeds, vehicle volumes, and existing bicycle

infrastructure.

10%

Destinations

7 Serves all trip purposes. Average density per mile of schools, parks, and shopping

areas within 1/4 mile of corridor.

15%

Community Support

8 Has support from the

community.

Corridor desirability based on input from members of the

public. (Comments received during public outreach for

bicycle plan at in person events, or on web map survey in

spring 2016.)

5%

* Metropolitan Transportation Commission has established Communities of Concern (COC) for the Bay Area. COCs

are defined as Census tracts with high concentrations of both minority and low-income households or Census tracts

with a high concentration of low-income households and three of the following criteria: limited English proficiency,

zero-vehicle households, seniors 75 years or older, people with disabilities, single parent families, or rent-burdened

households.

6.a




BOARD MEMORANDUM





SUBJECT: Bay Area Bike Share Expansion Update


FOR INFORMATION ONLY

BACKGROUND:

Pilot Bike Share Program

Between August 2013 and June 2016, the Bay Area Bike Share Pilot Program operated in five

Bay Area cities along the Caltrain corridor: San Jose, Mountain View, Palo Alto, Redwood City

and San Francisco. The Pilot Program was a multi-agency effort led by the Bay Area Air

Quality Management District (Air District) in partnership with the Santa Clara Valley

Transportation Authority (VTA), the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (SFMTA),

the San Mateo County Transit District (SamTrans), San Mateo County and the City of Redwood

City. The Pilot Program was funded through a combination of federal, regional and local grants

for a total cost of $11.2 million.

The initial phase of the pilot program launched with 700 bikes at 70 bike share stations region-

wide, with 280 bikes and 28 stations located in Santa Clara County (40% of system).

Bay Area Bike Share Program users took more than 840,000 bicycle trips between August 2013

and March 2016. Approximately 91 percent of the trips occurred in San Francisco, where more

than half of all Bay Area Bike Share Program equipment had been deployed. The table below

compares the performance data of the five cities that participated in the pilot bike share program.

7

of 3

Bay Area Bike Share Pilot Program - Summary Statistics August 2013 - March 2016

City Bicycles

Deployed

Total Trips Trips Per

Bicycle Per

Day

Average

Trips Per

Month

Percent of

Total Trips

San Francisco 328 762,728 2.42 23,800 90.50

Redwood City 52 4,621 0.09 145 0.55

Palo Alto 37 8,315 0.23 260 0.98

Mountain View 59 21,818 0.39 680 2.59

San Jose 129 45,368 0.36 1,420 5.38

Total 605 842,850 - - 100

* Bicycles deployed does not sum to 700 due to bicycles out of service for maintenance.

Post-Pilot Expansion

In 2015, the management responsibilities for Bay Area Bike Share Pilot Program were

transferred from the Air District to Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC). In

December 2015, MTC entered into an agreement with Bay Area Motivate, LLC (Motivate) to

operate and expand the bike share system to 7,000 bicycles by 2018 under a corporate

sponsorship model, with no public funding. In September 2016, Motivate and Ford Motor

Company announced that the companies would partner on the bike share expansion, with a

rebranded service: Ford GoBike.

Ford GoBike will operate in San Francisco, San Jose, Berkeley, Emeryville, and Oakland. An

additional 1,000 bicycles will be deployed in San Jose, with the first phase of installation

planned for 2017.

Future Bike Share in Peninsula Cities

Motivate chose not to include the cities of Palo Alto, Mountain View, and Redwood City

(Peninsula cities) in the expansion, citing low ridership, as measured by trips per bicycle per day.

Peninsula cities were offered the option of continuing bike share past June 30, 2016 by buying

into the Motivate system and funding the operating costs. To inform this decision, Peninsula

cities conducted a study to analyze existing data, potential system size and performance and

governance options. The results of this study showed that, as a permanent solution, it was cost

prohibitive to buy into the Motivate system under the terms offered, due to ongoing operations

and maintenance costs.

After negotiating better buy-in terms, in September 2016, the City of Palo Alto announced a new

agreement with Motivate that will bring a 350-fleet bike share system to that city. The system

will use smart bikes with on-board technology (provided by SoBi), in contrast to the docking-

station technology currently used by Motivate. Palo Alto’s bike share system will be operated by

Motivate and members will be able to use their membership to ride up to 7,000 bicycles within

7

of 3

the Ford GoBike system, including those in San Jose. Neighboring peninsula communities will

be able to opt in to the Palo Alto bike share system, with buy-in terms anticipated to be

announced by Motivate in October 2016.

The City of Mountain View will continue with the current dock-based Motivate system through

November 30, 2016 and possibly until June 30, 2017. Mountain View city staff are currently

working in partnership with the Mountain View Transportation Management Association,

interested Peninsula cities, and other interested stakeholders to explore bike share program

options/solutions. Redwood City will discontinue bike share until a new system is in place.

DISCUSSION:

Representatives from the City of San Jose, City of Palo Alto, and Motivate/Ford GoBike will

present their plans for expanding bike share at the October 12, 2016 Bicycle and Pedestrian

Advisory Committee meeting.

Prepared By: Lauren Ledbetter

Memo No. 5717

7



Board Meeting: N/A

BOARD MEMORANDUM





SUBJECT: 2016/2017 VTA On-board Survey Questionnaire


FOR INFORMATION ONLY

BACKGROUND:

The Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) and the Metropolitan Transportation

Commission (MTC) are collaborating on the development and implementation of a survey of

VTA transit passengers. The survey is scheduled for Fall 2016 through Spring 2017. This new

survey will update the previous VTA system on-board survey completed in 2013. The primary

objective of the survey is to gather data, include providing VTA and MTC with robust

information on the travel patterns of VTA passengers, fulfilling the ‘Before’ conditions of the

FTA Before and After Study requirements for the BART Berryessa Extension New Starts

Project, and supporting Title VI equity and Limited English Proficiency (LEP) analyses. The

survey results will also be used to update the VTA travel demand models to support FTA New

Starts ridership forecasts for the second phase of the BART Silicon Valley Extension.

We anticipate collecting the following, at a minimum:

Full one-way trip sequence of passengers, including origin location, access mode(s) to

VTA transit vehicles, VTA transit vehicle boarding location, VTA transit vehicle

alighting location, egress mode(s) from VTA transit vehicle, and the destination location.

VTA trip characteristics (trip purpose, fare media used, etc.).

Demographics (race, ethnicity, income level, gender, age, disability, English

proficiency/primary language, household characteristics such as household size, number

of household vehicles, etc.).

MTC is providing 80 percent of the total funding for the survey effort, with the remaining 20

percent provided by VTA. Three surveying firms from the list of MTC On-Call survey

8

of 3

consultants were invited to bid on the VTA on-board survey project. Of the three firms, the

consulting firm of ETC Institute, headquartered in Kansas City, Missouri, was selected, as they

have considerable experience surveying local transit agencies, having completed the BART and

Caltrain system surveys and are currently implementing the MUNI systemwide on-board survey.

In addition to relevant experience, ETC Institute offered a sophisticated survey methodology that

enables the collection of very accurate geographical information on rider travel patterns - a

critical requirement for detailed analysis of the rider travel patterns.

The consultant work will include developing the methodology and sampling plan, developing a

survey questionnaire (also known as the survey instrument) conducting the fieldwork, processing

the data (data entry, coding, geocoding, editing/cleaning, weighting), producing the final data

file, and preparing the final report with high level data summaries and maps of relevant

passenger demographic and travel characteristics.

DISCUSSION:

A key task of the comprehensive on-board survey is the development of the survey instrument,

which is basically the set of questions that will be asked of transit riders. When the previous

2013 on-board survey results and findings were presented to the Board of Directors, there was

discussion regarding the types of questions that were asked of transit riders. At the conclusion of

the presentation of the 2013 on-board survey, it was determined that Board members would be

provided with an opportunity to review the next survey instrument in future on-board survey

efforts prior to implementation in the field. Currently, a draft set of survey questions for the

2016/2017 survey has been developed by VTA staff and is provided as an attachment to this

memorandum. The draft survey instrument was developed based on survey questions from

previous VTA on-board surveys, a similar survey developed for San Francisco MUNI, comments

received from the On-board Survey Project Working Group and comments from VTA

management.

One of the challenges with developing the survey questions is to ensure that the questions

provide a good balance with obtaining key information on trip travel patterns, in particular trip

origin, destination, trip purpose and mode of access and egress as well as the socio-demographic

characteristics of the riders (income, ethnicity, language proficiency) and other attitudinal

questions such as satisfaction with existing services. In addition, the survey cannot be too long to

implement, which could cause survey respondents to provide incomplete information. The draft

instrument was designed with these requirements in mind. As the survey is funded primarily by

MTC, it is a requirement that key questions on travel patterns be included without modification.

MTC also reserves the right to make recommendations to not include a significant number of

additional questions that could add risk to the project success, however, MTC staff has indicated

that they intend to be responsive to local needs when developing the survey instrument. If a large

number of added questions are desired over and above the data collection objective of this

survey, then staff would recommend that another type of survey be developed and implemented

outside of the current effort.

VTA is requesting comments from the Board members on the draft set of survey questions

provided in the attachment to this memorandum. VTA staff will review the comments and

8

of 3

working with MTC staff, prepare a final draft set of questions for the survey pretest. The survey

will then be finalized after analysis of the survey pretest. The project schedule is as follows:

Task Description Schedule

Survey Instrument - Initial Draft Week of October 10th - 14th

Survey Instrument - Revised Draft w/Board Comments Week of October 17th - 21st

On-Board Survey Begins - Pretest and First Wave Week of October 24th - Dec. 12th

On-Board Survey Continues - Second Wave Week of January 23rd - May 12

2017

Prepared By: George Naylor

Memo No. 5781

8

(for office use only) Route Code: Time: Interviewer: Serial #:

Please take a few moments to help VTA plan for your transit needs by filling out this survey. All responses to this survey will be kept strictly confidential and WILL NOT be shared or sold.

What is your HOME ADDRESS: (please be specific, ex: 123 W. Main St):

(If you are visiting the area, please list the address where you are staying)

______________________________________________ ______________________ _________ _________

Street Address City State Zip Code

9. INCLUDING THIS BUS/TRAIN, how many TOTAL BUSES/TRAINS will you use to make THIS ONE-WAY TRIP?

One, only this bus/train Two Three Four or more

9a. Please list the routes and/or rail stations in the exact order you use them for this one-way trip.

START END

1st route #/rail station 2nd route/rail station 3rd route/rail station 4th route/rail station 5th route/rail station

10. Will you (or did you) make this same trip on exactly the same routes in the opposite direction today? No Yes - At what time did/will you leave for this trip in the opposite direction? ______:______ am/pm (circle one)

COMING FROM?

1. What type of place are you

COMING FROM NOW?

(the starting place for your one-way trip) Your usual WORKPLACE Work related Your HOME Go to Question #3

Your hotel Hotel Residence (Visitor Only) Social or recreational Shopping School (K-12) (student only) College or University (student only) Airport (airline passenger only) Medical / dental Dining / coffee Escorting others (escorting children and/or elderly) Personal business Other: ____________________

2. What is the EXACT ADDRESS of that

place? (OR Intersection OR Place name if you do

not know the exact address:)

Address______________________________________

City: __________________ State: ______ Zip: ________

Intersection Cross Streets_________________________

Place name __________________________________

3. How did you GET FROM the place in

Question #1 TO THE VERY FIRST bus or

train you used for this one-way trip? Walked all the way: how far did you walk? _______blocks

BIKE BIKE SHARE Personal Bike

Mobility Device for person with a disability_______blocks

Was dropped off using Uber, Lyft, or similar service Taxi Was dropped off by someone – not a service

Drove alone and parked

Drove or rode with ____ others include yourself

3a. Where did you get on the VERY FIRST

bus or train you used for this one-way trip

(Write the nearest intersection / park-and-ride lot / rail station below):

__________________________________________

4. Where did you get on THIS bus/train if it

was not the VERY FIRST bus or train you used? Please provide the nearest intersection / station name / park-and-ride lot:___________________________________

GOING TO?

5. What type of place are you

GOING TO NOW?

(the ending place for your one-way trip) Your usual WORKPLACE Work related Your HOME Go to Question #7

Your hotel Hotel Residence (Visitor Only) Social or recreational Shopping School (K-12) (student only) College or University (student only) Airport (airline passenger only) Medical / dental Dining / coffee Escorting others (escorting children and/or elderly) Personal business Other: ____________________

6. What is the EXACT ADDRESS of that

place? (OR Intersection OR Place name if you do not

know the exact address:)

Address____________________________________________

City: _____________________ State: ______ Zip: ________

Intersection Cross Streets_____________________________

Place name__________________________________________

7. How will you GET TO your destination

(listed in Question #6) after you get off the

LAST bus or train you will use for this one-

way trip? Walk all the way: how far did you walk? _______blocks

BIKE BIKE SHARE Personal Bike

Mobility Device for person with a disability_______blocks

Dropped off using Uber, Lyft, or similar service Taxi Dropped off by someone – not a service

Drive alone Drive or ride with _____others including yourself

7a. Where will you get off the VERY LAST

bus or train you are using for this one-way trip (Write the nearest intersection / park-and-ride lot / rail

station below): ________________________________________________

8. Where will you get off THIS bus/train if it is

not the VERY LAST bus or train used? Please provide the nearest intersection / station name / park-and-ride lot:______________________________________

am / pm

Please continue on next page

DRAFT 1 October 11, 2016 8.a

11. How did you pay for this one-way trip?

BY CLIPPER BY CASH / PAPER / OTHER BY MOBILE TICKET Cash value on Clipper Cash 8-Hour Excursion Pass–Light Rail Only VTA Monthly Pass on Clipper Light Rail Single Ticket Ride Express Bus Round Trip Pass VTA EcoPass on Clipper Light Rail 8-Hour Excursion ticket Day Pass (Bus and Rail) Caltrain Monthly Pass on Clipper Day Pass Token Exchange 49ers Express Light Rail Pass ACE Monthly Pass on Clipper Other Transfer _______________ Other mobile ticket___________ SamTrans Monthly Pass on Clipper Other Pass __________________ Other Monthly Pass on Clipper______ VTA Employee/Dependent/Lifetime Pass Did not buy ticket 12. What type of fare did you pay?

Adult Senior (65+ years of age) Youth (5-18 years of age) Disabled/Medicare Card Holder (RTC) 13. How many working vehicles (auto or motorcycles) are available to your household? _________ vehicles

13a. [If #13 is more than NONE] Could you have used one of these vehicles for this trip? Yes No 14. Including YOU, how many people live in your household? _______ people

15. Including YOU, how many adults (age 16 and older) that are employed full or part time

live in your household? _______ people 16. Are you a student? (check the one response that BEST describes you)

Not a student Yes – Full Time college/university Yes – K - 12th grade Yes – Part Time college/university Yes – vocational/technical/trade school Yes – other

16a. [If #16 is Yes] What is your college / university / school name:_________________________

17. Are you a person with a disability? Yes No 17a. If #17 is Yes] Which of the following types of disabilities apply, if any (mark all that apply)? Vision Impairment or Blindness Hearing impairment Mobility disability declined

Intellectual/cognitive impairment Psychiatric disability Other____________________ 18. What year were you born? ________ 19. Are you? (mark all that apply)

American Indian / Alaska Native Black/African American Asian Native Hawaiian / Pacific Islander White Other: ____________________

20. What is your gender? Male Female Other: ___________________ 21. Do you speak a language other than English at home? No Yes - Which language? ________________

IF YES: How well do you speak English? Very Well Well Less than well Not at all 22. In an average week, how often do you use VTA transit?

6 – 7 days a week 5 days a week 2 – 4 days a week 1 day a week 23. How long have you been using VTA transit? More than 3 years 1 to 3 years Less than 1 year First time 24. If transit did not exist, how would you have made this trip? Drive alone Bike Walk Get a ride/carpool Paratransit/Outreach Would not have made this trip Other means (describe)_____________________________ 25. Do you have a valid driver’s license? Yes No 26. Do you use a web-based or mobile phone-based trip planner to plan your trips on transit? No, I don’t use one Yes, using 511.ORG Yes, using Transit App Yes, Google Trip Planner accessed through VTA.ORG website Yes, Google Trip Planner accessed outside VTA.ORG website Yes, using other web or mobile applications (please describe) _____________________ 27. Please Rate VTA on the following features (Circle your choice for each feature)

Poor Excellent 27a. Frequency of Service 1 2 3 4 5

27b. On-time Performance 1 2 3 4 5

27c. Personal Security/Safety 1 2 3 4 5

27d. Vehicle Cleanliness 1 2 3 4 5

27e. Quality or Stops/Stations 1 2 3 4 5

27f. Overall Transit Experience 1 2 3 4 5

28. How do you prefer to receive information from VTA (mark one)? VTA website (vta.org) Facebook Twitter Instagram LinkedIn Snapchat Youtube NextDoor Text messages Phone messages Other_____________ 29. Which of the following media do you use or consume AT LEAST ONCE PER WEEK (mark all that apply)? Print newspapers Radio TV Internet/Websites Email Text messages Phone Facebook Twitter Instagram LinkedIn Snapchat Youtube NextDoor Blogs 30. Which of the following BEST describes your TOTAL ANNUAL HOUSEHOLD INCOME in 2015 before taxes? Below $10,000 $40,000 - $49,999 $100,000 - $149,999 $10,000-$24,999 $50,000 - $59,999 $150,000 - $199,999 $25,000-$34,999 $60,000 - $74,999 $200,000 or more

THANK YOU FOR YOUR PARTICIPATION!

8.a

congestion management program & planning...

Documents