s a n ta c l a r a va l l e y t r a n s p o r tat i o n a u t h o r i t y

Va l l e y Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n P l a n
2009 Board of Directors
Dolly Sandoval Nancy Pyle Dominic Caserta
Chairperson Council Member Council Member
Council Member City of San Jose City of Santa Clara
City of Cupertino
Chuck Reed Greg Sellers
Sam Liccardo Mayor Mayor Pro Tem
Vice Chairperson City of San Jose City of Morgan Hill
Council Member
City of San Jose David Casas Don Gage
Mayor Pro Tem Supervisor
Rose Herrera City of Los Altos County of Santa Clara
Council Member
City of San Jose Yoriko Kishimoto Liz Kniss
Council Member President, Supervisor
Ash Kalra City of Palo Alto County of Santa Clara
Council Member
City of San Jose

Board Member Alternates

Nora Campos Chuck Page George Shirakawa
Council Member, Alternate Mayor, Alternate Supervisor, Alternate
City of San Jose City of Saratoga County of Santa Clara

Chris Moylan Bob Livengood

Vice Mayor, Alternate Mayor, Alternate
City of Sunnyvale City of Milpitas

Ex-Officio Members
Ken Yeager Dean J. Chu
Vice President, Supervisor Council Member
County of Santa Clara City of Sunnyvale
Santa Clara County Santa Clara County Cities Association
Representative to MTC Representative to MTC

Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority

Michael T. Burns John Ristow Chris Augenstein
General Manager Chief CMA Officer Deputy Director, Planning

The Valley Transportation Plan 2035 was adopted by the VTA Board of Directors in January 2009.
S A N TA C L AR A VAL L EY TRAN SPORTATION AUTHO RI T Y

Valley Transportation Plan

2035
 Contents
Foreword ....................................................................... v

Executive Summary ............................................................ vi

Chapter 1 A VISION FOR TOMORROW 1

Defining the Issues .............................................................. 2

Mission and Vision .............................................................. 3

VTP 2035 Setting: Growth, Land Use and Efficiency ............................... 5

Chapter 2 CAPITAL INVESTMENT PROGRAM 9

VTP 2035 Fiscal Setting ........................................................ 10

VTP 2035 Financial Plan ........................................................ 11

Capital Investment Program .................................................... 29

Highway Program .......................................................... 32

Expressway Program ....................................................... 39

Local Streets and County Roads Program .................................... 43

Roadway Maintenance Programs ............................................ 43

Transit Program ............................................................ 49

Transportation Systems Operations and Management Program .............. 53

Bicycle Program............................................................. 58

Community Design and Transportation Program ............................ 64

Chapter 3 PLANNING INITIATIVES 67

Highways ..................................................................... 68

Expressways ................................................................... 72

Local Streets and County Roads ................................................. 72

Transit ....... .................................................................. 73

Accessible Transportation Services and Programs ............................... 86

Intelligent Transportation Systems .............................................. 93

Bicycles ...... .................................................................. 93

Pedestrians .. .................................................................. 96

Transportation, Land Use and the Environment ................................. 96

Transportation, Energy and Air Quality Program ............................... 100

Partnerships for Sustainable Transportation .................................... 101

VALLE Y T R ANS PORTATION AU T H O RIT Y

Chapter 4 IMPLEMENTATION 107

Program Area Allocations and Funding Issues ................................. 108

Implementation Process ...................................................... 109

Near-Term Implementation Activities .......................................... 111

Highway Projects .......................................................... 111

Transit Projects ............................................................ 114

Intelligent Transportation Systems ......................................... 122

Bicycle and Pedestrian Projects ............................................. 125

Community Design and Transportation Grant Program .................... 128

Other Programs and Projects .............................................. 130

VTP 2035 Development Process ............................................... 130

VTP Capital Project List Development Process .................................. 131

Chapter 5 STRATEGIC PLANNING ELEMENT 137

The Purpose of the VTA Strategic Planning Element ............................. 138

Vision, Mission and Values..................................................... 139

Organizational Structure ...................................................... 140

Environmental Analysis ....................................................... 147

Goals and Strategies ........................................................... 147

Key Indicators................................................................. 149

Measures and Metrics ......................................................... 152

Appendices 155

Appendix A: Detailed Project Lists and Descriptions................................ 156

Appendix B: Community Design and Transportation Program....................... 212

Appendix C: Transportation, Energy and Air Quality Program ...................... 222

Appendix D: Systemwide Performance Measures ................................. 230

Appendix E: Summary of VTA Guiding Policies ................................... 242

Appendix F: Glossary of Terms .................................................. 246

VA L L E Y T R A N SP ORTAT IO N PLAN 2035

Foreword
THE VALLEY TRANSPORTATION PLAN 2035 (VTP 2035) IS THE LONG-RANGE VISION

for transportation in Santa Clara County. The Valley Transportation Authority (VTA), in its

role as the Congestion Management Agency (CMA) for Santa Clara County, is responsible

for preparing and updating the VTP on a cycle coinciding with the update of the Bay Area’s

Regional Transportation Plan (RTP).

VTP 2035 identifies the programs, projects and policies VTA’s Board of Directors would like

to pursue over the lifetime of the plan. It connects projects with anticipated funds and lays

out a framework for the development and maintenance of our transportation system over the

next 25 years. It considers all travel modes and addresses the links between transportation

and land use planning, air quality, energy use and community livability. VTP 2035 is not a

programming document and does not include precise schedules for project implementation or

assumptions regarding financing costs that may be needed to implement specific projects in

specific years.

VTP 2035 was developed during a challenging time. VTA must find ways to maximize

effectiveness and its benefit to the community while addressing climate protection, energy

use, growth pressures, and the growing gap between the availability of funds and our growing

transportation needs. The plan incorporates a Strategic Planning Element which addresses

these challenges and connects the agency’s goals and ideals with the programs, projects and

policies proposed in this document. The plan expresses a dedication to creating pragmatic

and creative transportation solutions, recognizing that achieving success in the issues

addressed in the plan will require cooperation and long-term commitments from VTA, its

Member Agencies, partners and the public.

VA L L E Y T R A N SP O RTAT I ON PLAN 2035 | v

 Executive Summary
AS THE CONGESTION MANAGEMENT AGENCY FOR SANTA CLARA COUNTY, VTA is

responsible for preparing the long-range Countywide Transportation Plan for Santa Clara

County, called the Valley Transportation Plan, or VTP. The VTP identifies existing and future

transportation related needs, considers all modes of travel and identifies what can be completed

within the anticipated available funding for projects and programs. It provides a roadmap for the

planning, policy development and programming of transportation funds in Santa Clara County

for the next 25 years according to State and Federal requirements. This update, VTP 2035, also

includes a new Strategic Plan Element.

The development of VTP 2035 was initiated in late 2007 and pursued a strategy to develop a

coordinated approach to identifying transportation issues in the county. Preparation of the VTP

2035 was accomplished in a five-step planning process which consisted of developing the following:

• A Vision Statement and goals to accomplish the vision

• A Needs Based Plan to meet the needs of the county to the year 2035

• A Fiscally Constrained Plan based on a forecast of future revenues

• An Implementation Strategy

• A Strategic Framework that describes VTA’s strategic vision for growth

VTP 2035 recognizes that it is not possible to fully meet the needs of the county by expansion of

the roadway system alone. At the same time, it also recognizes that the roadway system

is the framework for other modes of transportation, including transit, paratransit, and bicycle
and pedestrian systems. Thus, the plan includes both a strong roadway and a strong multi-modal

element.

VTP’s directive stems from the following mission statement for transportation system

development in Santa Clara County:

VTA provides sustainable, accessible, community-focused transportation options

that are innovative, environmentally responsible, and promote the vitality of our

region.

vi | VA LLEY TRANS PORTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

VTP 2035 THEMES
The VTP is grounded on themes that describe a new direction for the future of Santa Clara

County. These themes, contained within the plan horizon, include:

Connectivity The plan will address how we connect existing land uses to the transportation

system. The implementation section of the plan addresses studies that will provide systems

interconnection, mode interconnection, and elements such as first/last-mile connection.

Pricing Another important theme in the plan is developing congestion pricing methods. A

major component of this is the development of an Express Lane network. Express lanes are

expected to improve freeway operations, as well as generate revenue for a variety of multimodal

improvements within the corridor.

Efficiency The plan embraces different modes of transport as well as examines technology

to help us move more efficiently. The plan points us in the direction of developing new carpool

lanes, use of technology, enhanced transit, and bike and pedestrian facilities.

Land Use VTP 2035 focuses on intensifying land uses within major transportation corridors.

VTA has developed the Community Design for Transportation (CDT) in an effort to promote

smart growth at major transit centers. The plan also looks at strategies for pursuing the best

opportunities to develop within transit corridors.

Air Quality VTA has initiated a Transportation Energy and Air Quality (TEAQ) program that is

designed to address the issues related to air quality and energy use by developing guidelines and

incentives for agencies to reduce emissions.

CURRENT FUNDING PROJECTIONS

The financial element of the plan outlines a 25-year projection of transportation project costs,

anticipated revenues and shortfalls in the funding of Santa Clara County’s transportation needs.

The plan projects that $15.2 billion will be available over the next 25 years from a range of State

and Federal sources.

Revenue projections for the years 2009–2035 have been developed in consultation with the

California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), Caltrans District 4, the Metropolitan

Transportation Commission (MTC) and Member Agencies.

VA L L E Y T R A N SP O RTAT I ON PLAN 2035 | vii

 PLAN CONTENTS AND ORGANIZATION
VTP 2035 is organized into five chapters plus appendices:

Chapter 1: A Vision for Tomorrow This chapter provides an overview of the setting within

which the plan was developed. It introduces three pivotal issues: 1) improving efficiency;

2) developing new sources of revenue, and 3) growing smarter. It provides a summary of VTA’s

vision, mission and responsibilities.

Chapter 2: Capital Investment Program This chapter provides the fiscal setting underlying

the development of VTP 2035, the steps being taken to ensure VTA’s long term financial stability,

the sources of funding and the funds projected to become available during the 25-year timeframe

of the plan. It discusses the ten programs areas included in the plan and provides project lists for

the Highway, Transit, Expressways, Local Streets and County Roads, Bicycles, and Intelligent

Transportation Systems (ITS) program areas.

Chapter 3: Planning Initiatives This chapter discusses the breadth of VTA planning

initiatives for each of the Capital Investment Program Areas discussed in Chapter 2 as well other

planning activities that VTA directly sponsors or participates in to improve the transportation

system and built environment.

Chapter 4: Implementation This chapter summarizes the projects and programs that will be

pursued in the near-term—before the plan is updated in 2012.

Chapter 5: The Strategic Planning Element This chapter reviews the purpose of the VTA

Strategic Planning Element, how VTA is organized and structured to deliver the VTP programs

and projects, and the goals and strategies that guide the agency’s activities. It examines these

elements in context with a discussion of VTA’s Strengths, Opportunities, Weaknesses and Threats

(SWOT) and near-term goals.

Appendices This includes the entire VTP project listing with descriptions, a summary of the

policies that guide the plan, detailed descriptions of the CDT and TEAQ Programs and the model

analysis results for the projects included in the plan.

viii | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

RELATIONSHIP TO THE REGIONAL PLAN
The 2009 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP), prepared by the Metropolitan Transportation

Commission (MTC), guides transportation planning and funding throughout the nine-county

Bay Area to the year 2035. Countywide plans, like VTP 2035, provide input to the RTP.

VTP 2035 and the 2009 RTP share common themes, including the reduction of CO2

emissions, an Express Lane network, focused growth, and the use of technology to improve

congestion.

The RTP contains a fiscally constrained list of projects and programs that have a reasonable

expectation of being funded during the life of the plan. County-level projects seeking State or
Federal funding, completing environmental clearances, or desiring to enter into construction

must be in this section of the RTP. In turn, the RTP helps to inform the development of

the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), which prioritizes the use of State

transportation funds.

PLAN WITH VISION

Plans are intended to be visionary. They help us to understand where we are, envision where

we want to go and lay out the steps necessary to get there. Successful plans are founded on an

understanding of not only the vision and goals that the plan is designed to achieve, but also

on the issues that frame them and the resources available to achieve them. VTP 2035 is both

visionary and pragmatic—it affirms what we can do and raises the bar for what we should do.

VA L L E Y T R A N SP ORTAT I O N PLAN 2035 | ix

CHAPTER ONE a vision for tomorrow

Transportation is the backbone of our economy and

1
the connector of our communities. It binds together

our daily activities and is a key input to our quality

of life. Our transportation system is a shared

resource and we only get out of it what we put

into it. Accordingly, the decisions we make about

how we travel and how we grow our cities have

a profound effect on the future health and utility of

our transportation system—and ourselves.

VA L L E Y T R A N SP ORTAT I O N PLAN 2035 | 1

 DEFINING THE ISSUES the capacity of our roadway system by 5 to 6

Decades of sprawling, single-use developments percent. We will need to embrace carpooling,

have separated homes from jobs and transit, transit, biking, walking and making shorter

created a built environment that is unfriendly and/or fewer trips. We will also need to

to transit and pedestrians and made us embrace new “green” technologies that will

generally dependant on cars to get around. allow us to travel by more energy efficient and

As a result, many of our communities lack environmentally friendly means.

coherent structure, our roadways are congested

We need to develop new sources of
and we have limited choices about how we
revenue. State and Federal funding sources
move about. This situation shows little sign of
are shrinking and our funding needs for all
improving if we continue to grow as we have.
transportation modes are growing. We must
Fortunately, we can learn from our past and
generate additional revenue through existing
start moving toward a more sustainable future.
and new sources.
As an agency, and as citizens, we will need to
We need to grow smarter. We must shorten
adapt our policies and practices to meet the
travel distances and make non-auto modes
challenges and opportunities we face.
viable by creating walkable/bikeable communi-
We need to become more efficient
ties and locating new growth in urban cores and
travelers. Over the next 25 years, Santa
near transit. We must embrace new technologies
Clara County will grow by over 500,000
that can help us move and grow more efficiently.
residents and 400,000 jobs—increases of
And we must interconnect our systems so that
27.5 and 45.6 percent, respectively. Over the
pedestrian, bike, transit and roadway travel are
same period, we will only be able to increase
linked as seamlessly as possible.

2 | VA LL EY TRANS PORTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 C H AP TE R O N E A V IS ION F O R TO MO RRO W

VTA MISSION AND VISION Overview of VTA

In 2008, VTA adopted new Mission and Vision VTA is comprised of multiple agency func-

Statements, Core Values and Strategic Goals. tions, and has wide-ranging authority to plan,

Together, these elements represent a philo- fund and deliver the programs and projects

sophical and structural transformation at VTA. identified in VTP 2035. As a Congestion

They are designed to meet the evolving mobility Management Agency, transit operator, funding

needs of Santa Clara County and reflect current conduit, and designer and constructor of tran-

economic and environmental realities. The sit and highway projects, VTA is at the fore-

Mission and Vision Statements are presented front of transportation in Santa Clara County.

below. A detailed discussion of all these In this capacity, VTA partners with the cities,

elements occurs in Chapter 5. towns and the County of Santa Clara—VTA’s

Member Agencies—as well as intra-county

VTA MISSION STATEMENT agencies to develop a practical, multimodal
VTA provides sustainable, accessible, transportation infrastructure and services.
community-focused transportation options
As a special district, VTA occupies a unique
that are innovative, environmentally
position between city government and State
responsible and promote the vitality
government. It is led by a Board of Directors
of our region.
comprised of appointees who are directly

VTA VISION STATEMENT elected to local governments within Santa Clara

VTA builds partnerships to deliver transportation County. VTA has been granted tax authority

solutions that meet the evolving mobility needs status and can generate its own revenue by

of Santa Clara County. placing tax measures on the ballot.

VA L L E Y T R A N SP O RTAT I ON PLAN 2035 | 3

 TABLE 1-1 VTA’s Responsibilities

RESPONSIBILITY ROLE

Countywide VTA prepares the Valley Transportation Plan (VTP). The VTP
Transportation is the multimodal, countywide long-range transportation plan
Planning
for Santa Clara County. This plan is the foundation for the
wide array of transportation investments, services and pro-
grams that VTA and its partner agencies intend to implement
over the next 25 years. It is also the county’s input into the
Regional Transportation Plan (RTP), which is prepared by the
Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC).

Congestion As the Congestion Management Agency (CMA) for Santa Clara

Management Agency County, VTA is responsible for establishing, implementing and
monitoring the Congestion Management Program (CMP).

Transportation VTA establishes the transportation capital improvement project

Programming priorities for local, State and Federal program funding. This
includes transit, highway, roadway, bicycle, pedestrian and other
capital projects.

Local Transportation VTA is responsible for overseeing the ½ cent sales tax estab-
Ballot Measure lished by Santa Clara County voters in 2000 to implement the
Programs
Measure A Transit Program. VTA also has authority to develop
new measures if necessary.

Countywide Transit VTA plans, designs and builds new bus and rail projects, and
Planning, Develop- facilities. It also operates, maintains and improves bus, rail and
ment and Operations
paratransit service within the county.

Highway Planning VTA plans, designs and builds highway projects and partners
and Development with local, regional and State agencies to operate and maintain
the local highway system.

Commuter Rail Through a Joint Powers Board (JPB), VTA partners with the San
Service and Regional Mateo Transit District and the San Francisco Transportation
Partnerships
Agency (SFTA) to jointly plan and fund the Caltrain Commuter
Rail service which operates between Gilroy and San Francisco.
VTA also establishes regional partnerships to provide the com-
muter rail service in the Capitol Corridor between Sacramento
and San Jose, the Altamont Pass/Sunol Grade Corridor between
Stockton and San Jose, and regional bus service between Santa
Clara County and the Counties of Santa Cruz and Alameda.

4 | VA LLEY TRANS PORTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 C H AP TE R O N E A V IS ION F O R TO MO RRO W

RESPONSIBILITY ROLE

Land Use and As the CMA, VTA is responsible for linking transportation and
Transportation land use planning. VTA established the Community Design and
Integration
Transportation (CDT) Program as a partnership with its Member
Agencies to implement its goals for land use and transportation
integration.

Joint Development VTA can enter into partnerships with other agencies or private
developers to develop its land. VTA may also directly develop and
manage its land holdings, and use the surplus revenues for the
continued operation and development of the agency.

Table 1-1 explains VTA’s responsibilities and the north and swaths of neighborhoods in the
the specific roles VTA plays. south—still dominate travel patterns. The geo-

graphic imbalance of residences and job sites

creates heavy morning and evening commutes

VTP 2035 SETTING:
GROWTH, LAND USE AND that are often disproportionate in direction.

EFFICIENCY However, these issues also showcase the

In 2008, Santa Clara County finds itself in county’s strengths and opportunities. Demand

a changing transportation environment. to live and work in Santa Clara County

Fluctuating gas prices, climate change issues, remains high and underused industrial sites

dwindling supplies of traditional energy are seeing new life as redeveloped residential

sources, frustration with traffic and a desire to and mixed-use areas.

limit urban sprawl are yielding new models for

GROWTH
development. Affordable housing, transit access
The Association of Bay Area Governments
and a renewal in the desire for an urban lifestyle
(ABAG) projects an increase of 512,900
have spurred growth in existing city centers and
residents and 427,480 jobs in Santa Clara
near transit stations. Transit use has increased
County between 2010 and 2035—increases of
over the past three years and new data shows
27 and 46 percent, respectively. These percent
statewide declines in vehicle miles driven.
increases outpace the entire nine-county Bay
However, this transition toward a new urban
Area, which is projected to gain 1,619,000 new
and suburban form is in its infancy. The legacy
residents and 1,553,860 new jobs—increases
of the high-tech boom—corporate campuses in
of 22 and 42 percent, respectively.

VA L L E Y T R A N SP ORTAT I O N PLAN 2035 | 5

 FIGURE 1-1 Bay Area Growth in Jobs
2.5M

New Residents New Jobs

31.7% of Bay Area Growth
2.0M Current Residents Current Jobs

1.5M

27.5% of Bay Area Growth

1.0M

0.5M

Alameda Contra Costa Marin Napa San Francisco San Mateo Santa Clara Solano Sonoma
County County County County County County County County County

FIGURE 1-2 Santa Clara County Growth in Jobs

1.2M
68.5% of Santa Clara County Growth

New Residents New Jobs

1.0M
Current Residents Current Jobs

.8M

.6M

51.4% of Santa Clara County Growth

.4M

.2M

Campbell Gilroy Los Altos Hills Milpitas Morgan Hill Palo Alto Santa Clara Sunnyvale
Cupertino Los Altos Los Gatos Monte Sereno Mountain View San Jose Saratoga Santa Clara County

6 | VA LL EY TRANS PORTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 C H AP TE R O N E A V IS ION F O R TO MO RRO W

This growth will increase roadway demand at interconnected multimodal system. Increases

a rate greater than our ability to add capacity in carpooling, transit and non-auto modes

to the transportation system. It will not be like bicycling and walking will take cars off

possible to build our way out of traffic con- our roadways and control congestion. VTP

gestion. Rather, solutions must be found in 2035 supports these developments through

a smarter built environment and more projects like new carpool lanes, new meter-

efficient traveling. ing lights, signal synchronization, new and

enhanced transit services, new bicycle trails

LAND USE
and dynamic congestion pricing.
At a very basic level, we need to make our

trips shorter and easier. Residences need to be MOVING FORWARD

closer to jobs and services and be accessible Maintaining and improving the quality of our
by multiple modes. This will require partner- mobility over the next 25 years will be chal-
ing with Member Agencies to develop a built lenging. The arrival of new residents and jobs
environment that supports these objectives. will bring opportunity and vibrancy to our
Many cities in Santa Clara County have taken communities, but will increase the demand on
great strides toward these objectives in recent the transportation system that connects them.
years by building residences near job sites and Over the next 25 years, we will be able to craft
transit, establishing mixed use districts and by new and exciting strategies and projects, but
intensifying land uses in urban cores and tran- continual State and Federal funding short-
sit corridors. These trends present great hope falls means that we cannot build everything
for the future and must continue. However, we need if we rely only on those traditional
more needs to be done if we are to sustain and sources. VTP 2035 acknowledges these chal-
improve our quality of life and mobility over lenges and creates a framework for developing
the next 25 years. the best, most cost-effective programs and

projects for Santa Clara County. It lays out

EFFICIENCY
sensible policies and the framework for a
In addition to smarter, more convenient land
comprehensive plan. It is, in short, a roadmap
uses, improvements in mobility will largely
to a promising future.
be driven by improved roadway and transit

efficiency and the development of a truly

VA L L E Y T R A N SP O RTAT I ON PLAN 2035 | 7

CHAPTER TWO capital investment program
2
This chapter of the plan examines the fiscal setting
underlying the development of VTP 2035, the steps
being taken to ensure VTA’s long-term financial
stability, the sources of funding, and the funds
projected to become available during the 25-year
timeframe of the plan. These elements provide the
foundation for the VTP Capital Investment Program.

Chapter 2 is complemented by Chapter 3, which

discusses the planning initiatives that create
and guide these projects, and Chapter 4, which
discusses near-term implementation of these projects
and initiatives.

VA L L E Y T R A N SP ORTAT I O N PLAN 2035 | 9

 VTP 2035 FISCAL SETTING to most of the rest of the nation, including

Santa Clara County is the heart of Silicon other Bay Area counties.

Valley, with an economy rooted in technol-

However, the short-term financial future is
ogy development. This “tech” economy is
very unclear. The nation’s financial system is
characterized by significant volatility and
grappling with the worst crisis since 1929. In
boom-bust cycles that, while influenced by
the weeks immediately preceding the pro-
trends in the larger national economy, are
duction of this chapter (late 2008), housing
not necessarily concurrent. VTA has been
values in many areas of the country were in
through two of these cycles since its forma-
decline, major financial institutions have
tion in 1995.
failed, credit markets are essentially frozen

In 1995, the Valley was recovering from a and the Federal government has stepped in

down-cycle. By 1997 the recovery had become with a multi-billion dollar bailout package in

a high technology boom with unprecedented an attempt to stabilize the economy.

job growth, peaking in mid-2000. By 2002

In the midst of this environment, the Federal
the Valley was in a deep recession from which
Transportation Act is due for reauthorization
it did not begin to recover until late 2004. The
at the end of 2009. The Federal Highway Trust
next two years were characterized by modest
Fund will be bankrupt at that time, and the
growth. The national economy began faltering
Mass Transit Account is projected to follow suit
in early 2007. While local sales tax receipts
shortly thereafter in 2010.
were essentially flat in fiscal 2008, Santa
At the State level, California is already in its
Clara’s economy was performing well relative
third year of dealing with multi-billion dollar

10 | VALLEY TRANS PORTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 C H AP TE R TWO CAPITAL P RO GRAM

structural deficits with a fourth year predicted. County, describes the planning and fund-
While new legislation enacted in 2005 has so ing process, the funds projected to become
far deterred the State from raiding transporta- available during the timeframe of the plan and
tion funds as deeply as reported in VTP 2030 the Board-adopted fund allocations for each
(2005), all “unprotected” sources are being program area.
diverted to the State General Fund, without the
As noted previously, the projects, programs
promise of repayment.
and services identified in this section will
Needless to say, these are extremely challeng- be funded from a number of local, State and
ing times for funding and this will be a major Federal fund sources. The process for divid-
focus of VTA staff over the next several years. ing up and allocating Federal and State funds
The economic setting and financial foundation to the local level—and then to the various
that influence the overall development of VTP program areas—is complex and varies by fund
2035 is discussed next. source. For the purposes of this plan, a brief

summary of how this money flows to VTA is

helpful in understanding the overall financial

VTP 2035 FINANCIAL PLAN
planning process for VTP 2035 and the policy
Developing the plan requires an understand-
environment that shapes VTA Board decisions.
ing of the resources that are expected to

become available during the life of the plan

THE FLOW OF MONEY
with which to implement the programs and
Locally generated funds are normally gov-
projects presented. The VTP 2035 Financial
erned by local initiatives or policies—such
Plan examines the various sources of funding
as a sales tax or parcel tax measure—that
for transportation programs in Santa Clara

VA L L E Y T R A N S P O R TAT I O N PLAN 2035 | 11

 earmark revenues for specific purposes. FUND SOURCES
Federal funds flow into the State and are Funding for the projects, programs and
divided up based on both Federal and State services identified in VTP 2035 comes from
statutes and guidelines. State funds are a number of local, State and Federal sources.
essentially moved to the regional and local Generally, the plan focuses on the larger
level through the State Transportation sources that provide flexibility in program-
Improvement Planning (STIP) process, and ming and that are expected to provide signifi-
allocated for specific purposes in accordance cant revenues for transportation projects in
with the statutes and guidelines governing Santa Clara County over the life of the plan.
the STIP process.
Other, less flexible funding sources or funds
Various organizations are involved that are dedicated for specific purposes
along the way, such as the California such as transit operations are not presented
Transportation Commission and Caltrans, here. While these other funds are critically
but ultimately the funds essentially important to operate and maintain the transit
arrive at the regional level where either a system, their limitations mean that the plan
Regional Transportation Planning Agency is not needed to establish policy for their use.
(RPTA) or a Metropolitan Planning Details regarding use of these funds can be
Organization (MPO)—or both—divide them found in VTA’s Short Range Transit Plan, and
up for various dedicated and discretionary in other city and county planning documents.
purposes. These regional entities may,
In addition to the more traditional fund
and most often do, have their own statutes
sources, VTP 2035 discusses strategies for
and guidelines for directing funds to
seeking additional funding that VTA will
various uses. In our case, the Metropolitan
explore during the timeframe of the plan, and
Transportation Commission (MTC) func-
that may become valuable and reliable sources
tions as the MPO for the nine-county San
of revenue. A description of all of these fund
Francisco Bay Area region. The policies
sources follows and are summarized below.
for MTC to assign transportation funds to

counties occur through the development TRANSPORTATION FUNDING

of the long-range Regional Transportation SOURCES FOR VTP 2035
PROJECTS AND PROGRAMS
Plan (RTP), which is prepared approxi-
The fund sources described below provide sig-
mately every four years.
nificant revenue for transportation projects in

Santa Clara County, and are available for VTP

12 | VA LLEY TRANS PORTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 C H AP TE R TWO CAPITAL IN V E S TMENT P RO GRAM

TABLE 2-1 VTP 2035 Program Area Allocations (in millions)

LOCAL ANTICIPATED UNSPECIFIED

SANTA CLARA COUNTY EXPRESS

VTP 2035 PROGRAM REVENUES

JOINT DEVELOPMENT REVENUE
NEW LOCAL TRANSPORTATION
LOCAL TRANSPORTATION FEES

2008 MEASURE B SALES TAX 3

FEDERAL NEW STARTS

2000 MEASURE A 1

PROP 1B FUNDS

LANE REVENUES
COMMITTED
STP/CMAQ

TE/TFCA
TCRP 2

FEES
RTIP
PROGRAM
ITIP

AREAS

Transit $750 $4,704 $636 $0 $0 $0 $0 $170 $35 $0 $554 $1,400 $0 $1,033 $9,281
(2000 Meas. A)

Highways $0 $0 $0 $245 $292 $0 $0 $195 $235 $414 $0 $1,720 $0 $0 $3,101

Expressways $0 $0 $0 $0 $161 $0 $0 $0 $102 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $263

Local Streets and $0 $0 $0 $0 $260 $0 $0 $24 $299 $45 $0 $0 $0 $0 $628

County Roads

Pavement $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $230 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $910 $0 $1,140

Local $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $85 $0 $60 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $145

Transportation
Projects and
Enhancements

Soundwalls $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $10 $0 $0 $0 $0 $10

Landscape/ $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1
Graffiti

TSM and Ops $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $100 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $100

(ITS)

Bicycle $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $100 $25 $0 $35 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $160

CDT Program $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $101 $100 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $159 $0 $360

Total $750 $4,704 $636 $245 $713 $531 $210 $389 $766 $470 $554 $3,120 $1,069 $1,033 $15,189
1
Includes 18.5% Operating Revenue set-aside
2
Total TCRP programmed to BART Extension, Warm Springs to SC/SJ—including prior expenditures
3
Assumes new revenue would not begin before 2013.

2035 projects and programs at the VTA Board 2000 Measure A Sales Tax
of Directors’ direction. A 25-year projection On November 2, 2000, the voters of Santa Clara
(in 2008 dollars) and a general description of County voted to extend the 1996 Measure B
the programming processes and fund-specific Sales Tax for 30 years to fund a specified pack-
limitations are included with each source. age of transit projects and programs. The new

VA L L E Y T R A N SP ORTAT I O N PLAN 2035 | 13

 2000 Measure A began on April 1, 2006 and VTP 2035 projects $750 million from this

ends on March 31, 2036. The tax is currently source to extend BART from Fremont to San

projected to generate $5.1 billion in 2008 Jose and Santa Clara. This plan assumes a flat

dollars between 2008 and 2035. Eighteen and amount with no escalation.

a half percent of Measure A funds are set aside

Traffic Congestion Relief Program
for operating purposes.
and Proposition 42

2008 Measure B In 2000, the Traffic Congestion Relief Program

In November 2008, the voters of Santa Clara (TCRP) was enacted, directing revenues

County renewed the funding for the BART generated by the State sales tax on gas and

project. This 1/8-cent sales tax is solely for the diesel fuel from the State general fund to

purpose of funding the operations and main- transportation. The transfer was to occur for

tenance of the 16.1-mile BART extension into fiscal years 2003–04 through 2007–08, then

Santa Clara County. The tax is limited to 30 end. However, in 2002, California voters passed

years and will not be collected until sufficient State Proposition 42, which made the sales

State and Federal funds are secured. tax on gasoline a permanent funding source

for transportation. These revenues are dedi-

Federal New Starts Program cated to the following purposes: (a) the State
(Section 5309—New Starts)
Transportation Improvement Program; (b) local
The Federal New Starts program is one of
streets and roads; (c) the Public Transportation
the Federal transit funding programs created
Account; and (d) the Traffic Congestion Relief
in 1991 as part of the Intermodal Surface
Program, which consists of 149 projects that
Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA). These
were earmarked in legislation that was enacted
programs were continued in the Transportation
in 2000. These programs are discussed in more
Efficiency Act for the Twenty-First Century
detail in the following paragraphs.
(TEA-21) and are expected to be renewed in the
While State transportation funding was
next reauthorization. The New Starts program
expected to increase as a result of the passage
is part of Title 49 United States Code (USC),
of Proposition 42, the Governor and Legislature
Section 5309. The funds are for significant rail
took advantage of a “loophole” in the ballot
and rapid bus expansion projects.
measure to divert a significant amount of these
Congress distributes these funds to projects
revenues to the General Fund. To curb this
at its discretion, based on project evaluations
practice, California voters approved Proposition
by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA).

14 | VALLEY TRANS PORTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 C H AP TE R TWO CAPITAL IN V E S TMENT P RO GRAM

1A in November 2006, a constitutional amend- six-year payment schedule for the remaining

ment that puts restrictions on when and how $239 million, starting in fiscal year 2009.

often Proposition 42 revenues can be loaned to

Proposition 42 Local Streets and Road
the General Fund. It also requires any outstand-
Rehabilitation Augments the gas tax
ing prior-year Proposition 42 loans to be repaid
receipts that the State distributes directly to
within a 10-year period and specifies an annual
cities and counties. The current estimate is
minimum amount that must be paid back in a
$890 million in 2008 dollars. The VTA Board of
given fiscal year.
Directors does not control or direct these funds.

Traffic Congestion Relief Projects

Proposition 42 State Transportation
Establishes a list of 149 specific congestion
Improvement Program Increment
relieving transit and highway projects desig-
Increases the amount of State funding flowing
nated to receive funds. Approximately $965
into the State Highway account for the STIP,
million was designated for projects in Santa
subject to the distribution formulas that apply
Clara County. Of that amount, the California
to the existing funds. The current estimate is
Transportation Commission (CTC) has
$899 million in 2008 dollars. More discussion
already allocated all but $239 million to VTA.
is included under the State Transportation
The CTC adopted a statewide TCRP allocation
Improvement Program (STIP) section.
plan on September 24, 2008 that specifies a

VA L L E Y T R A N SP ORTAT I O N PLAN 2035 | 15

 Proposition 42 State Transit Assistance Corridor Mobility Improvement

Increment Increases the amount of State Account This program provides $4.5

Transit Assistance (STA) to transit operations. billion statewide for performance enhancing

The current estimate is $420 million for VTA highway projects of statewide significance.

in 2008 dollars. STA funds are directed to Three highway projects in Santa Clara County

specific transit operators and funds are gener- will receive $170 million from this program.

ally used for operations. More discussion of the

STIP Augmentation Proposition 1B
STA program is included under “Other Major
provided an additional $2 billion statewide to
Transportation Fund Sources” on page 20.
augment the 2008 STIP. Santa Clara County’s

share is $63 million. More information on the

Proposition 1B
program is provided in the STIP section. These
The Highway Safety, Traffic Reduction,
funds, allocated to VTP 2035, are included in
Air Quality and Port Security Bond Act of
the RTIP totals shown in Table 2-1.
2006 was approved by California voters

as Proposition 1B on November 7, 2006. State Local Partnership Program

Proposition 1B provides almost $20 billion in Proposition 1B recreated a State matching
bond funding statewide for twelve different program for entities that enact local transpor-
transportation infrastructure programs. Of tation taxes and uniform developer fees. Santa
these programs, six provide significant fund- Clara County’s estimated share is approxi-
ing for projects in Santa Clara County. mately $46 million.

16 | VALLEY TRANS PORTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 C H AP TE R TWO CAPITAL IN V E S TMENT P RO GRAM

Public Transportation Modernization, street and highway pavement maintenance,

Improvement and Service Enhancement rehabilitation, installation, construction

Account This program makes funds and reconstruction of necessary associated

available on a formula basis for rehabilita- facilities such as drainage and traffic control

tion, safety or modernization improvements, devices, or the maintenance, rehabilitation,

capital service enhancements or expan- installation, construction and reconstruction

sions, new capital projects, bus rapid transit of facilities that expand ridership on transit

improvements, or for rolling stock procure- systems, safety projects to reduce fatalities,

ment, rehabilitation or replacement. VTA’s or as a local match to obtain State or Federal

estimated share is $210 million. The majority transportation funds for similar purposes.

of these funds ($120 million) will be used These funds flow directly to the cities and

to replace and maintain VTA’s current fleet the county, with no prioritization by VTA.

and facilities. The balance ($90 million) is They are therefore excluded from Table 2-1.

included in Table 2-1. Approximately $190 million is projected to

be made available to the fifteen cities and the

Highway Railroad Crossing Safety
County of Santa Clara in the next ten years.
Account $250 million is available statewide

on a competitive basis for railroad grade-

Federal Surface Transportation
separation projects. The CTC programmed Program/Congestion Mitigation
approximately $20 million to two grade Air Quality Program

separation projects on the Silicon Valley The Surface Transportation Program (STP)

Rapid Transit Extension right-of-way in and Congestion Mitigation Air Quality

August 2008. These funds are shown under Program (CMAQ) funding programs were

Proposition 1B in Table 2-1. created in ISTEA and continued in TEA-

21 and SAFETEA-LU. Since they are not

Local Street and Road Congestion
restricted to particular modes, STP and
Relief and Traffic Safety Account
CMAQ are also called “flexible funds.” STP
Proposition 1B provides funds to the cities
funds can be used for virtually all transporta-
and counties for improvements to transporta-
tion capital projects. CMAQ funds are limited
tion facilities that will assist in reducing local
to implementing the transportation provi-
traffic congestion and further deterioration,
sions of the 1990 Federal Clean Air Act in Air
improving traffic flows, or increasing traffic
Quality Non-Attainment areas. The Bay Area
safety that may include, but not be limited to,
is currently a non-attainment area.

VA L L E Y T R A N SP ORTAT I O N PLAN 2035 | 17

 Federal funds are authorized in six-year pro- IIP is the remaining 25 percent of the STIP. IIP
grams. The current act is the SAFETEA-LU, funds are programmed by Caltrans through
which expires at the end of Fiscal Year 2009. the Interregional Transportation Improvement
TEA-21 expired on October 1, 2003; however, Plan (ITIP) process, with final approval by the
Congress has been adopting continuing CTC. The STIP programming process occurs
resolutions to allow transportation agencies every two years—in “even” years. The current
to continue doing business until a successor total STIP projection in 2008 dollars for Santa
bill is adopted. MTC has final programming Clara County is $957.9 million (virtually all
authority for STP and CMAQ funds in the derived from Proposition 42), consisting of
nine-county Bay Area, and directs the use $713 million in RIP funds and $245 million in
of these funds through the RTP. The current IIP funds for projects nominated by Caltrans.
estimate for Santa Clara County is $651 mil-
Transportation Fund for Clean Air
lion in 2008 dollars over the life of the plan.
Health and Safety Code Section 44223 authorizes

State Transportation the Bay Area Air Quality Management District

Improvement Program (BAAQMD) to levy a fee on motor vehicles.
Senate Bill 45 (SB45), enacted in 1997, con- Funds generated by this fee are placed in the
solidated several State transportation funding Transportation Fund for Clean Air (TFCA)
programs and directed State and Federal account to be used for implementing projects and
transportation funds from the State Highway programs that reduce air pollution from motor
Account (SHA) into the Regional Improvement vehicles. Health and Safety Code Section 44241
Program (RIP) and the Interregional limits expenditure of these funds to specified
Improvement Program (IIP). Together, these eligible transportation control measures (TCMs)
programs are called the State Transportation that are included in BAAQMD’s 1991 Clean Air
Improvement Funds (STIP). STIP funds may Plan, developed and adopted pursuant to the
be used for road rehabilitation and capacity requirements of the California Clean Air Act
expanding capital transportation projects. of 1988.

RIP funding constitutes 75 percent of the STIP, BAAQMD directly administers 60 percent
and funds are distributed among the counties of the TFCA, with annual revenues ranging
via a formula established by State legislation. from $9 million to $15 million. The remaining
In the Bay Area, Congestion Management 40 percent goes directly to TFCA Program
Agencies (CMAs) program RIP funds with Managers in each Bay Area county. VTA, as
review by MTC and approval by the CTC. The Santa Clara’s TFCA Program Manager, works

18 | VA LLEY TRANS PORTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 C H AP TE R TWO CAPITAL IN V E S TMENT P RO GRAM

with Member Agencies to develop criteria set-aside has been continued in the two
that are then used to select projects consistent subsequent acts.
with the eligible project categories specified
TE funds must be used for elements of a
in statute. The current TFCA 40 percent
project that are over and above what would
estimate for Santa Clara County is $80 million
be termed the “normal project.” They must
in 2008 dollars over the life of the plan. Since
have a direct relationship to the intermodal
TFCA fund generation is tied to the number of
transportation system and fit one or more of
vehicles being registered, it does not increase
12 activity categories described in TEA-21.
with inflation.
These activities include bicycle and pedes-

trian improvements, scenic preservation and

Transportation Enhancement
Activities wildlife mortality mitigation.

ISTEA provided a 10 percent set-aside of

The mechanisms and responsibility for
each state’s STP allocation for Transportation
programming TE funds have changed several
Enhancement (TE) activities above and
times since the program’s inception. As of
beyond normal capital improvements. This
2004, TE funds are programmed through the

VA L L E Y T R A N SP O RTAT I ON PLAN 2035 | 19

 STIP process. Each of the counties receives a is $1.88 billion in 2008 dollars sent directly to
TE share estimate with its RIP share estimate. the cities and County of Santa Clara.
The TE estimate for Santa Clara County is $41
VTA Dedicated Sales Tax
million in 2008 dollars.
In 1976, the voters of Santa Clara County

OTHER MAJOR TRANSPORTATION enacted a permanent 1/2-cent sales tax for

FUND SOURCES local transit operations and capital projects.
Although the fund sources discussed in this These funds flow to VTA and are allocated
section provides significant funding for trans- by VTA for operations and capital projects
portation projects in Santa Clara County they through VTA’s annual budget and SRTP. The
have not been included in VTP 2035 for the current 25-year estimate is $4.78 billion in
following reasons: 2008 dollars.
• Funds are given directly to cities and
counties for local road repairs. Transportation Development
Act Article 3
• The VTA Board does not control them,
Transportation Development Act (TDA) Article
and/or they are committed to operations
and rehabilitation purposes. 3 funds are a portion of the sales tax on gasoline

and diesel fuel, which is returned by the State

The priorities for using these funds are
of California to the county in which it was
determined by the cities, the county, VTA
collected. TDA Article 3 funds are for use on
and Caltrain through local the Capital
bicycle and pedestrian projects.
Improvement Program (CIPs) and the Short-

Range Transit Plan (SRTP). MTC programs these funds in the nine Bay

Area counties. Each year, VTA coordinates

Gas Tax Subventions
and submits countywide project priorities
A portion of the State sales tax on gasoline
for this fund source. The VTA Board has set
and diesel fuel goes directly back to the cities
aside 30 percent of the annual allocation for
and the counties for streets and roads main-
the countywide Bicycle Expenditure Program
tenance. These funds are allocated based on
between 2000-01 and 2010-11. The remainder
formulas established by the State Legislature.
is distributed among the cities, towns and
The State Controller’s office transfers funds
county by a VTA Board-adopted formula. The
directly to local agencies. These funds were
current 25-year estimate for TDA Article 3
augmented by Proposition 42. The current
funds is $45 million in 2008 dollars.
estimate, including Proposition 42 transfers,

20 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 C H AP TE R TWO CAPITAL IN V E S TMENT P RO GRAM

Transportation Development for rolling stock purchases and paratransit

Act Articles 4, 4.5 and 8 operations. Programming is determined in
TDA Article 4 and TDA Article 8, also gener- VTA and Caltrain SRTPs, through the MTC
ated from the statewide sales tax on diesel and region’s Transit Capital Priority process,
gasoline fuels noted above, provide transit subject to the provisions of the Caltrain Joint
operating, maintenance and capital funds. Powers Agreement (JPA). The current 25-year
TDA Article 4.5 is available only for para- estimate is $1.16 billion in 2008 dollars.
transit operating assistance and capital
Section 5309, Fixed Guideway These
projects. TDA funds are administered by MTC
funds are available to VTA and Caltrain for
and allocated annually based on sales tax
rail or ferry capital projects. Planning for
receipts in each county.
projects occurs in VTA’s and Caltrain’s SRTPs.
These funds flow to VTA and are allocated Programming is through MTC’s Transit
for operations and capital projects via VTA’s Capital Priority process, and subject to the
annual budget and SRTP. The combined provisions of the JPA. The current 25-year
25-year TDA estimate (for Articles 4, 4.5 and estimate is $500 million in 2008 dollars.
8) for Santa Clara County is $2.91 billion in
Section 5309, New Rail Starts This is a
2008 dollars.
discretionary program for rail, ferry and rapid

Federal Transit Act Section Funds bus transit expansions, and is discussed in
(Section 5307, 5309) the previous section under VTP 2035 Fund
The FTA funding programs were parts of ISTEA, Sources. The current estimate for New Rail
and were continued in TEA-21. These funds Starts funds during the 25-year plan period
flow to transit operators via MTC’s regional are $750 million in 2008 dollars.
programming process, with earmarks for

specific urbanized areas (UAs). Based on 2000 Measure B Sales Tax Funds

census data, Santa Clara County contains two In 1996, Santa Clara County voters approved

UAs—the San Jose UA and the Gilroy/Morgan Measure B, a 1/2-cent, nine-year countywide

Hill UA. VTA and Caltrain are the only fund general sales tax to be collected by the county

recipients within these two UAs. The three most between April 1, 1998 and March 31, 2006.

significant Federal funding programs are: When Measure B was approved, voters also

approved 1996 Measure A, a nine-year program

Section 5307, Transit Formula Funds
of transit, highway, expressway, and bicycle
These funds are available to VTA and Caltrain
projects and a pavement management program

VA L L E Y T R A N SP ORTAT I O N PLAN 2035 | 21

 to be funded with any new sales tax revenue and on operator revenues. Population-based
carried out by VTA and the county. funds are allocated to regional transporta-

tion planning agencies based on service area

The 1996 Measure B program is complete, and
population.
the improvements are in use. It is therefore

not included in this plan. The current 25-year STA projection is $490

million in 2008 dollars. This includes base

State Transit Assistance
funding and $270 million in Proposition
These funds may be used for transit capital
42 STA increments to VTA and Caltrain.
projects and transit operations, including
It does not include the population-based
regional transit coordination. STA funds are
funds allocated to VTA by MTC for regional
subdivided into STA revenue-based and STA
paratransit coordination and/or the Lifeline
population-based categories. Revenue-based
Transportation Program.
funds are allocated to transit operators based

22 | VALLEY TRANS PORTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 C H AP TE R TWO CAPITAL IN V E S TMENT P RO GRAM

ADDITIONAL FUNDING funds. Forecasting the amount of revenue

STRATEGIES that many of these sources might generate is
The VTA is also looking at new and innovative a difficult and inexact process over the long
ways to fund transportation projects. Current term. These local sources include, but are not
funding projections are inadequate to meet limited to:
all the transportation needs in California. In
• Citywide or countywide development
order to meet the demand of the transporta- impact fees (discussed below)
tion system and the lack of adequate capital,
• Transit Special District (discussed further
the plan is looking toward generating revenue below)
locally to help fund our transportation projects.
• City or county general funds
Examples of this are discussed below.
• Business tax and/or license fees

Local Sales Tax • Transient Occupancy taxes

Since the voters in Santa Clara County approved • Gas taxes
a sales tax for specified transportation projects
• Local assessment districts
in 1984 and 1996, the county has successfully
• Developer exactions
constructed significant improvements to the
• Right-of-way dedication
transportation system. The projects built

under the 1984 and 1996 measures dwarf the • California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) mitigation
projects programmed with State and Federal

flexible funds. • Redevelopment tax increment financing

• Parking charges and taxes

In November 2000, the Santa Clara County

voters approved a 30-year 1/2-cent sales tax to • Sales tax

fund transit projects and services in the county. • Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) tax
Measure A revenues are administered by VTA, • Payroll tax
and VTA is responsible for providing the funds
• Parcel tax
necessary to sustain operations and mainte-
• Joint development and other forms of value
nance of the Measure A projects in perpetuity.
capture

Other Local Revenue Sources • Vehicle registration fees

Local revenues can offer greater reliability and • Roadway pricing

flexibility than State or Federal sources, and • Other user fees
may be used strategically to leverage other

VA L L E Y T R A N SP ORTAT I O N PLAN 2035 | 23

 Development Impact Fee • Fees charged directly to developers seeking

Development Impact Fees may be assessed permits to build within the county.

to projects through local agency policies, • Fees charged proportional to the impact
or through the Congestion Management (i.e., vehicle trip generation) of the specific

Program (CMP) Deficiency Planning Process. land use type. Thus, the fee could be scaled

The CMP statute requires Member Agencies according to the burden new develop-
ment places on congested transportation
to prepare deficiency plans for CMP system
infrastructure. The traditional approach to
facilities located within their jurisdictions that
instituting CDP fees is for all local jurisdic-
exceed the CMP Traffic Level-of-Service (LOS)
tions to adopt the plan by a majority vote
standard. of their city council or board. Although
no legal precedent has been established,
In 1997, VTA investigated a countywide trans-
an alternative strategy may be for VTA to
portation impact fee as part of a Countywide
institute a 50 percent matching require-
Deficiency Plan (CDP) dedicated to specific
ment and give each jurisdiction the option
improvements on the CMP network. Such a
of adopting the countywide fee as a means
fee program could have the following aspects: of generating its local match.

24 | VALLEY TRANS PORTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 C H AP TE R TWO CAPITAL IN V E S TMENT P RO GRAM

VTA Member Agencies may develop their own expand transit operations that support new

CDPs for the same purposes. Several cities in development or community specific services

the county have or are developing deficiency such as a community bus. This may also

plans or impact fees for new development be a mechanism that would allow VTA to

projects. VTA staff is available to assist local implement transit service improvements in

jurisdictions with developing deficiency plans advance of the land use in areas where VTA’s

and impact fees. Transit Sustainability Policy and Service

Design Guidelines are not met. Several cities

Currently fees are in place in the North San
are in the process of preparing comprehen-
Jose Redevelopment Area and in Sunnyvale.
sive General Plan updates and VTA will be
Together they are projected to generate $731
working over the next few years with these
million in 2008 dollars. These funds are
jurisdictions to further explore this option in
dedicated to specific transit, highway, express-
conjunction with these processes.
way, local road, bicycle and Transportation

Demand Management (TDM) projects.

Express or High Occupancy Toll
Lanes and Other Roadway Pricing
VTA projects that the cities and the county will
Although the concept of having drivers pay for
adopt additional fee programs over the life
using the roadways has existed for decades,
of the plan, generating an estimated $470
it is now drawing more attention from local,
million for roadway improvements.
State and Federal agencies. This increased

Transit Special District attention is attributable to worsening

Jurisdictions around the nation and in other traffic congestion, the desire to gain greater

counties are exploring and implementing efficiency from existing facilities, the scarcity

Transit Special Districts (TSD) to generate of transportation funding and the improved

funds to support new or expanded transit ability to electronically collect tolls and vary

service and/or transit-related capital toll amounts by time of day and location.

improvements in specific areas or corridors.

Tolling is a user fee best able to directly
The concept is that assessments would be
charge for the use of a facility at the place
levied to businesses, property owners, other
and time of use. Such user fees address the
special districts such as schools, or jurisdic-
market side of the equation by considering
tions in general that request new transit
the interaction between demand for trans-
service and that would benefit from those
portation services and the available supply.
service improvements. The fees would help

VA L L E Y T R A N SP O RTAT I ON PLAN 2035 | 25

 This results in a direct cost for the good—or selves through the revenue generated from toll

service—being consumed. Cost in this context collection. Given the scarcity of—and the high

may be considered as the time spent driving. demand for—State and Federal highway funds,

Economic theory tells us that as the price of a toll roads are considered in some cases the

good decreases (i.e., drive time) demand for it best—or only—hope for timely implementation

increases—so drive alone trips are induced as of needed highway expansion or improvement

long as the cost of driving remains relatively projects. Toll roads are commonplace in other

low and new facilities that improve travel time parts of the U.S. and in other countries, and

are constructed. have often been constructed to accommodate

long distance or commute trips.

VTP 2035 includes a countywide express lane

network. Forms of roadway pricing for serious Toll roads can also be an effective conges-

consideration are: tion management tool. Flexible pricing plans

can be used to encourage ridesharing while

Toll Roads Charge drivers in all travel lanes
charging for use of the roadway. Pricing plans
to use the roadway. Toll roads have the admi-
can also be used to discourage trips during
rable quality of being able to pay for them-

26 | VALLEY TRANS PORTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 C H AP TE R TWO CAPITAL IN V E S TMENT P RO GRAM

the peak-hour periods and encourage drivers This facility will charge SOVs for use, but would

to shift their commute to times when fewer allow free passage to vehicles carrying two or

vehicles are using the facility. The revenue more people. It is currently under construction

generated in excess of the amount needed with a projected in-service date of 2011.

to pay for construction and operation of the

The fee charged for using the lane goes to
facility can be used to provide transit services
manage operations and prevent congestion
in the corridor; these efforts can further
in the express lane. Revenues from express
enhance the level of ridesharing and transit
lanes can be used to pay for all or a portion
use, thereby effectively increasing the overall
of the cost of the additional lane(s) or the
carrying capacity of the corridor.
lane conversions, and to pay for transit

Express Lanes An innovative operational services serving the corridor or other roadway

and financial approach to implementing improvements in the corridor.

roadway pricing that can be viewed as a subset

In 2004, State legislation (AB 2032, Dutra)
of toll roads that allow single occupant vehicles
was passed giving VTA the authority to
(SOVs) to use—for a fee—what would otherwise
implement express lane operations in up to
be a preferential lane for carpools and transit
two corridors in Santa Clara County. VTA has
vehicles. Express lanes essentially apply to new
completed an Express Lane Study that identi-
or existing carpool lanes, where surplus HOV
fied candidate corridors. These corridors are
lane capacity is “sold” to SOVs at escalating rates
included as part of the Highway Program of
to keep the lane(s) operating a peak efficiency.
projects in this plan.
Express lane operations have existed on State

Route (SR) 91 in southern California since 1991. VTA projections estimate that express

This four-lane express lane facility constructed lane projects will generate $3.13 billion in

in the median of SR 91 allows free passage to 2008 dollars during the plan time period.

vehicles carrying three or more people, while Approximately $1.72 billion will be needed to

charging a fee to SOVs and two-person carpools. finance, construct, operate and maintain the

In the Bay Area, VTA has been a leader in the express lane system over the plan period. The

development of an express lane network. VTA express lanes will generate an additional $1.4

is partnering with the Alameda Congestion billion that will be used for transit services

Management Agency and Caltrans to deliver a and other transportation improvements in the

southbound express lane on the I-680 Sunol express lane corridors.

Grade in Alameda and Santa Clara counties.

VA L L E Y T R A N SP ORTAT I O N PLAN 2035 | 27

 Joint Development Revenue have become available. TCRP, Proposition 42,

VTA has implemented a Joint Development/ Regional Measure 2 (RM2), and Proposition

Land Development Program. This program 1B are examples of significant new fund

responds to the Board’s 2003 Ad Hoc Financial sources that were not anticipated in either the

Committee Recommendations to pursue countywide plans or the regional transporta-

opportunities to provide VTA with a diverse tion plans that were in effect at the time.

revenue stream. VTA has a large portfolio of

Moreover, with the development of the 2009
land assets that if developed, leased or sold and
RTP, MTC acknowledged that it has in the
the revenues properly invested can generate a
past tended to underestimate the amount of
significant ongoing revenue stream for VTA.
reasonably expected transportation revenues
Potential from the Joint Development Program
that come into the Bay Area during the
is currently estimated at $500 million over the
25-year timeframe of the RTP. Accordingly,
life of the plan.
MTC has included an additional $13 billion

for Regional Anticipated/Unspecified Funds

New Local Anticipated/
Unspecified Funds in the Commission-adopted Financially

Over the last decade, significant, unantici- Constrained Investment Plan in the 2009

pated new transportation revenue sources RTP. This is roughly equivalent to 20 years

28 | VALLEY TRANS PORTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 C H AP TE R TWO CAPITAL IN V E S TMENT P RO GRAM

worth of the annualized amount of unantici- ity, and requiring fewer resources. Bicycle

pated funding that has come into the Bay and pedestrian improvements augment

Area since 1998. other modes and firmly establish walking

and biking as viable forms of travel. Overall,

Following this same logic, VTP 2035
land use decisions are better integrated and
includes $2 billion in new Local Anticipated/
coordinated so as to complement and sup-
Unspecified Funds coming to Santa Clara
port transportation projects.
County. To compare this to the MTC

assumptions, if Santa Clara County received The Capital Investment Program addresses

its population share of the $13 billion transportation-related projects and actions

Regional Anticipated/Unspecified Funds, or in Santa Clara County that involve participa-

approximately 30 percent, about $3.9 billion tion by VTA and its partnering agencies,

could be expected for Santa Clara County of impact inter-jurisdictional travel, or are

the life on the plan. regional in nature. These capital investments

are location-specific improvements for four

modes of travel: roadway (including express

CAPITAL INVESTMENT
PROGRAM lanes and ITS), transit, bicycle and pedes-

This section of the plan is the core of VTP trian. The projects and programs for these

2035. It presents a capital investment plan modes are covered in ten Program Areas:

for a comprehensive set of transportation 1. Highway Program

projects and programs that express a vision 2. Expressway Program

of Santa Clara County’s transportation 3. Local Streets and County Roads

Program
future.
4. Pavement Management Program
The VTP 2035 Capital Investment Program
5. Sound Mitigation Program
is built on a vision in which the existing
6. Landscape Restoration/Litter and
roadway network is better managed with Graffiti Removal Program
ITS improvements: an expanded high- 7. Transit Program
occupancy vehicle (HOV) system, improved
8. Systems Operations and Management
interchanges, some freeway upgrades and a Program

priced express lane network. Transit lines are 9. Bicycle Program

improved, and existing transit services are 10. CDT Program
refined—increasing efficiency and productiv-

VA L L E Y T R A N SP O RTAT I ON PLAN 2035 | 29

 Developing the Constrained and Like the RTP, not all of the programs and
Unconstrained Project Lists projects identified in VTP 2035 can be funded
Under guidelines established by the Federal with the fund sources identified, which means
government in the 1998 TEA-21, and its that VTP 2035 also has an unconstrained
earlier sibling, the 1991 ISTEA, long-range portion. Both constrained and unconstrained
transportation plans must be financially projects lists are presented in the Capital
constrained. The financially constrained por- Investment Program that follows.
tion of the RTP includes projects funded with

projected revenues from sources that exist The Programming Process

today—such as approved sales tax measures, VTP 2035 is a long-range transportation plan-

Federal flexible formula funds, or gas tax ning document, and neither it nor the RTP set

subventions—and from sources that can be priorities or schedules for when projects are

reasonably expected to be available during the to be implemented. Programming documents,

life of the plan. The unconstrained portion of such as the Transportation Improvement

RTP includes projects that fall outside of these Program (TIP), are where priorities and

funding assumptions. schedules for delivery of specific projects are

30 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 C H AP TE R TWO CAPITAL IN V E S TMENT P RO GRAM

developed. These are shorter-range documents areas and their respective lists of projects are
with a three-to six-year timeframe. The VTA presented on the following pages. The VTA
Board of Directors and its partners determine Board of Directors adopted the allocations
the expenditures that will guide project priori- amounts for the projects shown in this table at
ties and schedules that are affirmed in these its June 2008 meeting. These allocations were
shorter-range programming documents. based on revenue projections developed by

MTC, the Bay Area CMAs and VTA.

VTP 2035 Fund Projections
and Allocations The VTP 2035 program areas represent a

As shown in Table 2-2, the total amount wide range of programs and projects covering

assumed to be available over the life of the plan the four modes of travel: roadways, transit,

for VTP 2035 programs and projects is $15.2 bicycle and pedestrian. Since the adoption

billion. Details regarding each of these program of VTP 2030 in February 2005, VTA and its

TABLE 2-2 VTP 2035 Fund Allocations

FUND
PROGRAM
ALLOCATION
AREAS
(‘08 $MILLIONS)

Highway Program $3,101

Expressway Program 263

Local Streets and County Roads Program 628

Transit Program 9,281

Transportation Systems Operations and Management (ITS) Program 100

Pavement Management Program 1,140

Bicycle Program 160

CDT/Pedestrian Program 360

Landscape Restoration/Litter and Graffiti Removal Program 1

Sound Mitigation Program 10

Local Transportation Projects and Enhancements 145

Total $15,189

VA L L E Y T R A N SP ORTAT I O N PLAN 2035 | 31

 partners have conducted numerous planning sponsor, the jurisdictions the project affects

studies to identify transportation needs and and the VTP 2035 project allocation.

define projects throughout the county. Results

HIGHWAY PROGRAM
from these studies have helped to develop
The first generation of the Highway
the project lists and define the program areas
Program—Generation 1.0—began in the
presented here. Some of the program areas
1950s with the construction of the National
presented here are handled programmatically
Interstate Highway System. Generation 2.0,
and do not have associated project lists. The
completion of the highway system, came
VTP 2035 allocations for each of the program
during the 1980s and 1990s with many local
areas discussed in this section are shown in
jurisdictions implementing self-help measures
Table 2-2.
to fund projects to complete the network,
Appendix A provides additional information
as was the case in Santa Clara County.
about the project lists presented in this sec-
Generation 3.0, which concentrates on pricing
tion. The additional information may include
and improving efficiency, begins in Santa
a more detailed description, the project
Clara County with VTP 2035.

32 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 C H AP TE R TWO CAPITAL IN V E S TMENT P RO GRAM

Planning for generation 3.0 of State highway improvements with high utility as well as

system improvements in Santa Clara County is higher cost mainline capacity and systems

an evolving and challenging process. VTP 2035 enhancements.

continues this process by building upon the high-

The constrained list of projects includes 75
way planning work conducted for VTP 2030.
projects totaling $3.1 billion in requests,

Key recommendations from the 2005 VTP including $1.7 billion for building and

2030 include the need to study county gate- maintaining an express lane network in Santa

ways, vital highway corridors, obtain greater Clara County. The unconstrained project list

utility from existing highway infrastructure includes another 30 projects totaling $1.1

and develop an express lane network. As a billion. The constrained list of projects is

result, part of the work in developing VTP provided in Table 2-3. The maps of projects

2035 Highway Projects involved an evalua- on pages 34 through 38 show only the 75

tion of the county gateways and key corridors constrained projects.

within the county to increase efficiency,

Express Lane Projects
identify, define and prioritize improvements
VTP 2035 includes an array of express lane
that relieve congestion, alleviate bottlenecks
projects that have resulted from planning
and enhance safety.
studies conducted by VTA between 2000
The VTP 2035 Highway Program fund
and 2008. VTA currently has the statutory
allocation is just over $3.1 billion for 75
authority to build and operate two express
improvements in all areas of the county,
lane corridors within the county. The top two
including the creation of a comprehensive
corridors are SR 85 and Highway 101 corri-
countywide express lane program.
dors. Other express corridors include SR 237,

I-280, I-680, I-880, and SR 87. In addition,

Developing the Fiscally
Constrained and Unconstrained VTA is partnering with Alameda County
Highway Project List agencies and Caltrans to develop the I-580/
VTA and its Member and Partnering Agencies 680 corridor including a portion of I-680 in
are the primary source for identifying projects. Santa Clara County.
A total of 105 projects representing about $4.2
VTP 2035 allocates $1.7 billion to the express
billion in requests were evaluated using the
lane network over the life of the plan. This
Board-adopted highway project prioritization
amount includes the cost to finance, build and
criteria. The criteria are designed to give fair
operate the system.
consideration to the full range of low-cost

VA L L E Y T R A N SP O RTAT I ON PLAN 2035 | 33

 FIGURE 2-1 Express Lane Projects in Santa Clara County

South County

34 | VALLEY TRANS PORTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 C H AP TE R TWO CAPITAL IN V E S TMENT P RO GRAM

TABLE 2-3 Constrained Highway and Express Lane Projects in Santa Clara County
VTP COST
ROUTE HIGHWAY PROJECT TITLE
ID (‘08 $MILLIONS)

H1 SR 85 SR 85 Express Lanes: US 101 (South San Jose to Mountain View) $72

H2 SR 87 SR 87 Express Lanes: SR 85 to US 101 (Conversion) 30

H3 US 101 US 101 Express Lanes: San Mateo county line to SR 85 in Mountain View (Conversion) 12

H4 US 101 US 101 Express Lanes: SR 85 (San Jose) to Cochrane Rd. (Conversion) 23

H5 US 101 US 101 Express Lanes: SR 85 in Mountain View to SR 85 in San Jose (Conversion) 90

H6 US 101 US 101 HOV/Express Lanes: Cochrane Rd. to Masten Ave. 93

H7 US 101 US 101 HOV/Express Lanes: Masten Ave. to 10th St. 59

H8 US 101 US 101 HOV/Express Lanes: 10th St. to SR 25 43

H9 SR 237 SR 237 Express Lanes: I-880 to Mathilda Ave. (Conversion) 20

H10 SR 237 SR 237 Express Lane Connectors: Milpitas to I-880 5

H11 SR 237 SR 237 HOV/Express Lanes: Mathilda Ave. to SR 85 70

H12 I-280 I-280 Express Lanes: Leland Ave. to Magdalena Ave. (Conversion) 50

H13 I-280 I-280 Express Lanes: US 101 to Leland Ave. 21

H14 I-280 I-280 HOV/Express Lanes: Southbound El Monte Rd. to Magdalena Ave. 12

H15 I-680 I-680 HOV/Express Lanes: Calaveras Blvd. to US 101 30

H16 I-880 I-880 Express Lanes: Alameda county line to US 101 (Conversion) 20

H17 SR 17 SR 17 Southbound/Hamilton Ave. Off-ramp widening 1

SR 25/Santa Teresa Blvd./US 101 Interchange (includes US 101 widening

H18 SR 25 233
between Monterey Rd. and SR 25 and connection to Santa Teresa Blvd.)
SR 85 Northbound to Eastbound SR 237 Connector Ramp
H19 SR 85 26
and Northbound SR 85 Auxiliary Lane
Fremont Ave. improvements at SR 85; Ramp improvements at Fremont Ave.
H20 SR 85 3
interchange and reconfiguration at Bernardo Ave.

H21 SR 85 SR 85/Cottle Rd. Interchange improvements 5

H22 SR 87 SR 87/Capitol Expwy./Narvaez Ave. Interchange improvements 10

US 101/Montague Expwy./San Tomas Expwy./Mission College Blvd.

H23 US 101 12
Interchange improvements

H24 US 101 US 101/Trimble Rd./De La Cruz Blvd./Central Expwy. Interchange improvements 34

H25 US 101 US 101/Blossom Hill Rd. Interchange improvements 20

VA L L E Y T R A N SP ORTAT I O N PLAN 2035 | 35

 FIGURE 2-2 Constrained Highway Projects in Santa Clara County

South County

36 | VALLEY TRANS PORTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 C H AP TE R TWO CAPITAL IN V E S TMENT P RO GRAM

TABLE 2-3 (CONT’D) Constrained Highway and Express Lane Projects in Santa Clara County

VTP COST
ROUTE HIGHWAY PROJECT TITLE
ID (‘08 $MILLIONS)

H26 US 101 US 101/Mabury Rd./Taylor St. Interchange improvements $49

H27 US 101 US 101 Southbound Auxiliary Lane: Great America Parkway to Lawrence Expwy. 3

H28 US 101 US 101/Old Oakland Rd. Interchange improvements 20

H29 US 101 US 101 Southbound widening: Story Rd. to Yerba Buena Rd. 63

US 101/Capitol Expwy. Interchange improvements

H30 US 101 40
(includes New Northbound on-ramp from Yerba Buena Rd.)

H31 US 101 US 101/Tennant Ave. Interchange improvements 17

H32 US 101 US 101 Southbound Auxiliary lane widening: I-880 to McKee 9

H33 US 101 US 101 Auxiliary Lanes: SR 85 to Embarcadero Rd. 103

H34 US 101 US 101 Ramp metering facilities: 10th St. 7

H35 US 101 US 101 Ramp metering facilities: Leavesley Rd. 10

H36 US 101 US 101 Ramp metering facilities: Masten Ave. 5

H37 US 101 US 101 Ramp metering facilities: San Martin Ave. 5

H38 US 101 US 101 Ramp metering facilities: Tennant Ave. 6

H39 US 101 US 101 Ramp metering facilities: E. Dunne Ave. 5

H40 US 101 US 101 Ramp metering facilities: Cochrane Ave. 6

H41 US 101 US 101 Ramp metering facilities: Coyote Creek Golf Dr. 5

H42 US 101 US 101 Ramp metering facilities: Bailey Ave. 4

H43 US 101 US 101 Ramp and intersection improvements: Southbound off-ramp at Tennant Ave. 1

H44 US 101 US 101 Ramp and intersection improvements: Southbound ramp at 10th St. 3

US 101 Ramp and intersection improvements:

H45 US 101 1
US 101 Southbound and Northbound ramps at Masten Ave.

H46 US 101 US 101 TOS improvements 35

H47 US 101 US 101/Hellyer Ave. Interchange improvements 14

H48 US 101 US 101/Zanker Rd./Skyport Dr./Fourth St. Interchange improvements 90

H49 US 101 US 101 Southbound Auxiliary Lane improvement: Ellis St. to SR 237 4

H50 US 101 US 101 Ramp and Intersection improvements: Southbound off-ramp at Cochrane Rd. 1

VA L L E Y T R A N SP O RTAT I ON PLAN 2035 | 37

 TABLE 2-3 (CONT’D) Constrained Highway and Express Lane Projects in Santa Clara County
VTP COST
ROUTE HIGHWAY PROJECT TITLE
ID (‘08 $MILLIONS)

H51 US 101 US 101 Ramp and Intersection improvements: Northbound off-ramp at Cochrane Rd. $1

H52 US 101 US 101 Ramp/Intersection Improvements at Dunne Ave. 2

H53 US 101 US 101/Buena Vista Ave. Interchange Improvements 27

H54 US 101 US 101 Ramp/Intersection Improvements: US 101 Southbound Ramps at San Martin Ave. 1

H55 US 101 US 101 Southbound Improvements: San Antonio Rd. to Charleston Rd./Rengstorff Ave. 19

H56 US 101 US 101 Widening to Six-Lane Freeway: SR 25 to SR 129 170

H57 SR 152 SR 152 Improvements, Intersection Improvement at Ferguson Rd. 2

H58 SR 152 SR 152 Ramp/Intersection Improvements: SR 152 at Bloomfield Ave. 2

H59 SR 152 SR 152 Ramp/Intersection Improvements: SR 152 at Frazier Lake Rd. 2

H60 SR 152 SR 152 Ramp/Intersection Improvements: SR 152 at Watsonville Rd. 3

H61 SR 152 New SR 152 Alignment: SR 156 to US 101 350

H62 SR 237 SR 237/El Camino Real/Grant Rd. Intersection Improvements 4

H63 SR 237 SR 237 Westbound On-ramp at Middlefield Road 11

H64 SR 237 SR 237 Eastbound Auxiliary Lane: Zanker Rd. to North First St. 7

H65 SR 237 SR 237/Mathilda Ave. and US 101/Mathilda Ave. Interchange Improvements 15

H66 SR 237 SR 237/North First St. Interchange Improvements 2

H67 SR 237 SR 237 Westbound to Northbound US 101 Ramp Improvements 9

H68 SR 237 SR 237 Eastbound Auxiliary Lanes: Mathilda Ave. to Fair Oaks Ave. 6

H69 I-280 I-280 Northbound: Second Exit Lane to Foothill Expwy. 2

H70 I-280 I-280 Northbound Winchester Blvd. Interchange Improvements1 —

H71 I-280 I-280 Downtown Access Improvements between 3rd St. and 7th St. 25

H72 I-880 I-880/Montague Expwy. Interchange Improvement 12

H73 I-880 I-880/I-280/Stevens Creek Blvd. Interchange Improvements 64

H74 I-880 I-880 Widening for HOV Lanes: SR 237 to Old Bayshore 95

H75 I-880 I-880 Northbound Auxiliary Lane: Coleman Ave. to First St. 13

Total $1,794

1
Project included in H73

38 | VALLEY TRANS PORTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 C H AP TE R TWO CAPITAL IN V E S TMENT P RO GRAM

System Efficiency Projects to reflect new conditions and opportunities,

The VTP 2035 Highways project list includes address issues identified in the 2003 Study

16 projects designed to improve the efficiency and provide input into the VTP 2035 planning

of the existing highway system, including aux- process. This process concluded in early 2009

iliary lane and ramp metering projects. Ramp with the adoption of an updated plan.

metering is one of the most cost-effective and

VTP 2035 Expressway Program
beneficial improvements that can be made to
Fund Allocation
a congested highway corridor and VTA has
The county placed expressway projects into
been a leader in the Bay Area in implementing
five tiers—the top two tiers, Tier 1A and Tier
these projects. Santa Clara County is home to
1B, were submitted for inclusion in VTP 2035.
approximately fifty percent of all ramp meters
The projects were assigned to these tiers based
in the nine-county Bay Area region. Moreover,
on criteria developed by a Technical Working
MTC has recently taken more interest in these
Group of city and county staff, approved by
types of projects and has included its Freeway
the Expressway Study Policy Advisory Board
Performance Initiative (FPI) in the 2009 RTP
with county and city representation and
to assist with project implementation. It is
adopted by the county Board of Supervisors.
expected VTA will receive funding through
The complete list of 28 Tier 1A and 1B projects
MTC for these types of projects included in
totals about $423 million. As shown in Table
the VTP. The additional revenue could offset
2-4, all 25 Tier 1A projects were placed on the
expenses and allow for additional projects to
financially constrained list with a proposed
be added to the list.
VTP 2035 allocation of approximately $263

million, comprised of approximately $161

EXPRESSWAY PROGRAM
million in State and Federal sources and $102
Santa Clara County is the only county in
million from local development fees. Tier 1B
California operating a comprehensive
projects were placed in the unconstrained list.
expressway system within urban areas. In
A complete list of Tier 1A projects is provided
2003, the County of Santa Clara adopted its
in Figure 2-3.
Comprehensive County Expressway Planning

Study which provided a long-term plan for VTP 2035 allocates $263 million to fund the
the improvement and maintenance of the entire Tier 1A list of projects identified in the
expressway system. In 2008, the county Countywide Expressway Study.
initiated a comprehensive update to this plan

VA L L E Y T R A N SP O RTAT I ON PLAN 2035 | 39

 FIGURE 2-3 Constrained Expressway Projects in Santa Clara County

South County

40 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 C H AP TE R TWO CAPITAL IN V E S TMENT P RO GRAM

TABLE 2-4 Constrained Expressway Projects in Santa Clara County

VTP COST
EXPRESSWAY EXPRESSWAY PROJECT TITLE
ID (‘08 $MILLIONS)

X1 Almaden Expressway 8 Lanes from Coleman to Blossom Hill $10.5

X2 Capitol Expressway TOS Infrastructure (not mapped) 3.5

X3 Central Expressway Auxiliary Lanes between Mary and Lawrence 17.0

X4 Central Expressway Convert Measure B HOV Lane (De La Cruz to San Tomas Expwy.) 0.1

X5 Central Expressway Convert HOV Queue Jump Lane at Bowers 0.1

X6 Central Expressway 6 Lanes from Lawrence Expwy to San Tomas Expwy. 13.6

X7 Foothill Expressway Extend Deceleration Ln. at San Antonio 0.7

X8 Foothill Expressway Loyola Bridge 7.0

X9 Lawrence Expressway Additional Left Turn Lane at Prospect 2.6

X10 Lawrence Expressway Close Median, Right In/Out 1.5

X11 Lawrence Expressway Arques Square Loop Grade Separation 45.0

X12 Lawrence Expressway 8 Lanes From Moorpark to South of Calvert 5.2

X13 Montague Expressway 8 Lanes from Trade Zone to Park Victoria 20.0

X14 Montague Expressway 8 Lanes from Lick Mill to Trade Zone 12.0

X15 Montague Expressway Trimble Road Flyover 32.0

X16 Montague Expressway Mission College At-Grade Improvements 4.0

X17 Oregon Expressway/Page Mill I-280 Page Mill Modification for Bicycle Travel 6.6

X18 San Tomas Expressway SR 17/San Tomas Expressway Improvements 2.6

X19 San Tomas Expressway Box Culvert 13.2

X20 San Tomas Expressway 8 Lanes from Williams to El Camino 40.7

X21 Santa Teresa/Hale Corridor Realign DeWitt S-Curve 2.5

X22 Santa Teresa/Hale Corridor TOS Infrastructure Improvements (not mapped) 5.0

X23 Santa Clara County SCC Motorist Traffic Information and Advisory Systems (not mapped) 5.0

X24 Santa Clara County Signal Coordination/Interconnect with Cross Streets (not mapped) 5.0

X25 Santa Clara County TOS Infrastructure Improvements (not mapped) 10.0

N/A Almaden Expressway Project Study Report for SR 85/Almaden Interchange 0.4

N/A Central Expressway Install Median Curbs Between SR 85 and SR 237 0.8

N/A Lawrence Expressway Project Study Report at Lawrence/Calvert/I-280 1.0

N/A Oregon Expressway Alma Bridge Replacement Feasibility Study 0.3

Total $267.9

N/A Not funded through VTP. Not mapped.

VA L L E Y T R A N SP O RTAT I ON PLAN 2035 | 41

 Expressway Projects/ at the Lawrence Expressway/I-280/Calvert
Improvements interchange area.
Almaden Expressway Improvements
Montague Expressway Convert HOV
to Almaden Expressway largely involve
lanes between I-680 and I-880 to mixed flow
additional lanes both north and south of the
lanes. Montague Expressway also has an
Highway 85 interchange to reduce congestion
at-grade improvement at the Mission College
and increase throughput.
Boulevard Intersection.
Capitol Expressway Improvements
Oregon/Page Mill Expressway Replace
include modifications to the Traffic
and optimize signals, installing pedestrian
Operations Systems (TOS) infrastructure.
ramps, improving pedestrian and bicycle
Central Expressway Widening from safety and reducing the effects of traffic on
four to six lanes between Lawrence and San adjacent streets.
Tomas Expressways will increase capacity and
San Tomas Expressway Widen to eight
safety on this heavily used stretch of Central
lanes between El Camino Real and Williams
Expressway. Other improvements include
Road as well as at-grade improvements in the
auxiliary lanes from Mary to Lawrence and
SR 17 intersection area. There is also a box
median curb between SR 85 to SR 237.
culvert project for maintenance purposes.
Foothill Expressway Extension of a
Santa Teresa–Hale Corridor The previ-
deceleration lane at San Antonio Road is a
ous Comprehensive Countywide Expressway
safety project, while a host of bicycle, pedes-
Planning Study in 2003 did not contain
trian and signal timing improvements are
expressway projects located in southern Santa
added with the replacement of Loyola Bridge.
Clara County. The Policy Advisory Board
Lawrence Expressway Optimizing signal (PAB) for the Expressway Planning Study con-
timing in the Lawrence/Saratoga area and cluded that a South County “local corridor”
the Highway 280 intersection will reduce is needed to facilitate travel between Gilroy
delays. Limiting the number of neighborhood and Morgan Hill. They further concluded that
access points between Highways 101 and 280 while this facility did not necessarily need to
will reduce delays from merging vehicles. be called an expressway or fall under single-
Additional mixed flow lanes will be added jurisdiction ownership, it did need consistent
between Calvert and Moorpark/Bollinger. standards and an identifiable alignment. In
Additionally, a project study report will look 2008, the Expressway Planning Study PAB

42 | VALLEY TRANS PORTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 C H AP TE R TWO CAPITAL IN V E S TMENT P RO GRAM

approved the addition of the Santa Teresa county roads on the committed project list.
Corridor in Morgan Hill and Gilroy to the VTA Staff, working through the CIP Working
Countywide Expressway Plan. The two VTP Group of the Technical Advisory Committee
2035 projects for this corridor involve opera- (TAC), developed this list of projects using pro-
tional signal timing. gram eligibility and scoring criteria adopted by

the VTA Board. The criteria are based on street

Signal Operations for
connectivity, congestion relief, safety, and the
All Expressways
interface between transportation and land use.
Improvements include coordination of express-
Another $58 million in grant fund requests
way signals with signals on perpendicular streets,
appear on the uncommitted project list.
electronic information signs, advisory radio,

cable TV feeds, automatic traffic counts and a The following project types are eligible for

web page. These improvements are intended to LSCR funds:

work together to reduce delay on and around the • New street connections and extensions,
expressways. Additionally, traffic signal monitor- local road crossings of freeways and
expressways
ing on the expressways will be interconnected

with other programs in Sunnyvale, Palo Alto, • Multimodal reconstruction of streets

Mountain View and Los Altos. • Roadway operational improvements

including new lanes, intersection turn
Refer to the Comprehensive Countywide lanes, and modern roundabouts
Expressway Planning Study, Implementation
• New or major upgrades of sidewalk and
Plan for more information on the Tier 1A Class II and III bicycle facilities
projects.
• Traffic calming measures

LOCAL STREETS AND • New grade separations at railroads and

COUNTY ROADS PROGRAM roadways

The VTA Board of Directors created the Local • ITS projects and project elements
Streets and County Roads (LSCR) Program to
The complete list of LSCR projects is shown in
address the difficulties Member Agencies have
Table 2-5 on pages 45 through 47.
with raising revenues for local streets and

county roads projects not connected to new ROADWAY MAINTENANCE

development projects. PROGRAMS
Three VTP 2035 roadway program areas are
The VTP 2035 Program Area allocation identi-
presented under this heading: 1) Pavement
fies up to $628 million for local streets and

VA L L E Y T R A N SP O RTAT I ON PLAN 2035 | 43

 FIGURE 2-4 Constrained Local Streets Projects in Santa Clara County

South County

44 | VALLEY TRANS PORTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 C H AP TE R TWO CAPITAL IN V E S TMENT P RO GRAM

TABLE 2-5 Constrained Local Streets Projects in Santa Clara County

VTP COST
ID JURISDICTION LOCAL STREETS PROJECT TITLE (‘08 $MILLIONS)

R1 Campbell Hacienda Ave. Improvements $3.5

R2 Campbell Campbell Ave. Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvements under SR 17 3.0

R3 Cupertino Rancho Rinconada Traffic Calming Project 0.1

R4 Gilroy IOOF Ave. Overcrossing 14.5

R5 Gilroy Gilroy Orbital Concept (NW Quadrant): Buena Vista Ave. to Monterey Rd. 8.5

R6 Gilroy Las Animas Ave. Overcrossing 9.2

R7 Gilroy Tenth St. Bridge Project 14.0

R8 Los Altos Miramonte Ave. Bikeway Improvements 1.4

R9 Los Gatos SR 9 Gateway Enhancements at University Ave. and North Santa Cruz Ave. 3.0

R10 Los Gatos Blossom Hill Rd. at University Ave. Intersection Improvements 1.0

R11 Milpitas Calaveras Blvd. Overpass Widening with Operational Improvements 70.0

R12 Milpitas Montague Expwy. and Great Mall Pkwy./Capitol Ave. Grade Separation 60.0

R13 Milpitas Dixon Landing Rd. Widening 60.0

R14 Milpitas Dixon Landing Rd. and North Milpitas Blvd. Intersection Improvements 3.0

R15 Morgan Hill Butterfield Blvd. South Extension 18.8

R16 Morgan Hill Santa Teresa Blvd. Improvements 10.2

R17 Mountain View Rengstorff Ave. Grade Separation 65.0

R18 Palo Alto Palo Alto Smart Residential Arterials 10.0

R19 San Jose Autumn Pkwy. Improvement from Union Pacific Railroad to Park Ave. 33.0

R20 San Jose North First St. Core Area Grid Streets 61.0

R21 San Jose Chynoweth Ave. Extension: Almaden Expwy. to Winfield Blvd. 15.0

R22 San Jose Charcot Ave. Extension over I-880 34.0

R23 San Jose Coleman Ave. Widening from I-880 to Taylor St. 13.0

R24 San Jose King Rd. Bridge Replacement and Widening at Penitencia Creek 5.0

R25 San Jose Branham Ln. Widening: Vista Park Dr. to Snell Ave. 10.3

R26 San Jose Blossom Hill Rd. Bike/Ped Improvements 10.0

R27 San Jose Caltrain Pedestrian Crossing Bridge at Blossom Hill Station 2.5

R28 San Jose Almaden Rd. Improvement: Malone Rd. to Curtner Ave. 5.4

R29 San Jose Downtown Couplet Conversion Projects 22.0

VA L L E Y T R A N SP ORTAT I O N PLAN 2035 | 45

 TABLE 2-5 (CONT’D) Constrained Local Streets Projects in Santa Clara County
VTP COST
ID JURISDICTION LOCAL STREETS PROJECT TITLE (‘08 $MILLIONS)

R30 San Jose North San Jose Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvements $33.0

R31 San Jose Snell Ave. Widening: Branham Ln. to Chynoweth Ave. 4.0

R32 San Jose Zanker Rd. Widening: US 101 to Tasman Dr. 54.0

R33 San Jose Branham Ln./Monterey Hwy Grade Crossing Project 30.0

R34 San Jose Neiman Blvd. Pedestrian Overcrossing at Capitol Expwy. 8.0

R35 San Jose Caltrain Grade Separation at Branham Ln.1 —

R36 San Jose Senter Rd. Widening: Umbarger Rd. to Lewis Rd. 5.4

R37 San Jose North San Jose Miscellaneous Intersection Improvements 29.0

R38 San Jose Bird Ave. Pedestrian Corridor 3.0

R39 San Jose Park Ave. Improvements: Bird Ave. to SR87 4.1

R40 San Jose Oakland Rd. Improvements from 101 to Montague (Phase 2) 10.0

R41 San Jose Auzerais Ave. Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvements from Sunol St. to Race St. 1.9

R42 San Jose Caltrain Grade Separation at Skyway Dr. 25.0

R43 San Jose San Carlos St. Bridge Replacement and Widening at Caltrain/Vasona LRT 10.0

R44 Santa Clara Great America Pkwy./Mission College Blvd. Intersection Improvements 6.5

R45 Santa Clara El Camino Real and Lafayette St. Intersection Improvements 1.0

R46 Santa Clara Reconstruction/Rehabilitation of Various Streets 15.0

R47 Santa Clara El Camino Real/San Tomas Expwy. Intersection Improvements 0.8

R48 Santa Clara County Center Ave. and Marcella Ave. two-lane Connection 3.0

R49 Santa Clara County DeWitt Ave./Sunnyside Ave. Realignment at Edmunsen Ave. 6.6

R50 Santa Clara County Hill Rd. Extension: East Main Ave. to Peet Rd. 8.0

R51 Santa Clara County Marcella Ave. Two-Lane Realignment 6.0

R52 Santa Clara County Foothill-Loyola Bridge 1.0

R53 Santa Clara County Fitzgerald Ave./Masten Ave. Realignment at Monterey Rd. 0.6

R54 Santa Clara County Alum Rock Ave. Pedestrian Connection to Miguelita Bridge 0.4

R55 Santa Clara County Santa Teresa Blvd. and Tilton Ave. Traffic Signal Improvements 0.6

R56 Santa Clara County Railroad Crossing Improvements at Church Ave. and Monterey Hwy. 0.7

R57 Santa Clara County McKee Rd. Pedestrian Improvements 0.4

R58 Santa Clara County Watsonville Rd. Center Turn Lane 7.0

R59 Santa Clara County Santa Teresa Blvd. and San Martin Ave. Traffic Signal Improvements 0.6

1
Project is included in R33

46 | VALLEY TRANS PORTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 C H AP TE R TWO CAPITAL IN V E S TMENT P RO GRAM

TABLE 2-5 (CONT’D) Constrained Local Streets Projects in Santa Clara County
VTP COST
ID JURISDICTION LOCAL STREETS PROJECT TITLE (‘08 $MILLIONS)

R60 Santa Clara County Doyle Rd. Bicycle and Pedestrian Trail Connection $0.4

R61 Saratoga SR 9 Pedestrian Safety Improvement 2.0

R62 Saratoga Citywide Signal Upgrade Project Phase II 0.5

R63 Saratoga Herriman Ave./Saratoga Ave. Traffic Signal 0.3

R64 Saratoga Prospect Rd. Median Project 2.0

R65 Saratoga Verde Vista Ln. Traffic Signal 0.3

R66 Saratoga Saratoga Ave. Rehabilitation and Overlay Project 0.8

R67 Saratoga Saratoga Ave. Sidewalk Pedestrian Improvement 0.3

R68 Sunnyvale Mary Ave. Extension 58.0

R69 Sunnyvale Lawrence Expwy. and Wildwood Ave. Realignment and Signalization 5.0

R70 Sunnyvale Comprehensive Sidewalk Network for Employment Areas 8.1

R71 Sunnyvale Sunnyvale Local Street Improvements 14.7

R72 Sunnyvale Sunnyvale Downtown Specific Plan Transportation Improvements 13.0

R73 Sunnyvale Installation of Pedestrian Countdown Signals 0.2

Total $947.6

Management, 2) Sound Mitigation and ment from outside edge of curb and gutter

3) Landscape Restoration/Litter and Graffiti to opposite outside edge of curb and gutter.

Removal. VTP 2035 identifies up to $1.1 billion for the

Pavement Management Program (PMP).

Project lists have not been developed for these
This is based on the amount of Surface
programs. However, VTA will work in part-
Transportation Program revenues that are
nership with its Member Agencies to identify
expected in the next 25 years. The total unmet
projects that would be eligible to fund through
pavement need for Santa Clara County is
these programs. Each of these program areas
estimated at approximately $8 billion.
is described below.
The following types of project expenditures
Pavement Management Program
are eligible for PMP funding:
Pavement management projects are intended
• Roadway reconstruction projects
to repair or replace existing roadway pave-
• Overlay projects

VA L L E Y T R A N SP O RTAT I ON PLAN 2035 | 47

 • Pavement maintenance treatments includ- identifying projects that would be eligible to
ing seal coats and microsurfacing fund through the Sound Mitigation Program.
• Spot repairs VTA is compiling a list of soundwall locations

• Curb and gutter repair that will meet VTA’s basic sound mitigation

standard, must be eligible for STIP funds

• Replacing pavement markings and striping
and a Noise Barrier Summary Scope Report
• Incidental non-pavement repairs (e.g.,
(NBSSR) or equivalent must be complete. VTP
emergency storm drain repair)
2035 identifies up to $10 million for a Sound
• Fiber-optic cable installation and other ITS
elements should be installed in conjunction Mitigation Program.

with these projects

Landscape Restoration, Litter
Bike facilities may be included in the final and Graffiti Removal
striping wherever feasible and consistent with The VTA, along with local partners and
local plans, and projects should include VTA Caltrans, conducted a study to determine the
standard concrete pads and ADA accessible level of effort required to maintain the freeway
curbside facilities at bus stop locations. appearance in Santa Clara County. The study

also resulted in a pilot program that estimated

Each city and the county must use a Pavement
the amount it would cost to maintain the
Management System certified by MTC to
freeway to a clean level. Caltrans, working
identify and prioritize projects and must be a
with their maintenance staff, performed a pilot
minor collector or greater roadway.
clean-up program along US 101 between I-880

Sound Mitigation Program and Blossom Hill Road in San Jose in early

VTA is responsible for programming freeway 2008. The pilot program determined that it

sound mitigation projects such as soundwalls would cost almost $18 million to maintain the

in Santa Clara County. With the enactment of freeway appearance at a clean level.

SB 45, all new highway projects must include

The VTP 2035 Expenditure Plan identifies
soundwalls in their project scopes. In
up to $1 million to augment Caltrans efforts
addition, sound mitigation, including retrofit
to restore freeway landscaping and remove
projects where no new changes to the freeway
graffiti within the freeway rights of way. These
or expressway are planned, are the responsi-
funds will provide “seed” money to develop
bility of the local jurisdiction.
public/private partnerships to identify funds

VTA staff, working with the CIP Working and develop programs for ongoing landscap-

Group of the TAC, has developed a process for ing and maintenance efforts.

48 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 C H AP TE R TWO CAPITAL IN V E S TMENT P RO GRAM

TRANSIT PROGRAM source of funds to fully implement the 2000

The CIP identifies specific transit projects Measure A Transit Program of projects.

to be implemented during the timeframe of

Existing VTA Transit Services
the plan. As shown in Table 2-6 on page 51,
VTA is responsible for providing bus, light rail,
these projects include new light rail exten-
light rail shuttles and paratransit services to
sions, bus rapid transit corridors, regional
Santa Clara residents, workers and visitors.
rail services, community-oriented bus service
VTA also partners with other transit operators
operated with small vehicles and enhanced
to provide commuter rail service, inter-com-
commuter rail service. This section discusses
munity and inter-county express bus service
VTA’s current services and plans to enhance
and rail shuttles. Future partnerships include
and expand them, more defined descriptions
BART to jointly operate the segments in Santa
of the specific capital projects in the VTP 2035
Clara County. These services provide important
Transit Program and the need to secure a new
connections to and from Santa Clara County

VA L L E Y T R A N SP O RTAT I ON PLAN 2035 | 49

 FIGURE 2-5 Measure A Transit Projects in Santa Clara County

South County

50 | VALLEY TRANS PORTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 C H AP TE R TWO CAPITAL IN V E S TMENT P RO GRAM

TABLE 2-6 Transit Projects in Santa Clara County

VTP COST
JURISDICTION TRANSIT PROJECT TITLE
ID (‘08 $MILLIONS)

T1 All Cities Additional Measure A Capital and Operating Needs 1 $1,954

T2 Santa Clara, San Jose ACE Upgrade 24
T3 Milpitas, San Jose, Santa Clara BART to Milpitas, San Jose and Santa Clara 2 6,172
T4 Mountain View, Palo Alto, Los Bus Rapid Transit–The Alameda/El Camino—San Carlos/Stevens Creek
Altos, Sunnyvale, Santa Clara, (T4A) El Camino BRT 3 207
San Jose, Cupertino
(T4B) Stevens Creek BRT 4 127
Subtotal 334
T5 Palo Alto, Mountain View, Los Caltrain Electrification from San Francisco to Gilroy
Altos, Sunnyvale, Santa Clara, (T5A) Caltrain Electrification from San Francisco to Tamien 5 222
San Jose, Morgan Hill, Gilroy
(T5B) Caltrain Electrification from Tamien to Gilroy 6 123
Subtotal 345
T6 Palo Alto, Mountain View, Caltrain Service Upgrades 203
Sunnyvale, Santa Clara, San
Jose, Morgan Hill, Gilroy
T7 San Jose, Morgan Hill, Gilroy Caltrain–South County 86
T8 San Jose Downtown East Valley
(T8A) Santa Clara/Alum Rock Phase 1: BRT 7 128
(T8B) Santa Clara/Alum Rock Phase II: LRT 8 265
(T8C) Capitol Expressway LRT 9 334
(T8D) Neiman LRT Extension 10 137
(T8E) Monterey Highway BRT 11 87
Subtotal 954
T9 Palo Alto Dumbarton Rail Corridor 44
T10 Los Gatos, Campbell, San Jose Highway 17 Bus Service Improvements 2
T11 Los Gatos, Campbell Vasona Junction 12 99
T12 San Jose Mineta San Jose International Airport APM Connector 264
T13 Palo Alto Palo Alto Intermodal Center 59
T14 All Cities ZEB Demonstration Program (not mapped) 20
T15 All Cities ZEB Facilities (not mapped) 78
T16 Sunnyvale, Cupertino Sunnyvale-Cupertino BRT 68
T17 San Jose North San Jose Transit Enhancements (not mapped) 13 35
Total $10,741
1 5 9
Funds assumed to be available over the Project is electrification only. Does not include Project from Eastridge to existing Alum Rock
25-year plan timeframe to fund the Measure capital funds needed for additional vehicles LRT Station
A Program and additional transit capital or service expansions. VTA share of cost only. 10
Project from Eastridge south to Nieman Ave.
and operating expansion projects 6
Project is electrification only. Does not 11
2 Project from Downtown San Jose to Santa
BART cost includes total TCRP programmed include capital funds needed for additional Teresa LRT Station
to BART extension Warm Springs to vehicles or service expansions. 12
Santa Clara/San Jose, including prior 7 Project from Campbell to Netflix/SR 85 via
Project from Eastridge via Capitol Winchester Blvd.
expenditures. Expressway/Alum Rock/Santa Clara to 13
3
Project from Diridon Station to Palo Alto Downtown San Jose Project is included in the North San Jose
4 8 Development Area Deficiency Plan
Project from downtown San Jose to De Anza Project from Santa Clara/Alum Rock to
College Diridon Station

VA L L E Y T R A N SP ORTAT I O N PLAN 2035 | 51

 for residents and workers. VTA also funds FY 2007-08, VTA carried about 43.5 million

privately operated shuttles and ADA para- riders: approximately 33.1 million on bus and

transit services for persons with disabilities. A 10.4 million on light rail. The agency serves

summary of the directly operated, inter-agency roughly 3,800 bus stops, 15 transit centers

and contracted transit services is presented in and 62 light rail stations. In July 2008, VTA

the following tables. restructured its bus transit service, targeting

greater service for a core system of routes

VTA directly has an active fleet of 450 buses
that generate strong ridership. Since then,
and 99 light rail vehicles—plus four historic
ridership has increased and VTA will continue
trolleys. About 21 million miles of bus and
to refine its service along the core system
light rail service is operated annually. During
market-based model.

52 | VALLEY TRANS PORTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 C H AP TE R TWO CAPITAL IN V E S TMENT P RO GRAM

Transit Capital Program Development of the TSO&M Program for VTP

The VTP 2035 transit program is based on 2035 built on work conducted for the develop-

the currently adopted Measure A Expenditure ment of an ITS Plan for Santa Clara County

Plan and planning work conducted since 2005. as part of VTP 2030. The VTP 2035 TSO&M

Table 2-6 (page 51) provides the financially Program development included a review and

constrained list of VTP 2035 transit capital update of the list of ITS projects from VTP

projects. There are a total of 23 projects repre- 2030 and the development of a fund alloca-

senting a $9.28 billion dollar investment, which tion strategy for the TSO&M Program. This

includes the Measure A projects discussed in work was conducted by an ITS task force

more detail in the following sections. consisting of staff from both VTA’s Member

Agencies and regional agencies, including

As shown in Table 2-1, a wide range of fund
MTC and Caltrans.
sources are being pursued to fully implement

the Measure A program. These funds include ITS Project List

local transportation fees, VTA joint develop- The VTP 2035 ITS Plan includes 50 listings
ment revenue, Santa Clara County Express of “projects” totaling over $247 million, as
Lane Program net revenues and new local shown in Table 2-7. “Projects” is in quotes
anticipated unspecified fund sources. here because some may be included in whole

Information on the VTP 2035 Transit or in part in projects found in other program

Planning Program is provided in Chapter 3. areas, and as such do not represent individual

projects in the usual sense.

TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS
Maps and a project listing are provided on
OPERATIONS AND
MANAGEMENT PROGRAM pages 54 through 57. Please refer to the Local
The Transportation Systems Operations and Streets and County Roads Program map on
Management (TSO&M) Program includes page 44 for the four projects that are included
projects that use technology to improve the under that program. The cost shown in the
operation and management of the overall listing is the full cost. The VTP 2035 alloca-
transportation system. These new technolo- tion amount for the TSO&M Program is $100
gies are collectively referred to as Intelligent million.
Transportation Systems (ITS), and include
During the development of VTP 2035, staff
electronics, computer and communications
compiled a list of ITS projects/initiatives and
infrastructure.

VA L L E Y T R A N SP ORTAT I O N PLAN 2035 | 53

 FIGURE 2-6 Constrained ITS Projects in Santa Clara County

South County

54 | VALLEY TRANS PORTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 C H AP TE R TWO CAPITAL IN V E S TMENT P RO GRAM

TABLE 2-7 Constrained ITS Projects in Santa Clara County

VTP COST
JURISDICTION ITS PROJECT TITLE
ID (‘08 $MILLIONS)

S1 Campbell Hamilton Ave. ITS $0.40

S2 Campbell Citywide Traffic Signal Upgrade (not mapped) 0.15

S3 Campbell Winchester Blvd. ITS 0.40

S4 Campbell Reactivation of Traffic Count Stations (not mapped) 0.10

S5 Campbell Installation of Pedestrian Countdown Timers (not mapped) 0.20

S6 Gilroy City of Gilroy Adaptive Traffic Control System (not mapped) 0.90

S7 Gilroy Gilroy Event Management System Dynamic Message Signs (not mapped) 0.90

S8 Gilroy City of Gilroy Traffic Signal System Upgrade 3.90

S9 Gilroy Gilroy Flood Watch Cameras (not mapped) 0.51

S10 Gilroy ITS Enhancements on Santa Teresa Blvd. 2.00

S11 Gilroy 10th Street and Downtown Signals Upgrade 1.50

S12 Gilroy SR 152 Signal System Upgrade (not mapped) 2.30

S13 Gilroy Gilroy Community Bus Signal Priority (not mapped) 0.40

S14 Gilroy Gilroy Other Signals Upgrade (not mapped) 1.00

S15 Gilroy Gilroy Downtown Parking Management System (not mapped) 0.30

S16 Los Gatos Town of Los Gatos Traffic Signal System Upgrade (not mapped) 0.30

S17 Milpitas South Milpitas Blvd. SMART Corridor 0.48

S18 Milpitas City of Milpitas Traffic Signal Upgrade (not mapped) 0.75

S19 Morgan Hill Citywide Traffic Signal Operational Center (not mapped) 1.25

S20 Morgan Hill Citywide Wireless Vehicle Detection System Installation (not mapped) 0.90

S21 Mountain View Citywide Traffic Signal Upgrade and IP Traffic Signal Access (not mapped) 2.50

S22 Mountain View Grant Road Adaptive Traffic Signals 1.35

S23 Mountain View Shoreline Blvd. Adaptive Traffic Signals 1.65

S24 Mountain View Rengstorff Ave. Traffic Signal Improvements 0.40

S25 Palo Alto Palo Alto Smart Residential Arterials 6.22

S26 Palo Alto Citywide Traffic Signal System Upgrades (not mapped) 1.80

S27 Palo Alto Citywide Traffic Signal CCTV/Emergency Vehicle Preemption Project (not mapped) 1.40

VA L L E Y T R A N SP O RTAT I ON PLAN 2035 | 55

 TABLE 2-7 (CONT’D) Constrained ITS Projects in Santa Clara County
VTP COST
JURISDICTION ITS PROJECT TITLE
ID (‘08 $MILLIONS)

S28 San Jose Silicon Valley Transportation and Incident Management Center (not mapped) $7.50

S29 San Jose San Jose Proactive Signal Retiming Program (not mapped) 25.00

S30 San Jose San Jose Transportation Communications Network Enhancements 24.00

S31 San Jose San Jose Traffic Signal System Upgrades (not mapped) 8.00

S32 San Jose Downtown San Jose Area Freeway Management System (not mapped) 2.00

Downtown San Jose Local Street Advanced Traffic Management System

S33 San Jose 3.00
(not mapped)
S34 San Jose Downtown San Jose CMS Upgrades (not mapped) 1.40

S35 San Jose King/Story Area Advanced Traffic Management System (not mapped) 3.00

S36 San Jose Silicon Valley ITS Program Upgrades (not mapped) 27.00

Countywide Freeway Traffic Operation System (TOS)

S37 San Jose 25.00
and Ramp Metering Improvements (not mapped)
S38 San Jose Silicon Valley TIMC—SJPD Integration (not mapped) 2.00

S39 San Jose City of San Jose Red Light Running Enforcement Program (not mapped) 0.50

S40 San Jose San Jose Traffic Signal Interconnect (not mapped) 4.00

S41 San Jose SVITS Hybrid Analogy/Digital Video System (not mapped) 0.20

S42 San Jose Silicon Valley TIMC—Ramp Metering Integration (not mapped) 8.00

S43 San Jose Coyote Valley ITS (not mapped) 6.00

S44 San Jose Monterey Highway ITS (not mapped) 4.80

S45 San Jose San Jose Mobile Video Surveillance for Emergency Response (not mapped) 0.25

S46 San Jose San Jose Emergency Vehicle Preemption System (not mapped) 6.60

S47 San Jose SVITS Connection to Sunnyvale (not mapped) 3.50

S48 San Jose Construction Information Management System (not mapped) 0.10

S49 San Jose Winchester/Stevens Creek Area Advanced Traffic Management System 2.00

S50 San Jose Eastridge/Evergreen Area Advanced Traffic Management System (not mapped) 4.00

S51 San Jose Almaden/Blossom Hill Area Advanced Traffic Management System (not mapped) 2.00

S52 Santa Clara Santa Clara Communications Network Upgrade (not mapped) 3.49

S53 Santa Clara Santa Clara Traffic Signals Upgrade (not mapped) 3.19

S54 Santa Clara Santa Clara TMC Upgrade (not mapped) 0.35

56 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 C H AP TE R TWO CAPITAL IN V E S TMENT P RO GRAM

TABLE 2-7 (CONT’D) Constrained ITS Projects in Santa Clara County

VTP COST
JURISDICTION ITS PROJECT TITLE
ID (‘08 $MILLIONS)

S55 Saratoga City of Saratoga Citywide Signal Upgrade Project—Phase II (not mapped) $0.20

S56 Saratoga Citywide Accessible Pedestrian Signals (not mapped) 0.26

S57 Sunnyvale Traffic Adaptive Signal System on Major Arterials (not mapped) 3.32

S58 Sunnyvale Citywide CCTV Camera Deployment (not mapped) 1.06

S59 Sunnyvale Citywide Traffic Signal Controller Update (not mapped) 0.56

S60 Sunnyvale Citywide Count and Speed Monitoring Stations (not mapped) 1.01

S61 Sunnyvale Citywide ITS Communications Infrastructure (not mapped) 1.69

S62 Sunnyvale Traffic Management Center Integration (not mapped) 0.25

S63 Sunnyvale Emergency Preemption Receiver Installation (not mapped) 0.99

S64 Santa Clara County Capitol Expressway TOS (not mapped) 3.50

S65 Santa Clara County County Expressway Countdown Pedestrian Signal Heads (not mapped) 0.50

S66 Santa Clara County TOS Infrastructure Improvements (not mapped) 10.00

S67 Santa Clara County Signal Coordination/Interconnect With Cross Streets (not mapped) 5.00

S68 Santa Clara County SCC Motorist Traffic Information and Advisory Systems (not mapped) 5.00

S69 Santa Clara County Adaptive Pedestrian Timing Demonstration Project (not mapped) 1.00

S70 Santa Clara County Expressway Bike Detection (not mapped) 2.08

Total $247.26

proposes the following four major allocation • Use the remainder of the proposed alloca-
strategies: tion for other ITS projects that emphasize
integration and connectivity of the
• The highest priority projects improve traffic transportation network systems.
flow through signal operations for local
roadways/expressways, freeways (ramp • VTA staff will work with transportation staff
meters), transit (priority treatment at traffic from partner agencies to identify a project
signals) and bicycle traffic (bicycle detection list that uses the above strategies.
and signal timing).
As part of the strategic ITS planning effort, the
• Reserve 20 percent of the proposed alloca- list of projects/initiatives and the four allocation
tion to fund a countywide ITS operations,
strategies were distributed to the cities, county
management and maintenance program
managed by VTA. and Caltrans for review. A series of meetings

VA L L E Y T R A N SP ORTAT I O N PLAN 2035 | 57

 were held with each city and the county to VTA serves as the countywide planning agency
determine if updates were required. The for bicycle projects. In this capacity, VTA leads
outcome of these series of meetings revealed a the development and implementation of the
shift in the original fund allocation recommen- Countywide Bicycle Plan and develops the
dations, where operations, management and Bicycle Technical Guidelines (BTG). VTA also
maintenance needs have become the greatest has a bicycle count program and assists and
need in the region. The greatest needs, in order encourages Member Agencies with their data
of greatest frequency, are as follows: collection. Future data collection plans include

1. Operations, management and a countywide bicycle and pedestrian collision

maintenance programs
monitoring program. VTA is involved in other
2. Traffic flow improvement project for regional and countywide bicycle improvement
all users such as traffic signal timing;
improve access for pedestrians and and coordination efforts including the devel-
bicycles; improve transit operations; opment of a new Complete Streets Program,
and safety
which is discussed in Chapter 3.
3. Traffic Signal Systems projects

4. Traffic Operations Center (TOC) projects Bicycle Expenditure Plan

5. Traffic surveillance projects such as Regional bicycle projects are eligible to apply
cameras and in pavement loops
for inclusion in the Bicycle Expenditure
6. Communications between traffic signals,
Program (BEP) which was initiated in
TOC and other traffic operations systems
(TOS) FY 2000–2001. To date over two dozen

7. Emergency Response System projects BEP projects have been completed. Over the

8. Other projects that do not fall under any 2010–2035 time period, the BEP will have
of the above listed project types $160 million to fund bicycle projects. The
funding is a combination of:
BICYCLE PROGRAM
• Transportation Funds for Clean Air
VTA has developed a comprehensive bicycle
(funded through the BAAQMD)
program dedicated to improving the bicycle
• Transportation Development Act Article 3
infrastructure in Santa Clara County. VTA
funds
believes that the bicycle network is an essential
• Regional Bicycle/Pedestrian Program Funds
component of a fully integrated, multimodal,
(Transportation Enhancements Program
countywide transportation system. VTA is and Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality
committed to improving bicycling conditions to Improvement Program in FY 2006–2010)

enable and encourage people of all ages to bike • Local Fees

to work, school, errands and for recreation.

58 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 C H AP TE R TWO CAPITAL IN V E S TMENT P RO GRAM

VTA administers and distributes funds from in the Local Streets and County Roads Program,

these sources to Member Agencies, match- the Livable Communities and Pedestrian

ing appropriate project types and funding Program and the Expressway Program.

amounts with the requirements of each fund

A complete description of the VTA Bicycle
source. VTA assists Member Agencies as
Program is addressed in the next chapter.
necessary to comply with the various regional,

State and Federal procedural rules of each Bicycle Project Lists

fund source. Project sponsors/Member The project lists shown on pages 60
Agencies are required to provide a minimum through 63 represent the entire program of
20 percent match to receive BEP funding. The bicycle projects and total $332 million. In
BEP projects list is updated approximately early 2009, VTA’s Bicycle and Pedestrian
every four years for project changes and cost Advisory Committee and Technical Advisory
increases to align with the VTP schedule. Committee prioritized the projects and alloted

the $160 million allocation for this program

Recognizing that transportation is multimodal,
provided by the VTP.
several projects on the BEP list are also included

VA L L E Y T R A N SP ORTAT I O N PLAN 2035 | 59

 FIGURE 2-7 Bicycle Projects in Santa Clara County

South County

60 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 C H AP TE R TWO CAPITAL IN V E S TMENT P RO GRAM

TABLE 2-8 Bicycle Projects in Santa Clara County

VTP COST
ID JURISDICTION BICYCLE PROJECT TITLE (‘08 MILLIONS)

B1 Campbell Campbell Ave. Improvements at SR 17 and Los Gatos Creek $1.50

B2 Campbell Los Gatos Creek Expansion on the west side 2.50

B3 Cupertino Mary Ave. (I-280) Bicycle and Pedestrian Overcrossing 15.00

B4 Gilroy Uvas Creek Trail Feasibility Study (not mapped) 0.15

B5 Los Altos Adobe Creek Bike/Ped Bridge Replacement 0.50

B6 Los Altos Hills Moody Rd./El Monte Rd. Bike Improvements Segments 1, 2, and 3 3.50

B7 Los Altos Hills El Monte Rd.: Stonebrook Dr. to Voorhees 0.20

B8 Morgan Hill West Llagas Creek Trail: Spring Rd. to Edes Ct. 0.65

B9 Mountain View Stevens Creek Trail Reach 4 Segment 2 10.00

Stevens Creek Trail Reach 4 Segment 2:

B10 Mountain View 12.00
Dale Ave./Heatherstone Wy. to Mt. View High School
B11 Palo Alto Bicycle Boulevards Network Project (not mapped) 5.00

B12 Palo Alto California Ave. Caltrain Undercrossing 13.00

B13 San Jose Almaden Expwy. Bike/Ped Overcrossing 5.70

B14 San Jose Guadelupe River Trail: Montague Expwy. to Alviso 5.00

B15 San Jose Los Gatos Creek Trail: Auzerais Ave. to Park Ave.(San Carlos St. Segment) 5.00

B16 San Jose Los Gatos Creek Trail: Park Ave. to Santa Clara 7.33

B17 San Jose Coyote Creek Trail: Montague Expwy. to Oakland Rd. 7.50

B18 San Jose Coyote Creek Trail: Oakland Rd. to Watson Park 7.50

B19 San Jose Coyote Creek Trail: Watson Park to Williams St. Park 5.00

B20 San Jose Coyote Creek Trail: Williams St. Park to Kelley Park) 2.50

B21 San Jose Branham Ln./US 101 Bicycle and Pedestrian Overcrossing 7.00

B22 Santa Clara San Tomas Aquino Creek Trail: North of Monroe Ave. to SR 237 10.00

B23 Santa Clara San Tomas Aquino Creek Trail: Monroe Ave. to Cabrillo Ave. to southern city limit 1.60

B24 Saratoga PG & E DeAnza Creek Trail (Reach 3) 2.50

B25 Saratoga/Los Gatos SR 9 Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Improvements 2.70

B26 Sunnyvale Sunnyvale East Drainage Trail 1.33

B27 Sunnyvale Borregas Bike Lanes between Weddell and Persian 0.06

B28 Sunnyvale Borregas Bike Bridge over US 101 and SR 237 8.70

B29 Sunnyvale Bernardo Ave. Caltrain Undercrossing 8.50

B31 SCC Roads McKean Rd. Shoulder Improvements 6.60

B32 SCC Roads Foothill–Loyola Bridge 0.46

B33 SCC Roads Loyola Bridge over Foothill Expwy. 7.00

B34 SCC Roads Page Mill/I-280 Interchange Improvements 6.60

B35 VTA Santa Clara Caltrain Undercrossing 8.00

VA L L E Y T R A N SP O RTAT I ON PLAN 2035 | 61

 TABLE 2-8 (CONT’D) Bicycle Projects in Santa Clara County
VTP COST
ID JURISDICTION BICYCLE PROJECT TITLE (‘08 MILLIONS)

B36 VTA Pilot Bicycle Parking Program (not mapped) $0.25

B37 Campbell Widen Los Gatos Creek Trail on east side 0.30

B38 Campbell San Tomas Aquno Creek Trail 1.50

B39 Campbell Portals Project: Widening Campbell Ave. under SR 17 3.00

B40 Gilroy Western Ronan Channel SCVWD service road: Leavesley to Llagas Creek 2.70

B41 Gilroy Gilroy Sports Park 4.80

B42 Gilroy Lions Creek SCVWD service road west of Kern Ave. 1.90

B43 Gilroy Lions Creek SCVWD service road west of Santa Teresa Blvd./Day Rd. 0.60

B44 Gilroy Northern Uvas Creek SCVWD service road 1.90

B45 Gilroy Lions Creek SCVWD service road west 0.90

B47 Los Altos Miramonte Ave. Bikeway Improvement Project 1.40

B48 Los Altos Stevens Creek Link Trail 3.00

B49 Los Gatos Blossom Hill Rd. Sidewalks & Bicycle Lanes 0.80

B50 Los Gatos Los Gatos Creek Trail Connector to SR 9 1.00

B51 Milpitas Montague Expwy. BART Pedestrian Overcrossing 15.00

B52 Morgan Hill US 101 and Cochrane Road 0.60

B53 Morgan Hill Madrone Recharge Channel Bike Path 0.50

B54 Mountain View US 101/Permanente Creek Trail Bike/Ped Crossing 9.50

B55 Mountain View Stevens Creek Trail/Middlefield Rd. North Side Access 0.70

B56 Mountain View Stevens Creek Trail/Landels School Trailhead 0.60

B59 Palo Alto US 101/Adobe Creek Ped./Bicycle Grade Separation 13.00

B61 San Jose Blossom Hill: Calero Bikeways 0.30

B62 San Jose Brokaw–Coleman: Airport Bikeway 1.00

B63 San Jose Capitol Ave./Capitol Expwy. Bikeway 0.30

B64 San Jose Charcot Bikeway 0.40

B65 San Jose Five Wounds Trail: Watson Park to Williams St. Park 5.00

B66 San Jose Hedding St. Bikeway 0.20

B67 San Jose HWY 237 Bikeway 0.40

B68 San Jose Monroe Bikeway 0.10

B69 San Jose Newhall St. Bike/Ped Overcrossing over Caltrain 7.00

B70 San Jose Park Ave./San Fernando St./San Antonio Bikeway 0.10

B71 San Jose Penitencia Creek Trail: Coyote Creek to King Rd. 3.75

B72 San Jose Thompson Creek Trail: Eastridge Transit Center to Evergreen College 6.40

B73 San Jose Willow Glen Spur Trail 2.50

62 | VALLEY TRANS PORTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 C H AP TE R TWO CAPITAL IN V E S TMENT P RO GRAM

TABLE 2-8 (CONT’D) Bicycle Projects in Santa Clara County

VTP COST
ID JURISDICTION BICYCLE PROJECT TITLE (‘08 MILLIONS)

B74 Santa Clara San Tomas Aquino Creek Spur Trail 1.00

B75 Saratoga Blue Hills School RR Crossing Safety Project $0.38

B76 Sunnyvale Mary Ave. Bike Lanes 0.52

B77 Sunnyvale Maude Ave. Bike Lanes 0.22

B78 Sunnyvale Stevens Creek Trail Connector 1.40

B79 Sunnyvale Mathilda Avenue:Bike lanes from US 101 to El Camino Real 3.90

B80 Sunnyvale Pastoria Avenue: Bike lanes from El Camino Real to Evelyn Ave. 0.24

B81 Sunnyvale Hendy Avenue: Bike lanes from Sunnyvale Ave. to Fair Oaks Ave. 0.67

B92 SCC Roads Santa Teresa Blvd./Hale Ave. Bicycle Delineation (not mapped) 0.50

B93 SCC Roads Bicycle Detection: Expressways and Santa Teresa/Hale (not mapped) 2.10

B94 SCC Parks Los Gatos Creek Trail: Lark Ave. to Blossom Hill Dr. 1.50

B95 SCC Parks Coyote Creek Trail: Silicon Valley Blvd. to Metcalf Rd. 1.10

B96 VTA Capitol Caltrain Station Crossing 8.50

N/A Gilroy SCVWD service road along western edge of Llagas Creek: Farrell Ave. to Day Rd. 1.70

Permanente Creek Trail undercrossing of Charleston Rd. and extension of the

N/A Mountain View 4.20
trail south from Old Middlefield Way to Middlefield Rd.
N/A Mountain View Hetch Hetchy Trail: Middlefield Rd. to Shoreline Blvd. 0.80

N/A Palo Alto South Palo Alto Caltrain Pedestrian/Bicycle Grade Separation 13.00

N/A San Jose River Oaks Bikeway 0.30

N/A Sunnyvale Northside Access at Sunnyvale Caltrain Station 6.00

N/A Sunnyvale Wildwood Avenue: Bike lanes from Bridgewood to city limits 0.07

N/A Sunnyvale Duane Avenue: Bike lanes from Fair Oaks to Lawrence 1.91

N/A Sunnyvale Hollenbeck Avenue: Bike lanes from Grand Coulee to Danforth 0.20

N/A Sunnyvale Bernardo Avenue: Bike lanes from El Camino Real to Evelyn Ave. 0.16

N/A Sunnyvale Tasman Drive: Bike lanes from Fair Oaks Ave. to city limits 0.30

N/A Sunnyvale Bernardo Avenue: Bike lanes from Homestead Rd. to Fremont Ave. 0.13

N/A Sunnyvale Belleville Way: Bike lanes from Fremont Ave. to Homestead Rd. 0.12

N/A Sunnyvale Remington Drive: Bike lanes from Mary Ave. to Tilton Ave. 0.18

N/A Sunnyvale California Avenue: Bike lanes from Mary Ave. to Fair Oaks Ave. 0.23

N/A Sunnyvale Moffett Park Area Bike/Ped Trails 5.90

N/A SCC Parks Coyote Creek Trail: Metcalf Rd. to Malaguerra. Ave. 2.80

Total $332.01

N/A Not funded through VTP. Not mapped.

VA L L E Y T R A N SP O RTAT I ON PLAN 2035 | 63

 COMMUNITY DESIGN AND ship for pursuing transportation and land
TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM use goals. VTA has led the region with this
The Community Design and Transportation innovative program, with the CDT Program
(CDT) Program is VTA’s Board-adopted serving as a model for other agencies includ-
program for integrating transportation and ing the FOCUS program recently developed
land use. The CDT Program and its Manual of by the Association of Bay Area Governments
Best Practices for Integrating Transportation (ABAG) and the Metropolitan Transportation
and Land Use were adopted by the VTA Board Commission (MTC) as part of the 2009
of Directors in 2002. Subsequently, the CDT Regional Transportation Plan.
Program and manual were endorsed by each
The CDT Program structure reflects VTA’s
Member Agency in 2003 through formal
role as a multimodal transportation provider.
resolutions. The CDT Program continues
It considers all transportation modes and
to evolve and function as an active partner-

64 | VALLEY TRANS PORTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 C H AP TE R TWO CAPITAL IN V E S TMENT P RO GRAM

stresses the importance of a healthy pedes- current allocation methodology is based on

trian environment, concentrated mixed-use Santa Clara County’s population share of

development patterns integrated with transit the regional total and on the amount MTC

service, innovative street design, and the requires for dedication to the county share

interrelationships of buildings and sites with (currently split on a 25 percent share for

transportation facilities and services. The counties and a 75 percent share for MTC).

CDT Program is designed around a frame- Policies for the 2009 RTP are currently under

work of community cores along the major development; VTA will actively pursue a

transportation corridors and surrounding change in policy to pass through 75 percent

transit station areas. to counties with adopted CDT-like programs,

and to pursue additional funds for the CDT

CDT Grant Fund Programs
Program. In addition, VTA will pursue other
The CDT Program provides planning and
fund sources that could be administered
capital grant funds for transportation-related
through the CDT Program.
projects that develop land use policies sup-

portive of the CDT Principles, improve com- Developing a Project List

munity access to transit, provide multimodal Project lists for the CDT Program are regularly

transportation facilities, and enhance the developed through a competitive call-for-

pedestrian environment along transportation projects. The timing and frequency of the calls

corridors, in core areas and around transit depend on funding availability. VTA currently

stations. expects to allocate about $360 million to this

program over the 25-year life of the plan.

VTA receives funding for these grant

programs from MTC’s Transportation for Additional information on the Community

Livable Communities (TLC) Program. The Design and Transportation Program and other

policies for funding the TLC Program come VTA urban design/land use-related programs

through the development of the RTP. The is provided in Appendix B.

VA L L E Y T R A N SP ORTAT I O N PLAN 2035 | 65

CHAPTER THREE planning initiatives 3
VTA’s Capital Investment Program is supported and
complemented by a comprehensive array of ongoing and future
planning initiatives. These initiatives take the forms of policies,
plans and studies that range in application from specific projects
to how VTA functions as an agency. They address key goals
such as improving the efficiency of the transportation system,
developing new sources of revenue and improving our model
of growth to embrace shorter trips and multiple travel modes.
Taken as a whole, these initiatives support the mission and vision
of VTA and form a roadmap for meeting the challenges Santa
Clara County faces over the next 25 years.

This chapter discusses the breadth of planning initiatives as

they apply to each of the Capital Investment Program areas, as
well as to VTA and Santa Clara County’s built environment and
transportation system.

VA L L E Y T R A N SP ORTAT I O N PLAN 2035 | 67

 HIGHWAYS RAMP METERING

Over the past few decades, Santa Clara County Ramp metering helps reduce traffic congestion

has typically addressed highway congestion by by limiting the rate at which vehicles can enter

adding capacity to—and expanding—the highway a highway. This strategy avoids overloading

system. While this strategy has been successful the highway system with additional vehicles

in accommodating more vehicles, it has reached at known bottlenecks and keeps the density

its limits as a practical solution. The lack of cheap of vehicles at a level that allows for better

land and available funding has made adding operations. VTP 2035 includes nine meter-

lanes prohibitively expensive. As such, VTA’s next ing projects along the US 101 corridor in its

generation of highway improvements emphasizes highway program.

efficiency and pricing to generate revenue to pay

CONGESTION PRICING
for future corridor improvements.
Congestion pricing seeks to maintain a con-
When a highway is at or nearing capacity, stant acceptable level of operation by charging
each successive vehicle entering the highway users a fee. As applied to Santa Clara County,
exercises a greater negative effect on traffic congestion pricing would first take the form of
conditions than the vehicle that precedes express lanes on highways. Express lanes are
it. As such, it takes only a small percentage modified HOV lanes that allow non-carpool
of additional vehicles to have a significantly drivers to use the lane for a fee that varies
adverse impact on overall operations. Ramp depending on traffic conditions. The cost of
metering and congestion pricing stand out as entry would vary to maintain a minimum
cost-effective strategies to avoid overcrowding speed of 55 miles per hour and HOV users will
and maximize existing lane capacity. remain able to use the facility at no cost.

68 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 C H AP TE R TH R E E PL AN N ING INITIATIVES

This strategy takes advantage of excess capacity implementation projects such as the
in HOV lanes and has the added benefit of rais- SR 152/SR 156 Interchange, the US 101/
ing revenue for future corridor improvements, SR 85 Interchange and the I-880 widening
including express or freeway-based BRT between US 101 and SR 237.
services operating in those lanes. By allowing
VTA is currently engaged in highway planning
non-carpool drivers to use express lanes, the
studies, discussed below, to inform the next
burden on mixed-flow lanes is reduced. VTP
generation of highway projects.
2035 identifies potential express lane projects

on all major highways in Santa Clara County SR 85 and US 101 Express Lanes
excluding SR 17 and portions of I-280 and US This study follows and updates the Santa
101. At the time of this writing, legislation is Clara County HOT Lane Feasibility Study that
in place that allows the development of two was completed in 2005. The study involves
express lane corridors. US 101/SR 85 and the the preliminary engineering, conceptual
SR 237/I-880 connector are the top corridors alternatives and public outreach work to
for near-term implementation. VTA will seek develop express lanes on SR 85 and the US
authority to complete the entire network. 101 corridor. The study analysis will recom-

mend an implementation plan for the Silicon

HIGHWAY PLANNING STUDIES
Valley Express Lanes program with a recom-
Over the last several years, VTA had con-
mendation to convert existing carpool lanes
ducted highway planning studies to identify
to express lanes on SR 85 and US 101 by 2012
projects to be included as part of the VTP
and 2015 respectively.
planning process. These studies have led to

VA L L E Y T R A N SP O RTAT I ON PLAN 2035 | 69

 Investigation of Innovative Pricing US 101 Implementation—Trimble
Practices for Silicon Valley Road to Mabury Road/Taylor Street
This study, funded by the Federal Highway This project will prepare an implementation

Administration (FHWA) 2006 Value Pricing plan for the US 101 corridor from the Trimble/

Pilot Program, would evaluate three different De La Cruz Road Interchange to the proposed

elements of pricing practices consisting of: Mabury Road/Taylor Street Interchange. The

• Conversion of a general purpose lane to an scope of this project requires traffic studies and
express lane mapping of the corridor area and preparation

• Development of Express/Rapid Bus of geometric concepts and phasing implemen-

network on price-managed lanes tation plan for the 4th Street/Zanker Road,

• Transit credit-based congestion pricing Mabury Road/Taylor Street and Old Oakland

Road Interchanges. The implementation plan

The three elements combined would address
will determine which projects will be advanced
innovative ways to create a multimodal value
to the project study report phase, and the
pricing program in the region. These efforts
timing of the projects. The study is anticipated
would help shift trips away from driving alone to
to be completed in 2009.
carpooling and using transit, provide enhance-

ments for managing traffic flow, and create a US 101/Trimble Road/

potential revenue source to fund transportation De La Cruz Boulevard Interchange
improvements and transit operations. The project will study improvements to the

US 101—Trimble Road/De La Cruz Boulevard

El Camino Real/SR 85/SR 237/
Interchange, including:
Middlefield Road
• Replacing the existing US 101 overcrossing
This project will include operational

improvements to the El Camino Real/ • Widening De La Cruz Boulevard/Trimble

Road to six travel lanes through the inter-
SR 85 Interchange, auxiliary lanes on SR 85
change limits
from El Camino Real to the SR 85/SR 237
• Reconstructing the southbound exit loop
Interchange and operational improvements
to a new partial cloverleaf design and
at the Middlefield Road/SR 237 Interchange. incorporating a new intersection on
Currently the project is in the conceptual De La Cruz Boulevard

study phase with a Project Study Report/ • Adding a southbound auxiliary lane from
Project Development Support expected to be De La Cruz Boulevard to the SR 87 exit
ramp, depending on results of operational
completed in 2009.
studies

70 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 C H AP TE R TH R E E PL AN N ING INITIATIVES

• Configure ramp termini to be pedestrian- collected in that corridor, including

and bicycle-friendly expanded travel options and funding to
support non-highway options that enhance
Currently, VTA is working on the project effectiveness and throughput
study report, which is expected to be complete
• Implement the Express Lane Network in
in mid-2009. the Bay Area, taking advantage of existing
highway right-of-way
Calaveras Boulevard Widening
• Toll revenue collected from the Express
This work is anticipated to include widening Lane Network will be used to operate the
the existing four-lane facility to six lanes, from Express Lane Network; to maintain Express
Lane system equipment and software; to
Town Center Drive in the east to Abel Street
provide transit services and improvements
on the west. In addition, the work assumes
in the corridors; to finance and construct the
auxiliary lanes will be added on the current Express Lane Network; and to provide other
six-lane facility between Abel Street and corridor improvements

Abbott Avenue. The proposed widening will

MTC Freeway Performance
require widening/replacement of the bridges
Initiative
over Main Street and the Union Pacific
The Freeway Performance Initiative (FPI) is a
Railroad tracks to accommodate the proposed
relatively new MTC effort to improve the opera-
BART extension. Currently, VTA is working
tions, safety and management of the Bay Area’s
on the PSR, which is expected to be completed
freeway system. The purpose of the FPI is to
in mid-2009.
develop a comprehensive strategic plan to guide

the next generation of freeway investment.

MTC Regional Express Lane Study
The development and implementation of Studies of the major corridors in the Bay Area
a Bay Area Express Lane Network has five are currently being conducted by MTC. These
primary objectives: studies focus on freeway operations, incor-

• More effectively manage the region’s free- porating parallel arterials and transit, and
ways in order to provide higher vehicle and include documentation of existing problems,
passenger throughput and reduce delays for
development of viable short-term and long-
those traveling within each travel corridor
term solutions, preparation of rough cost
• Provide an efficient, effective, consistent
estimates, and an assessment of impacts and
and seamless system for users of the
network benefits of the proposed solutions. The effect

of a small number of regional multi-corridor

• Provide benefits to travelers within each
corridor commensurate with the revenues strategies is also being assessed.

VA L L E Y T R A N SP ORTAT I O N PLAN 2035 | 71

 The projects within Santa Clara County in improve efficiency and responsibly accommo-

the FPI are included in VTP 2035. These date bicycle and pedestrian traffic. The results

projects consist of ramp metering and road- of CCEPS will inform future VTP planning.

way improvements along three highways:

US 101, I-680 and I-880.

LOCAL STREETS AND
COUNTY ROADS
EXPRESSWAYS VTA’s Member Agencies serve as the lead

Santa Clara County’s expressway system is agencies for projects in this program area.

owned and operated by the County Roads Though projects frequently are closely

and Airport Department. Expressway plan- coordinated with and receive input from VTA,

ning is guided by the Comprehensive County Member Agencies act on their autonomy

Expressway Planning Study (CCEPS) which regarding project design and implementation.

was approved in January 2009. The study

VTA will actively work with local jurisdictions
identifies system needs and projects to
to ensure projects achieve the highest stan-

72 | VA LLEY TRANS PORTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 C H AP TE R TH R E E PL AN N ING INITIATIVES

dards of value and to implement CDT Program with these cities to integrate the land use pat-
recommendations, routine accommodation terns envisioned in those plans with the plans,
and Caltrans DD64 elements (best practice projects and services provided by VTA.
concepts for integrating bicycling and walking)
STRATEGIES FOR EXISTING
in local streets projects.
SERVICE IMPROVEMENTS
Planning for Market Needs Using
TRANSIT information from market-segmentation stud-
VTA is committed to providing the high- ies, surveys and other plans and studies VTA
quality transit service its customers expect will design and re-design its existing transit
and deserve. Since the adoption of VTP 2030 system to better serve existing and capture
in 2005 VTA has completed several transit- new high-ridership markets. A market-based
related planning efforts designed to guide approach is designed to match basic elements
future transit investments such as: such as travel, attitudes, desired amenities,

• The adoption of Service Design Guidelines environment and services in a way that VTA
and a Transit Sustainability Policy can prioritize the deployment of its resources
• The completion of a Market-based and maximize its market share. Another
Comprehensive Operations Analysis (COA) dimension to this study will be identifying the
• The service implementation of the COA origins and destinations of these markets.
recommendations.
Headway Improvements When financial
These collective efforts have resulted in the
conditions allow, future service expansion will
development and implementation of a new
focus on improving service frequencies on the
model for delivering transit service in the
core bus and LRT network.
county.
Expanded Service Hours When financial

COORDINATION WITH conditions allow, expanded hours of service

MEMBER AGENCIES FOR will be explored for lines with high evening
GENERAL PLAN UPDATES
ridership demand. These improvements
As of the writing of this document, several
also support welfare-to-work initiatives and
cities in Santa Clara County are undergoing
Community-Based Transportation Plans.
comprehensive General Plan (GP) updates.

San Jose, Santa Clara, Los Gatos, Milpitas and Operating Optimization and

Palo Alto are all engaged in GP updates with Effectiveness Ongoing efforts, informed

various horizon years. VTA is working closely by studies such as the Light Rail Systems

VA L L E Y T R A N SP O RTAT I ON PLAN 2035 | 73

 Needs Study, will allow VTA to explore Service Management Plan will modify bus

options for improving operational efficiency and rail service through measures such as

and flexibility to offer premium services such increases or decreases in service hours or

as faster transit speeds and express (skip stop) frequency, marketing and promotion, or

trains on the LRT system. routing changes.

ANNUAL TRANSIT SERVICE TRANSIT PLANNING STUDIES

PLAN PROCESS
The VTP 2035 vision for improving transit
VTA continually monitors use of its transit
service focuses on key high-ridership cor-
network to determine where and when
ridors, system refinements and improved
service improvements and expansions may be
operating efficiency. To get more from
needed, and this process is now guided by the
existing investments, take advantage of
TSP/SDG mentioned above. This information
“green” transportation opportunities and
is considered as VTA develops its biennial ten-
address specific community needs, VTA will
year Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP), and
use new technologies, innovative planning
its Annual Transit Service Plans. These plans
and marketing strategies, and smaller-sized
are used to implement detailed transit service
vehicles where appropriate. The vision for
improvements, route changes and refine-
these improvements is to develop an expand-
ments, and improve productivity. Until new
ing ridership base by providing higher-quality,
sources of additional funding can be secured
market-oriented service.
for operations, VTA will work within the exist-
VTP 2035 outlines several planning initiatives
ing resources it has for operations, and will
and studies to be conducted to prepare for
continue to improve services to its current and
transit delivery, refinement and expansion.
potential new customers.
These studies, outlined below, are designed to
Beyond the implementation of its new bus
deliver more effective and productive service.
service in January 2008, VTA has made a

commitment to continually evaluate the Transit Sustainability Policy,

Service Design Guidelines
system based on performance standards
The Transit Sustainability Policy (TSP) and
established in the SDG. The Quarterly Service
accompanying Service Design Guidelines
Performance Report provides a report card on
(SDG), adopted by the VTA Board in 2007,
the performance of every line in the system.
provide policy and technical guidance for the
Based on these quarterly updates, the Annual
development of new transit capital projects

74 | VALLEY TRANS PORTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 C H AP TE R TH R E E PL AN N ING INITIATIVES

using standards and metrics for the range of New Transit Corridors Program
VTA transit service types. The document also The New Transit Corridors Program consists
establishes a program for continual monitor- of a series of studies intended to establish a
ing and evaluation of VTA services that in turn rational planning framework for future transit
inform service changes through the annual capital expansion. While each study investi-
service planning process. Using the SDG as gates a different aspect of the transit capital
a reference point, VTA is exploring improve- program, the studies are linked by policy and
ments to the transit network through several program objectives established by the VTA
upcoming efforts: the Bus Rapid Transit Board of Directors.
Strategic Plan, the Light Rail System Analysis,
Bus Rapid Transit Strategic Plan VTA
Highway-Based BRT Alternatives Analysis
is in the process of producing a strategic plan
and Transit Corridor Improvement Plans. The
for implementation of a Bus Rapid Transit
SDG will periodically be reviewed and refined
(BRT) system in Santa Clara County. The
as needed to ensure that transit projects in
objectives of the strategic plan are to: estab-
Santa Clara County are held to current stan-
lish a brand identity for future BRT vehicles,
dards of efficiency and ridership.
stations and supporting materials; evaluate

First and Last Mile Study candidate corridors based on the SDG and

Providing efficient transit services which rely develop cost estimates for implementation

on density and concentrated job centers is and future service; and, develop an implemen-

difficult and costly in Santa Clara County. The tation plan to guide VTA in developing BRT

benefits of offering trunk line transportation facilities and funding future development and

services represented by commuter rail, light operation of the BRT system.

rail or bus rapid transit—or even conventional Depending on the outcome of this effort,
bus lines—are often lost at either the origin supporting studies may be needed. These may
or destination where potential transit riders include a systems linkage study to identity
are confronted by long walks over difficult opportunities to interconnect BRT lines with
terrain or unfriendly environments. Providing other modes, and may be incorporated into
efficient and attractive options for the “first other efforts.
and last mile” connection is the focus of this
Light Rail Operations Analysis and
study, which will explore shuttles and other
Improvements The Light Rail Transit
innovative approaches to connecting riders to
(LRT) System Analysis will evaluate current
home, work place and major activity centers.

VA L L E Y T R A N SP ORTAT I O N PLAN 2035 | 75

 and future market conditions along with Highway-Based BRT Alternatives

possible operating or capital improvements Analysis The Highway-Based BRT

to the system in the next 20 years. The Alternatives Analysis is a comprehensive

overarching goal of the analysis is to increase evaluation of the market for freeway-based

ridership on the system by making LRT more express bus services in Santa Clara and its

competitive in the overall travel market. This neighboring counties. VTA’s own express

will be accomplished by improving operating bus services will also be evaluated for their

speeds, flexibility and efficiency. It is expected effectiveness to capture the potential market.

that the study will produce recommended How VTA packages this service, from stations

capital and operational improvements. No and routes to brand identity and vehicles, will

funding has been identified for the potential be part of the business plan. VTA is working

capital improvement which could be closely with large employers in Santa Clara

significant. VTA will need to actively prioritize County in an effort to shape services that meet

these investments within its future capital their employees’ needs.

program and seek funding.

Transit Corridor Improvement Plans

Transit Corridor Improvement Plans are

76 | VALLEY TRANS PORTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 C H AP TE R TH R E E PL AN N ING INITIATIVES

defined in VTA’s TSP and SDG as an option first phase of the Community Bus Program

for cities or communities that are seeking was implemented. This involved bringing

transit enhancements in a corridor but do not contract services in-house (including the

reach the minimum thresholds for upgrades Los Gatos pilot program), introducing five

to higher levels of service. VTA will be work- new lines and converting existing lines to

ing with cities and communities as needed to Community Bus lines. This was followed by

develop Transit Corridor Improvement Plans expansion of 12 additional routes as part of

that will identify future transit upgrades. This the new bus service in January 2008. In addi-

process will have special importance with the tion, there are plans to expand Community

comprehensive General Plan updates currently Bus lines in the future with the purchase of 25

underway in many Santa Clara County cities. more vehicles as demand increases.

Moreover, based on the evaluation contained

Many of the Community Bus lines were con-
in the BRT Strategic Plan and LRT Systems
verted from existing local bus routes and did
Analysis, corridors identified for potential
not benefit from a comprehensive planning
future upgrades to BRT or LRT may require
process to understand needs and opportuni-
or benefit from Corridor Improvement Plans.
ties. For new Community Bus lines, VTA will
Additional corridors that are identified for fur-
be guided by planning studies which may
ther analysis in other studies and other forums
include a comprehensive evaluation of route
such as board workshops will also be subject to
design, implementation policies and needs .
these plans.

Fleet Management Plan

Community Bus Program
The Fleet Management Plan is a complemen-
The community bus concept uses small
tary document to the Short Range Transit
vehicles (25 seats) that function as circulator-
Plan and outlines a strategic direction for
type service in communities that may have
the retirement, replacement and procure-
low transit ridership or operational obstacles
ment of bus and light rail vehicles. The Fleet
such as hillsides or narrow streets. Vehicles
Management Plan is updated on a bi-annual
have distinctive branding and routes are
basis and assumes a 10-year planning horizon.
designed to integrate with the larger system as
Significant inputs into the plan are a forecast
circulator and feeder services.
of operating hours and revenue together with

In 2005, VTA introduced a Community Bus anticipated ridership. In addition, the mix of

pilot program in Los Gatos. In July 2007, the vehicles is an integral part of the plan. The

VA L L E Y T R A N SP O RTAT I ON PLAN 2035 | 77

 fleet mix is largely determined by anticipated Several planning efforts related to Transit

product lines—such as BRT, Community Bus Centers throughout the VTA system will

and others—offered by VTA. be undertaken as system expansion occurs

and the existing system is modernized to

Transit Facilities Planning
meet future needs. A near-term effort at the
VTA is currently in the process of developing
Eastridge Transit Center will occur as the
a Facilities Master Plan that will evaluate the
Capitol Expressway corridor undergoes transit
future needs of VTA’s transit operations and
enhancement. In addition, Palo Alto’s transit
the adequacy of the existing yards and facili-
center will be the subject of a study seeking to
ties to accommodate those needs. Included in
better integrate the variety of transit operators
this analysis are assessments of future fleet
serving the mid-peninsula area. Finally, future
size and storage requirements, maintenance
transit center expansions are anticipated as
equipment and facilities and administrative
BRT service comes on-line. A special effort
and office space. Other potential uses for VTA
focused on a future transit center at De Anza
property such as joint development opportu-
College will likely begin in advance of the
nities also will be explored.
anticipated Stevens Creek BRT project.

78 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 C H AP TE R TH R E E PL AN N ING INITIATIVES

Eastridge Transit Center Improvement point for bus passengers to access other major

and Access Plan This planning study will bus lines or feeder services. The existing stop

focus on improving transit passenger ameni- at De Anza College is adequate for today’s

ties and pedestrian and bicycle access to operations but will need to expand once BRT

the Eastridge Transit Center. The Eastridge or other new services come on-line. In addi-

Transit Center is the second busiest trans- tion, VTA would like to upgrade the facility to

fer point in the VTA system, behind the provide a greater level of passenger amenities

Downtown Transit Mall. The study will seek such as advanced technology, landscaping,

community input for how to improve access benches and shelters.

to the transit center in preparation for the

Transit Waiting Environments
reconstruction of the facility as a part of an
Capital Plan Transit waiting environments,
enhanced transit investment in the Capitol
commonly known as bus or light rail stops or
Expressway corridor. In addition, the study
stations, will continue to be utilized as transit
will identify strategies for raising the aware-
ridership grows throughout Santa Clara
ness of the center’s transit services, particu-
County. Improving these locations where VTA
larly in communities where English is not the
customers access the system will become a
primary language spoken at home.
challenge as existing facilities age and new

Palo Alto Intermodal Transit Center service is introduced. The Transit Waiting

Comprehensive Plan This comprehensive Environments Study will seek to develop

plan will analyze the bus and shuttle transit standards for stop and station design and

operational needs at the Palo Alto Intermodal facilities, and seek innovative ways to finance

Transit Center and develop a list of capital their improvement and construction over the
projects to improve its vehicle circulation, next 20 years.

transit operations, passenger flow, bicycle

Technology
facilities and transit-oriented development
The communication of transit information in
opportunities within the transit center. The
real-time through media such as signs, mobile
plan will provide a blueprint for future capital
devices or web-based portals will increase
improvements.
as VTA invests in real-time hardware and
De Anza College Transit Center De Anza
software. Plans for the deployment of these
College serves as a western hub of bus opera-
passenger amenities are already taking place
tions for VTA, providing an efficient transfer
with the first installation occurring on the

VA L L E Y T R A N SP O RTAT I ON PLAN 2035 | 79

 heavily traveled El Camino corridor. Future review and changes may affect how VTA
wireless communication will bring a greater proceeds in the future. VTA will monitor the
level of information to VTA passengers. CARB process and take actions accordingly.

Alternative Fuel/Zero-Emission Airport People Mover

Vehicle Program An automated people mover system con-
VTA will investigate options to procure necting San Jose International Airport with
alternative fuel/zero-emission vehicles in nearby transit hubs was anticipated as part of
accordance with its vehicle replacement the 2000 Measure A program and the Airport
program. Staff will explore the feasibility Master Plan. Because airport expansion plans
of implementing new technologies as they have been modified, the City of San Jose is
emerge and in accordance with the California currently exploring public-private partner-
Air Resources Board (CARB) requirements. ships for development of an airport feeder
CARB regulations are currently undergoing transit system.

80 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 C H AP TE R TH R E E PL AN N ING INITIATIVES

Caltrain Capital Needs Study reduced. The South County Commute Transit
Update Service Study will seek to determine the opti-
In 2007, VTA conducted a Capital Needs mal balance between local, express, BRT and
Study evaluating potential capital improve- commuter rail service for the South County
ments to the Caltrain system in Santa Clara commute market.
County. The plan should be updated on a

regular basis as projects are completed, the California High-Speed

Rail Studies
needs of the system change and additional
The California High-Speed Rail (HSR)
studies are undertaken. The 2009 Study
Project is an intra-state high-speed rail link
Update will consider capital needs as Caltrain
currently being planned by the California
service has evolved and include the results of
High-Speed Rail Authority to help meet
the access plan discussed below.
the anticipated increase in travel demand

Caltrain Station Access Study between the Bay Area and Southern

The challenge to increasing ridership is California. The initial phase of the project

dependent on providing efficient access to the calls for a 220-mile-per-hour train to connect

stations in Santa Clara County through auto- the Bay Area and the Los Angeles/Anaheim

mobile parking, bicycle storage, pedestrian area. Later phases would link Sacramento in

improvements and transit/shuttle service. The the north and San Diego in the south.

Caltrain Station Access Study will evaluate

In November 2008, Proposition 1A, a $9.95
additional opportunities for improving access
billion bond measure for High Speed Rail,
to Santa Clara County’s stations through all
was passed by California voters. It authorizes
modes. The Great America Station served by
using State bonds for up to $9 billion for
ACE and Capitol Corridor trains will also be
capital costs of the first segment of HSR—
included in the study.
San Francisco to Los Angeles/Anaheim. It

also authorizes $950 million for commuter

South County Commute Transit
Service Study rail systems that complement HSR and

Connecting San Martin, Morgan Hill and specifically cites the Altamont Pass area.

Gilroy with job centers in Downtown San Jose Planning, engineering and right-of-way

and northern Santa Clara County will become protection will be among the first activities

a greater challenge as South County residen- supported by this bond measure.

tial growth continues and freeway capacity is

VA L L E Y T R A N SP O RTAT I ON PLAN 2035 | 81

 According to the HSR Final Program purposes. The first segment—San Jose to San

Environmental Impact Report, the Pacheco Francisco—is subject to a Memorandum of

Pass is the preferred route from the Central Understanding (MOU) between the Caltrain

Valley to the Bay Area. The route will use the Joint Powers Board (JPB) and the HSR

current Union Pacific Railroad/Caltrain align- Authority. VTA, as a member of the Caltrain

ment from Gilroy to San Francisco in a shared JPB, will have a major role in reviewing the

corridor concept with tracks supporting HSR, engineering effort and its impact on local

Caltrain and other commuter rail services, cities and VTA facilities, as well as engaging

and Union Pacific freight operations. Two in joint planning studies for the two HSR sta-

stations are identified for Santa Clara County: tions. The second segment is in the corridor

Gilroy and San Jose Diridon. A potential owned by Union Pacific south of Tamien

third station may be located in Palo Alto or Station through Gilroy to the Santa Clara

Redwood City. county line. For this segment VTA will work

with the HSR Authority to review engineering

Two different segments in Santa Clara County
work and lead a joint planning effort for the
are identified for planning and engineering
Gilroy Station area.

82 | VALLEY TRANS PORTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 C H AP TE R TH R E E PL AN N ING INITIATIVES

The passage of the HSR bond opens new Dumbarton Rail Bridge, connecting Union

opportunities for VTA, the Caltrain JPB, and City in Alameda County with the Caltrain

our local cities to change the nature of the corridor. Due to funding challenges, the

Caltrain/UPRR alignment through Santa previous target date for implementation

Clara County, and potentially achieve econo- has been postponed pending engineering

mies of scale with activities to modernize studies and additional funding opportunities.

Caltrain. VTA’s stake in HSR comes in several However, a group of transit agencies contin-

different areas: ues to explore enhancing transit service in

• VTA will work with the High Speed Rail the corridor through improvements to the
Authority, the JPB and local cities on existing express bus network. The Highway-
planning and engineering studies defining
Based BRT Alternatives Analysis will
capital improvements in the alignment and
investigate the market and service options
an ultimate corridor “footprint.”
for this corridor.
• VTA will work with the JPB and local cities
on specific HSR projects, such as grade
SANTA CLARA COUNTY GOODS
separations, impacting local road systems
MOVEMENT STUDY
and the rail alignment.
Trucks, freight trains and air cargo help to keep
• VTA will work with cities on station area
Santa Clara County economically competitive
land use issues.
and have a significant impact on our transpor-
Caltrain Electrification and Service tation infrastructure. Ensuring competitive
Improvements Study connections to gateway facilities such as ports
VTA is a partner in the effort to modernize the
and airports is a key component of transporta-
Caltrain system through electrification and
tion policy and future economic development in
other capital improvements that will allow
Santa Clara County. In addition, as Santa Clara
it to increase peak hour service and overall
County seeks ways to reduce greenhouse gas
capacity while reducing noise and air pollu-
emissions, the true impact of goods movement
tion. In addition to electrification, the project
and methods for making this critical function
includes signal upgrades, positive train
more sustainable need to be evaluated. The
control and terminal capacity enhancements
Goods Movement Study will develop a database
in San Jose and San Francisco.
of major shippers in the county and a thorough

understanding of the modes utilized to import

Dumbarton Corridor Study
and export commercial goods. It will also make
The Dumbarton Corridor Study seeks to
projections of how goods movement will change
re-introduce commuter rail service to the

VA L L E Y T R A N SP ORTAT I O N PLAN 2035 | 83

 in the next 25 years and how public agencies in phases and elements may be included in

can work to ensure a competitive region while VTA’s annual service planning process.

maintaining quality of life.

SAN JOSE DIRIDON TRANSIT
Bus Service Expansion Study STATION EXPANSION STUDY FOR
BART AND HIGH-SPEED RAIL
This study will explore options for fund-
Beginning in 2009, the City of San Jose working
ing future expansion of bus service. Service
in collaboration with VTA, Caltrain, and the
expansion may include improved headways,
California HSR Authority will begin a study to
additional early morning and late evening or
develop an expanded Diridon Transit Station
weekend service, and new bus lines or routing.
in Downtown San Jose which will serve as the
Service integration plans will also be exam-
regional transit hub for Silicon Valley. The
ined in this context with regard to Caltrain,
project will integrate existing Caltrain, ACE,
LRT and BRT service improvements, and the
Amtrak, LRT and bus services with planned
BART project. This study may be conducted

84 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 C H AP TE R TH R E E PL AN N ING INITIATIVES

BART, BRT and high-speed rail services. Station The first CBTP in Santa Clara County focused
expansion would be integrated with current on the transportation needs of low-income
plans to have a design/build contract ready by communities in the Gilroy area. This Gilroy
2011 for construction of a San Francisco to San CBTP was completed and adopted by the VTA
Jose segment of the HSR project. Board in July 2006. The plan produced a list

of proposals including:
SILICON VALLEY RAPID TRANSIT
• Express transit service between
PLANNING AND DESIGN
Gilroy and San Jose
The Silicon Valley Rapid Transit (SVRT/
• Community Bus service
BART) project is engaged in ongoing planning

and engineering work. Efforts include station • Enhanced transportation information

services
area plans and transit integration plans. More

information on the SVRT project is provided • Low-cost transit pass program

in Chapter 4. • Bus shelters and other amenities

• Bicycle and pedestrian improvements

Community-Based
Transportation Plans Funding sources and opportunities that
In partnership with MTC, VTA will conduct interested parties can pursue to implement
Community-Based Transportation Plans the recommendations are detailed in the
(CBTP) in areas defined by MTC. The goal of Gilroy CBTP.
the CBTP process is to advance the findings
VTA has conducted studies for East San Jose
from MTC’s Lifeline Transportation Network
and Milpitas. A future study is planned for
Report adopted by the Commission and
Mountain View in 2011.
incorporated into the 2005 RTP. The Lifeline
Transportation Network Report identified Grand Boulevard Initiative
transit needs in economically disadvantaged The Grand Boulevard Initiative (GBI) is a
communities throughout the San Francisco collaboration of 19 cities, Santa Clara and San
Bay Area, and recommended local trans- Mateo Counties, local and regional agencies
portation studies in an effort to address them. and other stakeholders intended to improve
Each community-based transportation study the performance, safety and aesthetics of the
will involve a collaborative approach that El Camino Real corridor from the Diridon
includes residents and community-based orga- Transit Hub in San Jose to Mission Street in
nizations (CBOs) that provide services within Daly City. The ultimate goal is for the corridor
minority and low-income neighborhoods.

VA L L E Y T R A N SP O RTAT I ON PLAN 2035 | 85

 to achieve its full potential as a place for “oldest old” may be dependent on other forms
residents to work, live, shop and play, creating of transportation in the near future (National
links between communities that promote Institutes of Health, 2002, http://www.nih.
walking and transit and an improved and gov/news/pr/jul2002/nia-29.htm).
meaningful quality of life. The GBI builds
To meet the expected increased in demand
upon and supports several other transit and
for alternative modes of non-automobile
land use planning initiatives in Santa Clara
transportation, VTA is continuing to plan
County including the 522 Rapid bus service
for accessible fixed-route bus, light rail and
and service improvements being explored as
paratransit services during the next 30 years.
part of VTA’s BRT Strategic Plan. El Camino
These efforts include:
is also part of VTA’s countywide Community
• Operating a network of fixed route service
Design & Transportation (CDT) Program
including a fleet of accessible bus and
Cores, Corridors, and Station Areas frame- light rail vehicles, providing a range
work, which shows VTA and local jurisdiction of choices for seniors and people with
disabilities.
priorities for supporting concentrated

development in the County. • Ensuring that adequate operating and

capital funds are available to address the
demand for paratransit services as man-
ACCESSIBLE TRANSPORTATION dated by the Americans with Disabilities
SERVICES AND PROGRAMS Act (ADA).

FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES • Constructing transit facilities such as

AND SENIOR CITIZENS transit centers, stations and bus stops

Almost 10 percent of the nation’s drivers that provide for accessibility as mandated
by ADA and in some cases exceeds those
are older than 65, and that percentage could
mandates.
increase rapidly in the next decade as the
• Developing new technologies, such as
post-World War II “baby boom” generation
real-time transit information, trip plan-
reaches that milestone. By 2030, projections ning software, or an automated telephone
suggest one in five Americans will be 65 or customer service system, to improve the
access to transit information.
older, and the number of people aged 85 and

older—currently the fastest growing segment • Providing training and educational

opportunities to seniors and persons with
of the older population—could exceed 10
disabilities on the wide range of mobility
million. Driving cessation has been found to options that could meet their particular
peak at about age 85; suggesting more of the travel needs.

86 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 C H AP TE R TH R E E PL AN N ING INITIATIVES

FIXED ROUTE BUS AND provides eligible individuals with fare

RAIL SERVICE discounts as mandated by State and Federal
To ensure that seniors and customers with law. With a RTC Discount Card, persons with
disabilities have access to work, school, qualifying disabilities and senior citizens (65
medical care and recreational activities, all or over) are entitled to a reduced fare on
of VTA’s buses, light rail vehicles, and transit fixed-route bus, rail and ferry systems
facilities are accessible. Bus and light rail throughout the San Francisco Bay Area. The
operators receive comprehensive training in card makes it easier for qualified persons to
providing service to seniors and persons with demonstrate eligibility.
disabilities.
Customers who are found eligible for para-
Seniors and persons with disabilities may transit have the option to use their paratransit
apply for a Regional Transportation Card photo identification cards to ride VTA bus and
(RTC). The RTC Discount Card program light rail services at no cost.

VA L L E Y T R A N SP O RTAT I ON PLAN 2035 | 87

 The Golden Getaway program provides new services, assessment of opportunities for

bus service for a standard day-pass cost to service refinement and resource reallocation,

non-profit senior groups that qualify per FTA route specific service changes and recommen-

regulations (49 CFR Part 604). Service is dations for further analysis and study.

offered throughout Santa Clara County. Buses

Paratransit Services
are scheduled on a first-come, first-served
Customers who cannot independently use
basis for Thursdays, Saturdays and Sundays.
VTA’s fixed route service for some or all trips
The program objective is to make meaning-
can apply to use VTA’s ADA paratransit ser-
ful connections with seniors through a wide
vice. Paratransit service is provided within the
variety of communication outlets, to encour-
VTA service area and is available on the same
age seniors to ride VTA’s fixed route service
days per week and during the same hours of
to their favorite destinations, and to generate
the day as bus and light rail service.
a favorable view of VTA’s overall service. As

part of the program, VTA is available to give VTA paratransit usage, which includes
groups an on-site, free presentation which customers as well as their personal care
will include travel options for seniors, fare attendants and companions, has increased
information and trip planning assistance. each year from FY 2005 as shown in

Table 3-1.
VTA’s plans for new or improved transit

services also increase the access and mobility VTA’s on-going planning for paratransit seeks
for our customers. Newer services such as to continually refine and improve the service,
BRT and Community Bus are prime examples. from both cost efficiency and quality of service
Current studies of our express bus and light perspectives. The key focus of VTA’s para-
rail systems will also enhance future mobility transit planning will be to continue to provide
options. the operating and capital funds necessary to

meet the ever growing demand. Recent cost

The Transit Sustainability Policy, adopted
related strategies such as purchasing eco-
by the VTA Board of Directors, requires an
friendly Toyota Prius sedans, entering into
annual review of transit services. The review,
fuel purchasing and maintenance agreements
called the Annual Transit Service Plan,
with the county and relocating the vendor’s
includes an evaluation of existing services
operating yard to two VTA-owned facilities
compared to the performance standards
have all provided significant benefits.
contained in the SDG, review of potential

88 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 C H AP TE R TH R E E PL AN N ING INITIATIVES

Long-term vehicle procurement plans and not and has never provided paratransit service

developing a complete paratransit operating directly. Since July 1993, VTA has contracted

and fueling facility are two critical capital with Outreach, Inc. to provide paratransit

planning efforts. Currently 231 vehicles are broker services. VTA’s current agreement with

used exclusively for VTA’s paratransit service. Outreach is in effect through June 30, 2011.

One hundred seventy-three were funded by Outreach receives and schedules trip requests,

VTA and the remainder have been procured builds daily vehicle schedules, handles

and funded by Outreach, Inc., a local non- daily service changes, and subcontracts and

profit operator. VTA and Outreach are eligible monitors the daily service provided. Outreach

to procure vehicles using Federal grants, with also manages the paratransit eligibility and

only a 10 or 20 percent local match, depend- appeals process, simplifying the process and

ing on the grant source. Long-term funding providing a single point of contact for custom-

and vehicle procurement strategies will need ers needing paratransit services. Outreach

to be developed. The paratransit operator began performing these additional functions

currently uses two VTA controlled sites for on July 1, 2006.

daily operations and dispatching and vehicle

Outreach contracts with two types of vendors
storage. Modular buildings and sites with very
to provide paratransit services. Contracts are
limited improvements are being used. VTA’s
currently held with local taxi companies to
facility planning will include developing a
provide service to persons with disabilities
paratransit operating and fueling facility to
not requiring a lift-equipped vehicle (for
accommodate our long-term needs.
example, persons with visual impairments or

Also upcoming is the issuance of a request for cognitive disabilities). Taxi service accounts
proposals for paratransit services. VTA does for approximately 25 to 30 percent of all

TABLE 3-1 Paratransit Trips

FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 FY 2008

Paratransit 930,540 912,668 981,098 1,025,937 1,055,429

Trips

Percent Change — -1.9% 7.5% 4.6% 2.9%

By 2035 it is projected that 2 million trips will be provided annually.

VA L L E Y T R A N SP ORTAT I O N PLAN 2035 | 89

 paratransit trips. Most vehicles used in this operating area for buses. This program is
service are taxis and are not exclusively annually funded, often using Federal grants.
used for paratransit service. Outreach also The CTA reviews the priorities for these bus
contracts with MV Transportation, a nation- stop improvements.
wide transit provider, to operate sedans
Light rail platform retrofit VTA has
and accessible vans (both minivans and
retrofitted its Guadalupe South Line light rail
larger vans) and to deliver the remainder
passenger platforms to allow level boarding at
of the paratransit trips. Santa Clara County
all of the system’s 62 stations. Level boarding
provides vehicle maintenance and some fuel
increases the accessibility of VTA’s light rail
through a contract with Outreach.
service by allowing quick and easy access at
The new paratransit services request for every train doorway.
proposals is planned be issued in late 2009
New fare equipment VTA is in the design
with the selected firm starting operations on
process for procuring new fareboxes and
July 1, 2011.
upgrading light rail ticket vending machines.

The CTA has been involved in the design

TRANSIT FACILITIES
review efforts for both of these projects.
VTA’s transit facility projects are completed

within ADA accessibility standards and Future projects, such as transit centers, BRT,
provide improvements that benefit both LRT and others would also be designed using
seniors and persons with disabilities. VTA ADA guidelines and include the involvement
has also worked with our local disabled of the CTA in reviewing accessibility features.
advisory committee, the Committee for

Transit Accessibility (CTA) to implement TRANSIT INFORMATION

features that exceed ADA accessibility, such VTA regularly evaluates what information

as the guide tiles that are installed at transit people need about its services and programs

centers. Some current and upcoming facility and how people access that information,

projects include: and explores new ways to provide informa-

tion. Below are a few of the information

Bus stop improvement program This
services VTA currently offers or has under
program constructs improvements at bus
development.
stops throughout the county to meet ADA
• Real-time information systems are being
accessibility guidelines, improve the overall
implemented. These programs will provide
pedestrian environment and build a safe

90 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 C H AP TE R TH R E E PL AN N ING INITIATIVES

real-time information on next bus arrival information to customers by connecting

times at stations, transit centers and key Google’s map system to VTA’s transit
bus stops. service database.

• VTA participates in the regional trip • VTA provides accessible documents to the
planning systems sponsored by the MTC public via its website and Board Secretary
through 511. This system provides sched- through the use of accessible pdf document
ule, travel time and trip-planning formatting.
information over the Internet.

• VTA provides multi-language call-in lines MOBILITY OPTIONS PROGRAM

where people can speak with live informa- VTA has created a Mobility Options Program
tion service representatives who assist to provide persons with disabilities and
them with trip planning, fare and schedule
senior citizens with the skills, knowledge
information, transfers and information
about the transit system network. and confidence needed to choose the mode

of transportation (rail, bus, paratransit, etc.)

• VTA’s website is linked to the Google Trip-
Planner which provides step-by-step transit that best meets their needs. Through this

VA L L E Y T R A N SP O RTAT I ON PLAN 2035 | 91

 program, customers are taught the skills that Freedom Program grant administered by

will empower them to freely travel where MTC and VTA local funds will fund the initial

they want to go. Providing senior citizens and three years of the Mobility Options Travel

persons with disabilities the skills to use the Training Program. The program is guided by

fixed route system encourages independence the Mobility Options Task Force, composed

and self-sufficiency. of VTA staff from various departments,

Outreach, Inc., Hope Services, San Andreas

This program has been initiated to help
Regional Center, Silicon Valley Council on
persons with disabilities and seniors gain the
Aging, and CTA members.
skills and knowledge needed to independently

travel on VTA’s transit system. Participants The goal of the program is to increase utiliza-

will receive training provided by either VTA tion of fixed route services by persons who are

staff or by contractors (including mobility able and interested in expanding their per-

and orientation specialists). A Federal New sonal travel options by using VTA’s bus and

92 | VALLEY TRANS PORTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 C H AP TE R TH R E E PL AN N ING INITIATIVES

light rail services. Travel training is planned to ing shortfalls and limited ability to expand

be provided in four basic methods including: roadway capacity, investing in ITS technolo-

• Group travel instruction gies is a promising and practical strategy for

Santa Clara County.

• Tailored one-on-one travel instruction

• Specialized training provided by qualified STRATEGIC ITS PLAN

contractors to meet the specific travel
VTA is developing the Transportation
training needs of individuals with visual
disabilities and individuals with cognitive Operations Strategic Plan for Santa Clara
disabilities County—an ITS plan that will identify an

• Peer model travel instruction provided by implementation plan and project list for a
community organizations with information number of ITS projects. The plan organizes
and “train the trainer” training provided
ITS applications in eight program areas:
by VTA
• Transportation Management
VTA will develop a public outreach campaign
• Transit Management
to ensure community organizations and
• Traveler Information
current and potential passengers receive the

information on the program. • Incident and Emergency Management

• Commercial Vehicle Operations

INTELLIGENT • Rural Transportation Management

TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS • Advanced Vehicle Control and Safety
Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) Systems
refer to a family of technologies that make • ITS Planning
transportation more efficient, improve safety

and/or provide information to travelers.

BICYCLES
Examples of ITS technology include traffic
The past few decades have seen an increase
signal synchronization, roadway conditions
in the number of bicycle trails, paths, lanes
signs and realtime transit arrival times. ITS
and facilities in Santa Clara County. VTA’s
projects tend to be very cost effective as they
bicycle program aims to continue this trend by
are enhancements to existing facilities and can
expanding the number of bicycle facilities and
create significant improvements to roadway
bicycle-friendly thoroughfares and by promot-
efficiency. Given the Federal and State fund-
ing bicycle-friendly design.

VA L L E Y T R A N SP O RTAT I ON PLAN 2035 | 93

 COUNTYWIDE BICYCLE PLAN CCBC will be the most direct and convenient

In August 2008, VTA adopted the Santa routes for bike trips to local and regional

Clara Countywide Bicycle Plan (CBP). The destinations across city or county boundaries.

CBP complements Member Agencies’ bicycle

Across Barrier Connections (ABC)
plans, which are more focused on improve-
ABC is a list of locations of freeways, creeks,
ments serving local needs. The CBP contains
rivers and active rail lines in the county
policies and implementing actions designed
presenting impenetrable barriers to bicycle
to improve bicycle facilities and interagency
circulation. Although the county has over 90
coordination, and will promote bicycling and
pedestrian/bicycle crossings, approximately
bicycle safety in Santa Clara County. The
100 more are needed to provide a basic level
CBP guides the development of major bicycle
of connectivity across these barriers.
facilities by identifying regional needs and

new capital projects including a financially Safe Routes to Transit A list of projects

unconstrained master list of bicycle infra- that provide safe bike access to and from

structure projects. These projects are eligible transit centers are consistent with our role

for consideration for inclusion in the future in countywide transportation planning,

Bicycle Expenditure Program (BEP) updates. promoting the CDT program and as a transit

This list is useful in other VTA and local operator.

agency activities such as development review,

BICYCLE TECHNICAL GUIDELINES
transit planning, highway projects review,
The Bicycle Technical Guidelines (BTG) serve
prioritizing local streets and roads projects,
as a guide for Member Agencies in planning,
and collision monitoring. Lastly, by including
design and maintenance of bicycle facilities
these projects in the CBP, Member Agencies
and bicycle-friendly roadways.
may apply for outside (non-BEP) funds. The

three major categories of projects that the DOWNTOWN SAN JOSE BICYCLE
CBP addresses are: SYSTEM PLANNING
The City of San Jose is directing efforts
Cross-County Bicycle Corridors (CCBC)
towards improving Downtown San Jose’s
Twenty-four on-street bicycle routes and 17
bicycle network system. One particular pro-
trail networks are currently in various stages
posal being pursued is the concept of apply-
of completion with existing, planned and
ing physically separated bike lanes (“cycle
undeveloped segments. When completed, the
tracks”) to the San Fernando Street corridor.

94 | VALLEY TRANS PORTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 C H AP TE R TH R E E PL AN N ING INITIATIVES

In general, the concept of cycle tracks is to ing with San Jose to develop and implement

have bike lanes physically separated from this concept.

traffic by switching the location of bike lanes

BICYCLE SHARING PROGRAM
and on-street parking; bike lanes are moved
In late 2008, a groundswell of interest in
next to the sidewalk and the on-street park-
developing bike sharing programs swept
ing becomes the physical barrier separating
the county. In 2009, VTA will work with the
the bike lanes from vehicular traffic. San
Silicon Valley Bike Coalition (SVBC), local
Fernando Street was initially chosen as a
employers and cities to develop, fund and
good candidate for cycle tracks because of its
implement a bike sharing program. The initial
connectivity to major attractions like Diridon
steps include a pilot program that would
Station, San Jose State University, and the
involve identifying consumer needs and mar-
downtown core. However, further staff
kets, a management and operating approach,
research and analysis show that San Fernando
and key locations. Potential partners include
Street is not feasible for such a project due to
Caltrain, which is experiencing chronic
safety concerns with turning movements, bus
shortage of onboard bicycle capacity, cities
conflicts and two-way streets. San Jose is now
with high-demand Caltrain stations, visitors’
considering Fourth Street from San Fernando
bureaus and chambers of commerce, and the
to San Carlos as the preferred location for
Silicon Valley Leadership Group and major
further study of the concept.
employers. A Santa Clara County program
San Jose will continue efforts to enhance the
could:
San Fernando Street corridor by developing
• Address land use inefficiencies of many
it into a “premier bicycle boulevard.” Several
suburban sprawl employment sites located
design treatments such as colored bike lanes, far from transit
bike detection signal priority, buffered bike • Provide access to the first and last mile
lanes, and elimination or reduction of on-street from major transit stations
parking are being considered. Developing this • Supplement VTA and employer shuttles
corridor as a potential bicycle boulevard will between transit and employer sites

require further review due to several issues • Relieve overcrowding and the routine
concerning community feedback on potential “bumping” of passengers with bicycles on
Caltrain (and on VTA buses)
impacts and the planned use of San Fernando

as a traffic detour route for the pending BART A pilot program would focus on one or more
construction project. VTA will continue work- Caltrain stations which would address all of

VA L L E Y T R A N SP ORTAT I O N PLAN 2035 | 95

 the issues identified above and involve the opportunities for an expressway pedestrian
potential partners who have expressed inter- improvement program. A conceptual frame-
est. Subsequent programs may have city or work includes requiring coordinated planning
sub-regional focus, but all will be designed for and matching funds from the local jurisdic-
countywide compatibility. tions, the county and VTA. It is currently

envisioned that funds for this program would

VTA offers assistance to any Member Agency
come from the VTP CDT 2035 Program Area
needing assistance or input in conducting
allocation.
bicycle-related planning studies.

TRANSPORTATION, LAND
PEDESTRIANS
USE AND THE ENVIRONMENT
A central principle of the CDT Program is

design for pedestrians. The county’s trans- PROGRAMS FOR TRANSPORTATION

AND LAND USE INTEGRATION
portation system and built environment
The performance of the transportation
currently focuses on cars rather than people.
system is directly linked with land use and
Pedestrian-oriented places encourage walking
urban form. The form of development shapes
and exploration. Design elements of these
the places in which we live, work and play,
places include safe and direct walking routes,
defines the spaces we move around in and
wide sidewalks and amenities such as street
the travel modes we use. Energy use, climate
trees, lighting and benches.
change, sustainability issues, the viability

COMMUNITY DESIGN AND of alternative modes and the quality of our

TRANSPORTATION EXPRESSWAY environments are also intimately related to
PEDESTRIAN FUNDING PROGRAM
the interactions of transportation and land
The county expressway study likewise identi-
uses. Moreover, the transportation/land use
fies such pedestrian improvements through-
connection is becoming increasingly more
out the expressway network.
important to VTA’s—and the region’s—ability

However, funding availability, coordina- to deliver and maintain a high-quality,

tion challenges and sometimes competing multimodal transportation system and

priorities have made project implementation effectively address climate protection and

sluggish and sporadic. VTA will work with energy use issues. Because of these fundamen-

the county, cities and the Bicycle Pedestrian tal links between urban form and the travel

Advisory Committee to explore funding needs of individuals, VTA has a vital interest

96 | VALLEY TRANS PORTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 C H AP TE R TH R E E PL AN N ING INITIATIVES

in the planning and design of cities and Agencies are becoming increasingly important
communities. factors in VTA’s decision-making process for

transportation improvements. VTA will expect

THE ROLE OF MEMBER AGENCIES
to see its commitments of billions of dollars in
VTA can’t do it alone. To get the highest and
capital and on-going operating funds work in
best use from transportation investment, and
concert with coordinated land use and policy
deliver a world-class multimodal transporta-
commitments from Member Agencies that
tion system, VTA must rely on the concerted
support those investments.
efforts of its Member Agencies. Since opportu-

nities to add capacity to roadways and expand LAND USE VISION

fixed-rail transit are limited and expensive, VTP 2035 envisions a shift in development

the land use policies and decisions of Member patterns from spreading out to growing up

VA L L E Y T R A N SP O RTAT I ON PLAN 2035 | 97

 with future development clustered in core urban form, concentrated in areas where

areas and downtowns, along main streets and major investments in transportation and

major transportation corridors, and around urban infrastructure have already been made.
rail and BRT station areas. Existing and More intensive and diversified development

future resources are used more efficiently, and supports a greater range of local services and

people have greater choices to reduce vehicle facilities, making transit service more produc-

miles traveled (VMT) and energy use. tive, increasing opportunities for safe walking

and biking and reducing trip lengths.

The benefits of this vision are many.

Automobile use, VMT, energy consumption,

LAND USE GOAL AND OBJECTIVES
pollution and greenhouse gases are reduced;
The VTP 2035 land use goal and objectives
open spaces and natural areas in undevel-
reflect this vision and VTA’s role as a trans-
oped areas are preserved. Greater choices
portation provider. The goal and objectives
emerge from an amenity- and activity-rich

98 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 C H AP TE R TH R E E PL AN N ING INITIATIVES

outline the high level of coordination that • Design and construct transportation facili-
VTP 2035 land use programs expect from ties to enhance the aesthetic quality of the
built environment
Member Agencies and regional, State and
• Use land efficiently and support concen-
Federal partners when setting priorities for
trated development with strategies includ-
transportation investments.
ing land use intensification and reuse,
transportation investments that minimize
GOAL FOR INTEGRATING right-of-way requirements and limiting
TRANSPORTATION AND land area dedicated to surface parking
LAND USE
• Support development that expands housing
VTA’s goal is to provide transportation
supply relative to transportation alterna-
investments and services that support the tives, proximity to job and activity centers,
maintenance and creation of vibrant urban child care and other essential services,

communities, and protect Santa Clara and that provides a range of affordability
options and opportunities for both rental
County’s natural and economic resources.
housing and home ownership

THE VTP 2035 OBJECTIVE FOR • Foster an urban design vision that creates
INTEGRATING TRANSPORTATION a sense of place, human-scale buildings,
AND LAND USE vibrant public spaces and as many activities
• Concentrate development in cores, transit as possible within easy walking distance of
corridors and station areas to support alter- each other and transit stops
nate transportation modes and maximize
• Plan and design whole communities that
the productivity of transit investments
integrate housing, work places, shopping,
• Design and manage the transportation schools, parks, entertainment and public
system to support concentrated develop- facilities so residents can meet their needs
ment in selected locations closer to home

• Reduce energy use and greenhouse gas • Promote street design standards that con-
emissions sider function and land use content, and
provide interconnected multimodal options
• Provide connectivity in road, bike and
pedestrian networks so travelers can • Promote robust partnerships with member
choose among many routes and modes and regional agencies
linking their origins and destinations
While many of the objectives refer to
• Integrated 24/7 bicycle and pedestrian
concentrated, mixed-use development they
networks
are not limited to these areas and may also
• Provide for future transportation system
be appropriate in suburban and even rural
needs by coordinating land development
and transportation capital project planning settings.

VA L L E Y T R A N SP O RTAT I ON PLAN 2035 | 99

 TRANSPORTATION, ENERGY Through partnerships between VTA and its

AND AIR QUALITY PROGRAM partner agencies, the program aims to sup-

The Transportation Energy and Air Quality port the conservation of natural resources,

(TEAQ) Program will provide a framework reduction of greenhouse gases, prevention of

for VTA to develop initiatives, projects and pollution and use of renewable energy and

programs; conduct research; and work with materials.

partner agencies such as BAAQMD, MTC

The principles of TEAQ will:
and ABAG to address climate change and
• Look toward existing and new technology
energy issues. It will be linked with VTA’s
for applications in VTA operations
CDT Program and is envisioned as a dynamic
• Place high emphasis on demand for fuel
program that will evolve and adapt over time
efficient and alternative fuel vehicles
as new information, technologies and pro-
• Encourage private and public organizations
grams emerge. to pursue green actions

100 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 C H AP TE R TH R E E PL AN N ING INITIATIVES

• Support the development of locally • Develop express lanes and advocate for
produced green energy sources pricing roadways and parking

• Develop and support efforts to pursue new • Convert to alternative fueled, low- or zero-
revenue emissions fleets as technology becomes
cost-effective
• Support existing legislative mandates such
as SB 32 and AB 375 • Support State and local building codes that
require LEED Certified construction such
Over the course of the next few years VTA as insulation, energy efficient design and
will work with local jurisdictions and regional passive and active solar design elements

partners to develop guidelines for prepar- • Explore new technologies through research,
ing TEAQ plans and/or incorporating TEAQ test and pilot projects, and partnerships
with other agencies
related elements within the structure of exist-

ing plans or programs. Accordingly, VTA’s • Develop and implement education and
awareness programs
TEAQ Program will focus on funding local

efforts in coordination with regional, State Detailed information about the TEAQ
and national vision and goals. Program can be found in Appendix C.

In support of the TEAQ Program VTA will:

• Support TEAQ-related efforts through its

PARTNERSHIPS FOR
Legislative Program SUSTAINABLE
TRANSPORTATION
• Proactively implement VTA’s Sustainability
Program Partnerships are about creating synergy—the

interaction of two or more elements or forces

• Explore support from private sector devel-
opment though its capital and on-going so that their combined effect is greater than
operating programs the sum of their individual effects.

• Support regional and local advocacy efforts

Providing a sustainable transportation sys-
related to land use and transportation
tem and improving the quality of life in Santa
integration
Clara County requires meaningful coopera-
• Support programs such as the EPA
SmartWay Program tion and coordination between all groups and

jurisdictions in the county—with everyone

• Improve transit by focusing on key corridors
where local jurisdictions are committed to working toward mutual goals. While work-
land use intensification and on first/last ing to address transportation issues in the
mile connections county is VTA’s primary responsibility, our

VA L L E Y T R A N SP ORTAT I O N PLAN 2035 | 101

 goals cannot be addressed by VTA alone. with its Member Agencies, other Bay Area
Partnerships are essential to VTA’s success counties, and regional agencies. In addition
in implementing its transportation and land to the CDT program and the transportation/
use programs and in meeting the goals of land use investment strategies previously
enhanced livability, economic prosperity and discussed, VTA engages in other land use
a sustainable future. activities to further its goals for concentrated

mixed-use development near transit. Current

The remainder of this section discusses
and planned efforts include:
VTA’s work with our partners and the future

role of VTA leadership on issues related to • Transit corridors

transportation. Partnerships for Sustainable • Highways

Transportation considers two basic types of • Local streets and county roads
partnerships:
• Bicycles

Public/Public Enhanced cooperation

The inclusion of land use points in the scoring
between public entities is essential—and will
process results in a significant improvement
result in better use of public funds and greater
in the overall ranking for projects judged as
success with programs involving countywide
advancing the achievement of land use objec-
issues such as housing, park space, traffic
tives. While these judgments are necessarily
and reducing energy use and greenhouse gas
subjective, they provide an initial way for the
emissions. Even better cooperation between
investment strategy to bring land use consid-
entities with different agendas can yield
erations into the decision-making process for
substantial public benefits.
transit and roadways. The result of including

Public/Private Examples include joint land use considerations with roadway projects

development, provision of shuttle services, was the ability of local roadway projects to

TDM programs, and programs to reduce compete with freeway projects in the evalua-

waste and energy use and improve air and tion. The result of including land use consid-

water quality. erations with transit corridor projects helps to

predict whether there will be all-day demand

LAND USE PARTNERSHIPS for transit and a sufficient ridership base to
Since VTA does not hold land use approval warrant the high capital investments in rapid
authority, successfully implementing its land transit technologies.
use programs requires active partnerships

102 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 C H AP TE R TH R E E PL AN N ING INITIATIVES

JOINT DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM The Joint Development Policy provides a

VTA’s Joint Development Program furthers framework for creating and pursuing the high-

the VTP 2035 land use goal and objectives est and best opportunities for development

and supports VTA’s strategic and fiscal goals. around station areas and along corridors. The

The program was adopted by the VTA Board policy is intended to establish guidelines and

in January 2005. It is designed to secure the procedures for identifying such opportuni-

most appropriate private and public sector ties to optimize return on investment to VTA.

development of VTA-owned property at, and Joint Development also includes coordination

adjacent to, transit stations and corridors. with local jurisdictions in station area land use

VTA envisions its station areas and transit planning to establish development patterns

corridors as vibrant, prosperous community that enhance transit use.

assets that create a strong sense of place for

VTA’S TRANSIT
transit, pedestrians, and the surrounding
SUSTAINABILITY POLICY
community, and are destinations in their
As noted previously in Chapters 2 and 3, the
own right.
Transit Sustainability Policy (TSP) links land

VA L L E Y T R A N SP ORTAT I O N PLAN 2035 | 103

 use decision-making with VTA’s transit capital with local governments, TSP supportive
investment program and is designed to ensure actions may include, but are not limited to,
that VTA’s investments in current and future one or a combination of:
transit services are supported by local land • General Plan changes or approved Specific
use and policy decisions. Capital project fund- Plans

ing and service are linked with the TSP, and • Memorandums of Understanding
apply to both bus and rail projects and services.
• Developer Conditions of Approval
The TSP provides a policy framework for
• Tax Increment Financing
transit expansion and establishes standards for
• Transit Benefit Assessment District
project and service implementation. The TSP

standards are ridership-based and are derived • Dedication of land

from existing and forecast land uses resulting • Local funding

from local government land use policies. The

TSP also provides a foundation for planning

PROACTIVE CONGESTION
MANAGEMENT PROGRAM AND
studies for transit expansion and improve- DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROGRAM
ments including annual transit service plans As the Congestion Management Agency for
and corridors studies. With its responsibility Santa Clara County, VTA is charged with
as trustee of public transit funds in Santa Clara ensuring that regional roadways operate at
County, the TSP is intended to assist VTA with acceptable levels of congestion, developing
continuing to: strategies to reduce traffic congestion, pro-
• Optimize taxpayer and VTA investments in moting integrated transportation and land use
transit infrastructure and services planning, and encouraging a more balanced
• Protect the financial health and sustainabil- transportation system. VTA reviews develop-
ity of VTA
ment proposals to ensure that transportation
• Contribute to enhancing the livability impacts are minimized, and that opportunities
and sustainability of Santa Clara County
to facilitate use of transportation alternatives
communities
are taken. The CDT program is a fundamen-
The TSP was crafted to build practicable and tal component of this review process. The
robust partnerships with Member Agencies by proactive Congestion Management Program
outlining the commitments needed to support (CMP) process coordinates two project review
the proposed transit service. In partnership processes engaged in by VTA staff:

104 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 C H AP TE R TH R E E PL AN N ING INITIATIVES

1. Review of environmental documents, site with the development community to incorpo-

plans and related documents as part of rate VTA’s concerns. VTA prepares a quarterly
VTA’s Development Review Program
report summarizing comments submitted to
2. Review of Transportation Impact Analysis
Member Agencies by VTA staff and responses
(TIA) reports of proposed projects
from Member Agencies to VTA on approved
The cities, Santa Clara County and other projects.
agencies such as community college dis-
VTA is currently enhancing its efforts in the
tricts forward many of their proposals for
proactive CMP and Development Review
land development to VTA. In the case of
Program. VTA is identifying ways to better
environmental documents and site plans,
follow up on VTA staff comments over the
VTA reviews these proposals to ensure that
life of projects. In addition, VTA is improving
transportation considerations are adequately
its tracking of development activities early in
integrated into the plans. Areas addressed may
the planning process, and assisting Member
include transit access, pedestrian and bicycle
Agencies through the CDT program with the
access, site design and Transportation Demand
early review of development proposals. All of
Management. In the case of TIAs, VTA staff
these efforts are intended to forge a stron-
review the reports for consistency with CMP
ger partnership between VTA, its Member
standards, and to identify potential transporta-
Agencies and the development community to
tion-related enhancements. VTA then submits
promote stronger, more transit-supportive
comments on development review documents
and livable communities.
or TIAs to Member Agencies, who may work

VA L L E Y T R A N SP O RTAT I ON PLAN 2035 | 105

CHAPTER FOUR 4
implementation

Implementing the projects and program described in

Chapters 2 and 3 involve multi-stepped processes and

decision-making stages. This chapter begins with a brief

review of the program area allocations described in

Chapter 2, and some of the key funding issues that need

resolution before projects can be implemented. This is

followed by a summary of the projects and programs

that will be developed in the next few years. The chapter

concludes with an overview of the VTP 2035 processes

for project selection, planning, programming and

delivery—and for amending and updating the plan.

VA L L E Y T R A N SP ORTAT I O N PLAN 2035 | 107

 PROGRAM AREA AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS
ALLOCATIONS AND IDENTIFIED IN VTP 2035

FUNDING ISSUES The timing and availability of State

As presented in Chapter 2, VTP 2035 and Federal—and in some cases local—

outlines a 25-plus-year, $15.2-billion plan transportation dollars will be the primary

of programs and projects. These programs factors determining when many of the VTP

provide a framework for the overall VTP 2035 projects can move forward. At the

work program that the VTA Board will writing of this document, the statewide

work to implement during the timeframe budget shortfalls make the availability of

of the plan. State funds for existing programs uncertain.

On the Federal side, the ultimate form of

The Board-adopted program area alloca-
the Federal budget and the re-authorization
tions are presented in Table 4-1. In some
of SAFETEA-LU will determine how much
cases the VTP 2035 allocations cover all
funding will be available in the near and
project costs. In other cases, funding from
midterm horizons. Locally, VTA’s success
other sources must be assembled to fully
in securing additional sources of funding
fund specific projects. For example, com-
for transit is a key factor in developing
plete implementation of the Measure A
practical implementation schedules for VTP
Transit Program of projects is contingent on
2035 Transit Program, including the 2000
VTA’s ability to secure a new source(s)
Measure A projects. In addition, some transit
of funding for transit.
projects include funding from multiple

108 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 C H AP TE R FO UR IMP LEMENTATIO N

partners, and the ability of all partners to TABLE 4-1 VTP 2035 Program Areas and VTP Allocations
contribute their full share will determine
FUND
PROGRAM
when those projects can move forward. ALLOCATION
AREAS
(‘08 $MILLIONS)

Transit $9,281
IMPLEMENTATION PROCESS
Highways 3,101
VTP 2035 does not program funds to projects.

Each fund source has its own programming Expressways 263

process and cycle. The VTA Board and its

Local Streets and County Roads 628
partnering agencies take separate and specific

actions to tie the funds to individual proj- Pavement 1,140

ects as those cycles occur. Obviously, not all

Local Transportation Projects and Enhancements 145
projects can be implemented quickly, and
Soundwalls 10
many will be phased in over time and started

in outlying years of the plan. However, in Landscape/Litter/Graffiti 1

response to new Federal legislation governing

TSM and Ops (ITS) 100
the development of regional transportation

plans, VTP 2035 has organized its transit, Bicycle 160

roadway, bicycle and ITS projects into near CDT Program 360

term (before 2015), mid-term (2016–2025)

Total $15,189
and long-term (2026–2035) horizons. Within

these categories the projects receiving the

highest scores based on the Board-adopted

VA L L E Y T R A N SP ORTAT I O N PLAN 2035 | 109

 project evaluation criteria will generally be IMPLEMENTATION PROCESS FOR
considered first for implementation. CAPITAL PROJECTS
Most capital projects move through a lifecycle
Once the programs and project lists are devel-
of nine basic steps from plan to completion,
oped, and funding sources are identified, VTP
outlined below.
2035 next looks toward the steps for implemen-
1. Planning Defines the transportation
tation. Some projects are ready for construction
need and project goal
and some are underway in design; others are in
2. Programming Through a formal
planning stages; and still others are waiting to
process, funds are identified and specified
be further defined through studies. for a project scope and schedule

The following section outlines the implemen- 3. Preliminary Engineering Identifies

alternatives for attaining the specified
tation processes of VTA and other project-
goal(s); for each alternative, describes
related activities that need to occur for project benefits and develops engineering
delivery in the near-term, mid-term and drawings with sufficient detail to perform
environmental analysis and estimate
long-term horizons.
construction feasibility

110 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 C H AP TE R FO UR IMP LEMENTATIO N

4. Environmental Clearance Analyzes term. Each section is organized into Highway/

environmental impacts, identifies pos- Roadway, Transit and other categories,
sible mitigations to reduce impacts, and
and includes study, planning and construc-
obtains legally mandated State and/or
Federal environmental clearance for a tion activities. The projects, programs and
chosen preferred alternative studies listed below have identified partial or

5. Final Engineering Finalizes design whole funding and will move forward over
drawings and produces construction the next four years. Some of these projects
documents for the preferred alternative
are contingent on the availability of State or
6. Right-of-Way Obtains necessary right- Federal funds within the next three years, and
of-way for project construction
consequently may be delayed if the State and
7. Construction Builds the project Federal fiscal condition does not improve.
8. Operations Finished project is placed in
operation HIGHWAY PROJECTS

9. Maintenance and Oversight Project is State Route 85 and US 101 Express

maintained in a state of good repair Lanes The State Route 85 and US 101

Express Lanes project will convert existing

NEAR-TERM HOV lanes on SR 85 and US 101 to high-

IMPLEMENTATION performance express lanes or dedicated toll

ACTIVITIES lanes, which have been proven extremely popu-

This section focuses on the implementation lar in other areas of the country. Solo drivers

activities that are anticipated to occur over will be given the option of paying a toll to use

the next four years of the plan—until the next the new VTA express lanes. Carpools with two

update of this plan. VTA will continue plan- or more occupants, motorcycles, transit buses

ning and design efforts to ready other projects and eligible hybrids will continue to use the

for implementation in outlying years. VTA express lanes free of change.

will work with Member Agencies and other

State Route 99 and US 101 Trade
partners to deliver the VTP 2035 projects
Corridor Study VTA is working on study-
and programs by focusing first on the plan-
ing a new trade corridor for between US 101
ning and programming efforts required for
and SR 99 that would have its western ter-
implementation.
minus in southern Santa Clara County south

The following provides a summary of the of Gilroy. This project will investigate the

activities expected to occur within the near feasibility of operating this new trade corridor

VA L L E Y T R A N SP O RTAT I ON PLAN 2035 | 111

 as a tolled facility. The intention is to develop I-880 HOV Widening The I-880 HOV

a toll system that could generate revenue for Widening project is in the PA/ED phase, with

the corridor improvements. the preparation of the environmental docu-

ment underway. The project will provide HOV

SR 237/I-880 Connector Ramp At the
lanes between U.S. 101 and SR 237. The PA/
SR 237/I-880 interchange, VTA is proposing
ED phase expected to be completed in mid-
to convert existing HOV-to-HOV direct con-
2009; construction is expected to begin in
nector ramps to express lanes.
mid-2011. This project is funded through the
SR 237/I-880 express lane tolls will be CMIA program.
collected electronically using the FasTrak
US 101 Improvements: I-280 to Yerba
technology already in use on Bay Area bridges.
Buena Road A Mitigated Negative
Tolls for solo drivers will vary based on the
Declaration for the US 101 Improvements:
level of congestion and will be adjusted to
I-280 to Yerba Buena Road project was signed
maintain a free-flowing ride on the express
by Caltrans in 2005. Preliminary design was
lanes. Final design of the project is expected
started in August 2007, with Project Study
to be completed in October 2009, with full
Report/Project Report (PSR/PR) approved in
construction completed in summer 2010.
early 2009. Final design is underway and is
US 101 Auxiliary Lanes—Embarcadero expected to be complete by late 2009.
to SR 85 The US 101 Auxiliary Lanes—
I-880/I-280/Stevens Creek/Winchester
Embarcadero to SR 85 project is in the
Improvement VTA is performing pre-
Project Approval/Environmental Document
liminary engineering and environmental
(PA/ED) phase, with the preparation of the
clearance for the I-880/I-280/Stevens Creek/
environmental document underway. The
Winchester Improvement project. Project
environmental elements being studied include
improvements include: upgrades to the
air, noise, biological and cultural consider-
northbound I-880 collector/distributor ramp;
ations. The draft environmental document
improvements to the northbound I-880 on
was completed in early 2009, with the PA/ED
ramp; intersection upgrades at the north-
phase expected to be completed in mid-2009.
bound I-280/I-880 ramp termini; removal of
This project is funded through the State’s
the northbound I-880 to westbound Stevens
Corridor Mobility Improvement Account
Creek Boulevard loop off-ramp; and construc-
(CMIA) program.
tion of a new northbound I-280 off-ramp at

112 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 C H AP TE R FO UR IMP LEMENTATIO N

Winchester Boulevard. Currently, the project Mary Avenue Extension The Mary

is in the preliminary engineering and concep- Avenue Extension project is currently in the

tual design phase. The project is expected to PA/ED phase, with the Draft Environmental

begin construction in late 2011. Impact Report (EIR) circulated for public

review in Fall 2007. The project would

US 101/SR 25 Interchange and
extend Mary Avenue across US 101 and
US 101 Widening—Monterey Road
SR 237 to improve access to the Moffett
to SR 129 VTA is currently conducting
Industrial Park. The proposed roadway
preliminary engineering and environmental
section includes four lanes, with bike lanes
clearance for the US 101/SR 25 interchange
and sidewalks on each side. The EIR and
and US 101 Widening—Monterey Road to SR
the combined PSR/PR were approved by the
129 project. The studies are examining access
Sunnyvale City Council in October 2008.
control, freeway alignment, right-of-way, utili-
Design will begin in 2009 and construction is
ties and a new US 101/SR 25 interchange. The
expected to begin in late 2011.
project is expected to be completed by 2015.

VA L L E Y T R A N SP ORTAT I O N PLAN 2035 | 113

 Charcot Avenue Extension Current for the Capitol Expressway segment has been
work on the Charcot Avenue Extension completed. VTA is currently conducting Value
project includes surveying, traffic studies Analysis/Engineering (VA/E) Studies in an
and construction cost estimates, as well as effort to improve the project’s effectiveness
environmental technical studies of air, noise, and reduce costs. In addition, VTA is evaluat-
biological, cultural and community impacts ing the feasibility of a modal phasing plan that
toward preparation of an Initial Study and would build BRT in the corridor as a precur-
Mitigated Negative Declaration for the environ- sor to future light rail. The Board of Directors
mental document. A PSR has been prepared will consider modal options and construction
and the project is in the PA/ED phase. The funding when it revisits this project along with
project is expected to commence construction the entire Measure A Program of projects.
in summer 2010.
Santa Clara-Alum Rock Transit
SR 152/156 Interchange Construction Improvement Project The Santa Clara-
on the SR 152/156 Interchange project has Alum Rock Transit Improvement Project is a
been underway since March 2007. The flyover phased transit enhancement in Santa Clara
was opened to traffic in August 2008 and full County’s highest ridership transit corridor.
project completion is expected in mid-2009. The first phase introduces BRT in the cor-

ridor with, at minimum, dedicated lanes on

TRANSIT PROJECTS
the eastern half of the corridor and mixed
Many of the capital and service projects
flow operations in the western segment. The
discussed here are included in the 2000
BRT project is being designed to light rail
Measure A program of projects; others result
standards, enabling a future conversion to
from studies and programs developed by VTA
light rail in a second phase after construc-
and/or its partner agencies. Funding issues
tion of the BART extension is complete. The
related to both capital and operations present
project is currently concluding conceptual
significant challenges that must be addressed
engineering studies. Preliminary engineering
by VTA prior to full implementation. In early
will commence in early 2009 with final design
2009, VTA developed a process to guide the
scheduled to take place in 2010. BRT service
expenditure of Measure A funds.
is scheduled to begin in 2012.

Capitol Expressway Light Rail (CELR)

El Camino Real Bus Rapid Transit
Final Design and Environmental Clearance
Conceptual engineering for BRT on the El

114 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 C H AP TE R FO UR IMP LEMENTATIO N

Camino Real is scheduled to begin in 2009 anchor to the line. Stations and vehicles will

followed by preliminary and final engineering. feature passenger amenities such as real-time

The corridor currently is served by Local Bus information, high quality waiting environ-

22 and the Rapid 522. Key destinations in the ments and off-board fare collection.

corridor include Stanford and Santa Clara

BART to Silicon Valley The VTA Board
universities, retail and entertainment centers
approved development of a project extend-
in downtown Palo Alto, Mountain View,
ing BART from the planned Warm Springs
Los Altos, Sunnyvale, Santa Clara and San
Extension to Silicon Valley in November
Jose. BRT development on El Camino will be
2001. The proposed 16.1-mile extension of the
characterized by segments of dedicated lanes
BART system would operate along the existing
with center platforms and segments of mixed
railroad alignment south of the planned BART
flow operations with curb bulb-out stations.
Warm Springs Station in Fremont and con-
Stations and vehicles will feature passenger
tinue in a tunnel under downtown San Jose
amenities such as real-time information, high
and end near the Santa Clara Caltrain Station.
quality waiting environments and off-board
The grade-separated project includes six
fare collection.
stations: one in Milpitas, four in San Jose, and

Stevens Creek Bus Rapid Transit one in Santa Clara.

Conceptual engineering for BRT on Stevens

Combined Environmental Impact
Creek Boulevard and West San Carlos Street Statement/Environmental Impact Report
is scheduled to begin in 2010 followed by In support of preparing a combined
preliminary and final engineering. The Draft Environmental Impact Statement/
corridor currently is served by Local Bus Environmental Impact Report (EIS/
23. Key destinations in the corridor include EIR), in January 2002, VTA distributed
Downtown San Jose, the San Jose Convention a Notice of Preparation (NOP) to advise
Center, Valley Fair, Santana Row and Vallco interested agencies and the public that an
shopping centers and De Anza College. EIR would be prepared on the renamed
Stevens Creek BRT facilities will include a BART Extension Project. In February 2002,
dedicated lane crossing I-880 and Winchester the Federal Transit Administration (FTA)
with other segments of dedicated lane published a Notice of Intent (NOI) in the
operations. A new transit center at De Anza Federal Register stating that an EIS would be
College is necessary to serve as the western prepared covering the project. A combined

VA L L E Y T R A N SP O RTAT I ON PLAN 2035 | 115

 Draft EIS/EIR was circulated for public Supplemental Environmental Impact
review and comment in 2004. The Draft
Report
As the design of the project advanced,
EIS/EIR was initially written as a combined
several policy and technical matters emerged
federal/state document in accordance
requiring some changes in the project
with the National Environmental Policy
definition. In response to these changes, VTA
Act (NEPA) and California Environmental
distributed a NOP that a draft supplemental
Quality Act (CEQA). However, subsequent
EIR (SEIR) would be prepared to address
to the public circulation of a Final EIS/EIR,
proposed project changes since certification
VTA withdrew the BART Extension Project
of the Final EIR in 2004. VTA released a
from the federal process. VTA agreed with
Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact
FTA to address funding and project cost
Report (Draft SEIR) in January 2007.
effectiveness issues before reentering the
Subsequently, in June 2007, the VTA Board
federal process. In December 2004, the VTA
of Directors certified the Final Supplemental
Board certified the Final EIR.

116 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 C H AP TE R FO UR IMP LEMENTATIO N

Environmental Impact Report and approved a future project development work with the
revised BART Extension Project. High Speed Rail Authority. The study is

anticipated to start in Fall 2009 and conclude

Environmental Impact Statement
in 2010.
As the state environmental process was

concluding, VTA requested of the FTA to be Community Bus Program VTA intro-
allowed to re-enter the Federal Environmental duced a pilot program in 2005 utilizing small
Impact Statement (EIS) phase of project vehicles (25 seats) that function as circulator-
development. VTA proposed to complete type service in communities that may have
National Environmental Policy Act review of low transit ridership or operational obstacles
the BART Extension Project, redesignated such as hillsides or narrow streets. VTA
as the Silicon Valley Rapid Transit (SVRT) introduced five Community Bus routes in July
Project. FTA concurred and published a 2007 in South County followed by expansion
Notice of Intent to prepare a Revised Draft of 12 additional routes as part of the New Bus
EIS in the Federal Register in September Service Plan in January 2008. There are con-
2007. VTA and FTA conducted public and siderations to expand Community Bus in the
agency scoping meetings in October 2007. future where opportunities arise. This is an
The Revised Draft EIS was circulated for on-going annual process governed by VTA’s
public review and comment in March 2009. TSP and SDG.
A federal record of decision on the EIS is
New Transit Corridors Feasibility
anticipated in January 2010.
Study The New Corridors Feasibility Study
High Speed Rail Implementation will examine the feasibility of potential rail
Study The planning for a high speed rail corridors including those noted in the 2000
line connecting southern California to Santa Measure A ballot language. The study will
Clara County and the Bay Area will take place use the Board-adopted Transit Sustainability
over the next 20 years as project engineering Policy (TSP) and Service Design Guidelines
becomes more detailed and complete. In this (SDG) to evaluate the feasibility, constructa-
early study, VTA will begin preparations by bility and cost-effectiveness of providing light
identifying possible “footprints” for a future rail in these corridors. The study corridors
high speed rail project and identifying the identified in the 2000 Measure A ballot
range of planning issues that will accompany language include Vasona extension to Vasona

VA L L E Y T R A N SP ORTAT I O N PLAN 2035 | 117

 Junction, DTEV Eastridge Area to Highway and develop an implementation plan to guide

87, Santa Teresa extension to Coyote Valley, VTA in developing BRT facilities and funding

Stevens Creek Blvd., West San Jose/Santa future development of the BRT system. The

Clara, and North County/Palo Alto. plan is scheduled for completion during 2009.

Community-Based Transportation Light Rail System Analysis and

Plans The goal of these CBTP studies is Improvements VTA’s light rail system

to advance the findings from MTC’s Lifeline recently celebrated its 20th anniversary and

Transportation Network Report which this milestone has enabled VTA to assess

identified transit needs in economically the system as a whole to determine whether

disadvantaged communities throughout the it is meeting expectations. The LRT System

San Francisco Bay Area region and recom- Analysis will evaluate current and future

mended local transportation studies in further market conditions along with possible operat-

efforts to address them. Each CBTP involves a ing or capital improvements to the system in

collaborative approach that includes residents the next 20 years. The goal of the analysis is to

and CBOs that provide services within increase ridership on the system by making it

minority and low-income neighborhoods. In more competitive in the overall travel market.

partnership with MTC and local jurisdictions, It is expected that the study will produce

VTA will conduct these studies in several com- recommended capital and operational

munities of concern identified by MTC. These improvements. The plan is scheduled for

include Gilroy (completed in 2006), east San completion during 2010.

Jose (completed in 2009), Milpitas (completed

Highway-Based BRT Alternatives
in 2009) and Mountain View (2011).
Analysis The Highway-Based BRT

Bus Rapid Transit Strategic Plan VTA Alternatives Analysis is undertaking a

is in the process of producing a strategic plan comprehensive evaluation of the market for

for implementation of a BRT system in Santa freeway- and expressway-based express bus

Clara County. The objectives of the strategic services in Santa Clara and its neighboring

plan are to: establish a brand identity for counties. VTA’s express bus services will

future BRT vehicles, stations and supporting also be evaluated for their effectiveness in

materials; evaluate candidate corridors based capturing the potential market. How VTA

on VTA’s TSP and SDG and develop cost esti- packages this service, from stations and routes

mates for implementation and future service; to brand identity and vehicles, will be part

118 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 C H AP TE R FO UR IMP LEMENTATIO N

of the business plan. VTA is working closely of the facility as a part of an enhanced

with large employers in Santa Clara County transit investment in the Capitol Expressway

in an effort to shape services that meet their corridor. In addition, the study will identify

employees’ needs. The plan is scheduled for strategies for raising the awareness of

completion during 2010. the center’s transit services, particularly

in communities where English is not the

Transit Corridor Improvement Plans
primary language spoken at home. Estimated
Based on the evaluation contained in the BRT
completion date is summer 2010.
Strategic Plan, several corridors were identi-

fied for potential future upgrades to BRT or Transit Waiting Environments Capital

LRT. Additional corridors have been identified Plan Transit waiting environments, com-

for further analysis in other studies and other monly known as bus or light rail stops or

forums such as board workshops. Transit stations, are the front door to the transit

Corridor Improvement Plans are defined in system, and as such deserve high-quality

VTA’s SDG as an option for cities or communi- design and amenities. Improving these loca-

ties that are seeking transit enhancements in a tions where VTA customers access the system

corridor but do not reach the minimum thresh- will become a challenge as existing facilities

olds for upgrades to higher levels of service. age and new service is introduced. The Transit

VTA will be working with cities and communi- Waiting Environments Study will seek to

ties to develop Transit Corridor Improvement develop standards for stop and station design

Plans that will identify future transit upgrades. and facilities and seek innovative ways to

The anticipated start date is 2012. finance their improvement and construction

over the next 20 years. The study will initially

Eastridge Transit Center Improvement
be conducted as part of the CDT Manual
and Access Plan This study will focus on
update scheduled for 2009 with more detailed
improving transit passenger amenities and
work scheduled for 2011.
pedestrian and bicycle access to the Eastridge

Transit Center. The Eastridge Transit Center Airport People Mover The City of San

is the second busiest transfer point in the Jose is currently exploring public/private

VTA system, behind the Downtown Transit partnerships for development of an airport

Mall. The study will seek community input feeder transit system. As described in Measure

for how to improve access to the Transit A, the service would connect the San Jose

Center in preparation for the reconstruction International Airport, Caltrain, VTA Light Rail

VA L L E Y T R A N SP ORTAT I O N PLAN 2035 | 119

 and the planned BART station. In July 2008, concentrated housing, job and retail centers,

the city issued a request for qualifications difficult. The benefits of trunk line transpor-

solicitation directly to private firms. Pending tation services such as commuter rail, LRT

the outcome of this effort VTA has suspended or BRT are lost when the transit stops and

work. The anticipated study start date is 2009. stations are not located near housing, jobs and

retail hubs, and our land use pattern contains

First and Last Mile Connection Study
few of these hubs. Thus, without robust first
Santa Clara County’s lower-density suburban
and last mile connections, potential transit
nature and travel patterns make provid-
riders are often faced with long walks over
ing efficient transit services, which rely on

120 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 C H AP TE R FO UR IMP LEMENTATIO N

difficult terrain. First and last mile services Caltrain Station Access Study Caltrain

become an integral component of building a continues to attract riders to its Baby Bullet

viable transit network in a suburban environ- express service and the challenge to increas-

ment like VTA’s. First mile condition can be ing that ridership is dependent on providing

improved with good park-and-ride facilities efficient access to the stations in Santa Clara

and innovative shared-ride and parking County through automobile parking, bicycle

strategies, strong bicycle pedestrian connec- storage, pedestrian improvements and transit

tions with both residential and employment or shuttle service. The Caltrain Station Access

areas, and the application of new technolo- Study will evaluate ways to expand oppor-

gies or programs such as car, bike or Segway tunities for improving access to Santa Clara

sharing. First and last mile conditions may County’s stations through all modes. The

also be best served with high frequency, short Great America Station served by ACE and

route shuttles—which in Santa Clara County Capitol Corridor trains will also be included

are often provided directly by employers—but in the study. The estimated completion date

could also be improved with bike sharing during is winter 2010.

and other innovative programs noted above.

South County Commute Transit Service
Providing efficient and attractive first and last
Study Connecting the South County com-
mile connections from a variety of options is
munities of San Martin, Morgan Hill and
the subject of this study. The study is expected
Gilroy with job centers in Downtown San Jose
to begin in 2009.
and northern Santa Clara County will become

Palo Alto Intermodal Transit Center a greater challenge as freeway capacity is

Comprehensive Plan The Comprehensive reduced and South County residential growth
Plan will analyze the bus and shuttle transit continues. The South County Commute

operational needs at the Intermodal Transit Transit Service Study will seek to determine

Center and develop a list of capital projects the optimal balance between local, express,

to improve its vehicle circulation, transit BRT and commuter rail service for the South

operations, passenger flow, bicycle facilities County commute market. The estimated

and transit-oriented development opportuni- completion date is late 2011.

ties within the Transit Center. The plan will

Caltrain Electrification and Service
provide a blueprint for future capital improve-
Improvements Study VTA is a partner
ments. The estimated completion date is
in the effort to modernize the Caltrain system
winter 2010.

VA L L E Y T R A N SP O RTAT I ON PLAN 2035 | 121

 through electrification and other capital development focuses on projects and initia-

improvements that will allow it to increase tives that implement technology to improve

peak hour service and overall capacity while the operation and management of transporta-

reducing noise and air pollution. This project tion systems. These operational and manage-

will seek to electrify the Caltrain system ment improvements provide benefits not only

by 2015. Additional capital improvements to vehicular traffic but inclusively provide

include signal upgrades, positive train control benefits to transit and non-motorized modes

and terminal capacity enhancements in San (bicycles and pedestrians). Examples of near-

Jose and San Francisco. The anticipated study term projects and initiatives include:

start date is 2009.

Silicon Valley Intelligent Transportation

Caltrain Safety Improvements The Systems Program Enhancements

VTA, in conjunction with the PCJPB, is Through a partnership of local, regional and

developing a safety improvement program State agencies, work will continue on the

for the Caltrain commuter rail system within integration of technology-based systems to

Santa Clara County. This program will not provide improved operations management

only assess at-grade street crossings similar of the transportation system. The program

to a program initiated by PCJPB in San Mateo has four projects underway or near comple-

County, but it will also address other prob- tion that expand camera surveillance, traffic

lem locations where pedestrian, cyclist and signal coordination and traffic data exchange

motor vehicle safety is impacted. Included in in areas covering Los Gatos north to Fremont

the evaluation are at-grade railway/highway in Alameda County, around the San Jose

crossings, Caltrain stations, and pedestrian- Mineta International Airport and westward

intensive areas outside of street crossings from downtown San Jose to Cupertino. The

and stations where public traffic frequently Silicon Valley Intelligent Transportation

crosses, and/or exists adjacent to, the tracks. System program has plans to upgrade its

The anticipated start date is 2009. existing Wide Area Network to current net-

working standards and to interface with the

INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION
Caltrans District 4 Traffic Operations Center
SYSTEMS
in Oakland.
As described in the Transportation Systems
Transit Signal Priority Implementation
Operations and Management Program
VTA’s BRT program includes the deployment
section in Chapter 2, project planning and
of priority treatment at traffic signal

122 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 C H AP TE R FO UR IMP LEMENTATIO N

intersections. Bus Signal Priority (BSP) has Regional Transportation Operations

been in operation since 2005 along VTA’s Personal Service and Regional Intelligent

Route 522 corridor as a result of traffic signal Transportation Systems Maintenance

software updates, new traffic signal hardware Service VTA and its Member Agencies

and the installation of BSP transmitters on are interested in using these transportation

buses. VTA has an upcoming effort to upgrade systems to their fullest potential by developing

existing BSP equipment along the El Camino a program to manage, maintain and operate

Real portion of Route 522 to provide greater existing traffic operations systems (e.g., traffic

flexibility in the setup parameters of the BSP signals, traffic surveillance cameras, traffic

system and to reduce maintenance needs on data collection and communication peripher-

the BSP equipment. als). Ultimately, this program will move traffic

VA L L E Y T R A N SP O RTAT I ON PLAN 2035 | 123

 more efficiently in the region; however, cur- systems. The enhancement would be used by

rently, some of these systems are not staffed the County Traffic Operations Center staff and

or funded at appropriate levels. the centralized traffic signal control systems to

optimize traffic signal timing to meet changes

Traffic Signal Communication and
in demand.
Synchronization Project In 2008, the

California Transportation Commission Real-Time Transit Information Project

approved a $15 million Traffic Light The Real-Time Transit Information (RTI)

Synchronization Program (TLSP) Grant for Project will provide VTA’s transit riders with

the City of San Jose to upgrade 785 aging predictive arrival and departure times for all

traffic signal controllers, install 36 miles of VTA’s bus and light rail routes and vehicles.

of fiber-optic communications to support This real time transit information will be

real-time traffic management, and install accessible by cell phones and PDAs, internet

141 traffic surveillance cameras to support and on electronic message signs at selected

real-time traffic management, implementa- transit stops. These transit stops include bus

tion of traffic responsive corridors in seven stops, light rail stations, park-and-ride lots

key business and commercial districts in the and transit centers. The funding amount and

City of San Jose, and synchronize the traffic sources that have been secured to support the

signals. This program will be implemented development and implementation of the RTI

during 2009/10. System are as follows:

County Expressway Traffic Operations • $1.5 million from the Federal Highway
Administration Intelligent Transportation
System The County of Santa Clara Roads
System (FHA ITS) Integration Program
and Airports Department has on-going
• $0.8 million from the Congestion
efforts to implement the deployment of
Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ)
fiber-optic communications, traffic signal Improvement Program
system improvements and surveillance • $1.5 million from the Metropolitan
cameras along all eight expressways. Much of Transportation Commission’s Regional
this improvement project was funded by the Measure 2 Program (RM2)

1996 Measure B sales tax; however, in 2008, • $0.9 million from local funds

the California Transportation Commission

Future funding allocated for this project will
approved a $4.4 million TLSP grant for the
be used to expand the number of electronic
County to enhance its existing data collection
message signs at key transit centers and bus

124 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 C H AP TE R FO UR IMP LEMENTATIO N

stop locations. The project is anticipated to be Los Altos Adobe Creek Bicycle Bridge

completed by the end of 2010. This project replaces an existing obsolete

bicycle bridge that is jointly owned by the

BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN
Cities of Los Altos and Palo Alto. It is located
PROJECTS
on the bicycle/pedestrian pathway along
Campbell Avenue Bridge Widening and
the Hetch Hetchy right-of-way. Design has
Los Gatos Creek Trail Improvement at
been completed and Los Altos is scheduled to
Undercrossing of SR 17, Campbell This
award a construction contract during spring
project will improve the narrow traffic lanes
2009. Construction is scheduled for comple-
on the Campbell Avenue roadway bridge
tion by early 2010.
over Los Gatos Creek to make room for bike

lanes. The project is under design as part of Stevens Creek Trail Feasibility Study,

the larger CDT project to improve conditions Los Altos This study will identify a pre-

along Campbell Avenue from downtown ferred alignment to extend the Stevens Creek

Campbell to Los Gatos Creek and then to Trail south of the City of Mountain View.

the east side of SR 17. Design was completed Several on-street alignments were evaluated;

in 2008, and construction will begin in public outreach was also a major component

2009. of the study. The study is scheduled for

completion in late 2009.

Mary Avenue Bicycle/Pedestrian
Bridge at I-280, Cupertino and Foothill Expressway Shoulder

Sunnyvale This project closes a critical gap Widening at Loyola Corners,

in the cross-county bicycle corridor network. Los Altos This project will restripe the

There is no existing crossing of I-280 between shoulders from four feet to seven feet in

Foothill Expressway and Stelling Road, a width under the Loyola Bridge to improve

distance of 8,000 feet, which disproportion- bicycling conditions. The project is under

ately affects bicyclists and pedestrians. The design and is scheduled for completion

bicycle/pedestrian bridge has an innovative by August 2009. A longer-term project to

design and will provide a safe and convenient redesign and rebuild the Loyola Bridge struc-

non-motorized connection between De Anza ture is included in the Expressway Element.

College in Cupertino and Homestead High

Moody/El Monte Road Bicycle
School in Sunnyvale along the Mary Avenue
Improvements, Los Altos Hills This
corridor. This bridge opened in spring 2009.
project will connect the recently completed

VA L L E Y T R A N SP ORTAT I O N PLAN 2035 | 125

 path through Foothill College to the intersec- is secured, construction of Phase II would be

tion of Stonebrook Drive and El Monte Road. completed within a year.

It includes pedestrian signal upgrades at

Guadalupe River Trail—Gold to I-880,
this intersection and the intersection of El
San Jose This 6.4 mile long segment of the
Monte Road and the college entrance, a 500-
Guadalupe River trail will be paved so that it
foot bike path on El Monte Road and new
has an all-weather surface and will be much
sidewalks and retaining walls. The project is
more bike-commuter friendly. It will join
scheduled for completion in mid-2009.
the existing paved Guadalupe River trail that

Stevens Creek Trail—El Camino Real to connects to downtown San Jose and also to

Dale, Mountain View This project is the the future extension of the Los Gatos Creek

middle segment of Reach 4, which is the final Trail. Environmental clearance began in late

reach of this trail in the City of Mountain 2008, followed by design in September 2009

View. The Stevens Creek trail begins north and construction in 2010.

of SR 237 at the Bay Trail and ultimately

Santa Clara Caltrain/Intermodal Center
would extend to Cupertino. This project will
Pedestrian Bicycle Tunnel, Santa Clara
extend the existing 11 miles of trail another
This project will design and construct a bike/
two miles to the south. This project has
pedestrian tunnel under the UPRR railroad
two phases: Phase I begins just south of El
tracks. It is being designed in conjunction
Camino Real and ends at Sleeper Avenue and
with the existing Caltrain improvements at
is fully funded for design and construction.
this station to eliminate the holdout rule
Construction began in September 2008 and
(when an approaching train will delay its
the project will be completed by summer
arrival while another train is at the sta-
2009. Concurrent with this construction,
tion). It would extend the planned Caltrain
design for Phase II is underway, sched-
tunnel to the north and would for the first
uled for completion in 2010. Phase II will
time enable passengers and area residents
extend the trail from Sleeper Avenue over
to legally cross between the station and the
Highway 85 to eastside to the corner of Dale/
north side of the tracks. It is currently under
Heatherstone, a distance of about one-third
design. Construction is scheduled to begin in
of a mile including a grade separation. The
summer 2010, with completion scheduled for
project is fully funded for design and is seek-
summer 2011.
ing funding for construction. Once funding

126 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 C H AP TE R FO UR IMP LEMENTATIO N

San Tomas Aquino Trail, Santa Clara— being constructed on PG&E right-of-way for

Reach 4 This project is the last segment its entire distance in Saratoga. It could extend

in the City of Santa Clara of the 6-plus mile along UPRR right-of-way north and south of

trail that currently begins north of SR 237. Saratoga to become fully integrated as part

This project constructs a bike/pedestrian of the Bautista De Anza National Historic

path adjacent to San Tomas Expressway in Trail. The groundbreaking was on October

the landscaped shoulder area. The first part 24, 2008 and it is scheduled for completion in

of the project, between Monroe and Cabrillo, September 2009.

is under construction and will open in

Borregas Avenue Bike/Pedestrian
mid-2009.
Bridge—US 101 and SR 237, Sunnyvale

Saratoga De Anza Trail (recently The two bike bridges will provide a safe and

renamed Joe’s Trail) This 1.6 mile trail is convenient connection between the residential

VA L L E Y T R A N SP O RTAT I ON PLAN 2035 | 127

 areas of Sunnyvale and the job centers in • Supplement VTA and employer shuttles
Moffett Park. They are currently under con- between transit and employer sites

struction and are scheduled to open in spring • Relieve overcrowding and the routine
“bumping” of passengers with bicycles on
2009.
Caltrain (and on VTA buses)
Complete Streets Program The CMA
A pilot program would focus on one or more
workplan calls for the development of a
Caltrain stations which would address all of
Complete Streets Program in accordance with
the issues identified above and involve the
Federal, State and regional programs. This
potential partners who have expressed inter-
work will begin in 2009 and is expected to
est. Subsequent programs may have a city or
conclude in 2010.
sub-regional focus, but both will be designed
Bicycle Sharing Program In late 2008, a for countywide compatibility.
ground swell of interest in developing bicycle

sharing programs swept the county. In 2009, COMMUNITY DESIGN AND

TRANSPORTATION GRANT
VTA will work with the SVBC, local employ-
PROGRAMS
ers and cities to study the feasibility of a Bike
VTA has created two grant fund programs to
Sharing Program. The initial steps include a
support Member Agencies linking the CDT
pilot program that would involve identifying
program and the Transportation/Land Use
consumer needs and markets, a management
Investment Strategies. CDT grants support
and operating approach and key locations.
Member Agency efforts to implement the
Potential partners include Caltrain, which
concepts and principles of the CDT program.
is experiencing chronic shortage of onboard
These funds are a key component of the
bicycle capacity, cities with high demand
overall investment strategy, demonstrating
Caltrain stations, visitors’ bureaus and
VTA’s on-going commitment to supporting
chambers of commerce, the SVLG and major
its land use objectives with significant local
employers. A Santa Clara County program
investments in improving the quality of life
could:
in our communities. Grants are awarded on
• Address land use inefficiencies of many a competitive basis using Board-adopted
suburban sprawl employment sites located
criteria to provide strong incentives for
far from transit
Member Agencies to implement the precepts
• Provide access to the first and last mile
of the CDT program. In addition to the
from major transit stations
ongoing administration of these programs

128 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 C H AP TE R FO UR IMP LEMENTATIO N

VTA will pursue additional funding from local, CDT Capital Grants CDT Capital Grants

regional, State and Federal sources. are offered to Member Agencies to assist them

with implementing transportation-related

CDT Planning Grants CDT Planning
projects that improve community access to
Grants are designed to help VTA Member
transit, provide multimodal transportation
Agencies refine and build on promising ideas
facilities and enhance the pedestrian envi-
and to prepare those plans, projects and
ronment along transportation corridors, in
policies for implementation or adoption. The
core areas and around transit stations. Grant
CDT Planning Grant Fund Program will make
awards of up to $1.5 million per project are
available approximately $500,000 per annual
available. VTA currently expects to allocate
cycle to VTA Member Agencies for two annual
about $360 million to these programs over
programming cycles scheduled for FY 2010.
the 25-year life of the plan.
During this time VTA will work to identify and

secure additional funds to continue program- CDT Expressway Pedestrian Funding

ming in future years. The program offers two Program The County Expressway Study
categories of planning grants: identifies numerous pedestrian improve-

ments throughout the expressway network.

Policy Planning Grants—up to $150,000
However, funding availability, coordination
for projects that revise existing—or create
challenges and sometimes competing
new—policies, codes, ordinances or enforce-
priorities have made project implementation
able design standards that encourage changes
sluggish and sporadic. VTA will work with the
in community form resulting in multimodal,
county, cities and the BPAC to explore funding
pedestrian-friendly streets and transit-
opportunities for an expressway pedestrian
oriented, compact, mixed-use developments
improvement program. A conceptual
along major transportation corridors and in
framework includes requiring coordinated
core areas such as downtowns, main streets,
planning and matching funds from the local
commercial nodes and station areas.
jurisdictions, the county and VTA.
Capital Planning Grants—up to $75,000 for

capital planning projects that integrate high- OTHER PROGRAMS

AND PROJECTS
quality, pedestrian and multimodal transpor-
Deficiency Plans/Impact Fees Several
tation design elements into a public street,
cities in Santa Clara County levy development
corridor, commercial node or station area,
impact fees. These fees may be assessed to
and ready those projects for implementation.

VA L L E Y T R A N SP O RTAT I ON PLAN 2035 | 129

 projects through local agency policies, or in along El Camino Real within the Caltrans

conjunction with the CMP deficiency planning right-of-way; and a study of the economic

process. The CMP statute requires Member needs, opportunities, and strategies that

Agencies to prepare deficiency plans for CMP may be needed to cultivate new transit and

system facilities located within their jurisdic- pedestrian-friendly development.

tions that exceed the CMP LOS standard and

cannot be restored back to the LOS standard.

VTP 2035 DEVELOPMENT
In the late 1990s, during the development of PROCESS
its draft Countywide Deficiency Plan (CDP), SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS
VTA investigated a countywide development Several cities in Santa Clara County including
impact fee dedicated to specific improvements San Jose, Milpitas, Santa Clara, Sunnyvale and
on the CMP network. The VTA Board did Mountain View are conducting comprehensive
not approve the plan; however, interest has updates to their General Plans. These efforts
increased in recent years and VTA is currently present tremendous opportunities to better
re-examining this concept. During 2009–10, link transportation and land use planning and
VTA staff will study the concept including decision-making. However, these efforts will
options for issuing fees, potential revenues conclude at various times after the adoption of
generated from the various options, use of VTP 2035. VTA is working closely with each
funds and potential economic impacts and of these cities to ensure that VTA’s cores,
benefits. A possible outcome of this work may corridors and station areas framework for
be VTA Board direction to begin development concentrated growth and multimodal trans-
of a CDP in accordance with CMP statutes. portation options are fully considered and

integrated in these plans. Accordingly, VTP

El Camino/Grand Boulevard Initiative
2035 may need to be amended within the next
VTA will continue to participate with
24 months to be responsive to these efforts and
ongoing work on the Grand Boulevard
incorporate program and projects as needed.
Initiative including: developing a Multimodal

Transportation Corridor Plan (including the

analysis of transit and land use scenarios VTP CAPITAL PROJECT LIST
for the corridor); working with Caltrans DEVELOPMENT PROCESS
and cities along the corridor to facilitate The VTP uses a systematic approach for plan-

the design exception process for projects ning capital projects to prepare them for the

130 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 C H AP TE R FO UR IMP LEMENTATIO N

programming and development process. This • VTP project selection process

process was used to create the current list of • Project planning, programming, and delivery
projects described in the Capital Investments
• Updating and amending the VTP
section in Chapter 2, and will be maintained

through the 25-year VTP 2035 planning VTP PROJECT SELECTION PROCESS
horizon. It is also intended for use in future Figure 4-1 on the following page illustrates the
updates to VTP 2035. process of selecting projects for inclusion in VTP

2035. Oversight of the planning process rests

The VTP 2035 process builds on the foun-
with the VTA Board of Directors and allows for
dation of past plans and project lists, and
broad community input through VTA commit-
establishes a framework for decision-making
tees and other public venues.
under the leadership of the VTA Board of

Directors. Primary input comes from VTA and To begin the process, VTA solicits proposals
Member Agency planning studies with input from interested agencies and the general
from VTA’s advisory committees, the envi- public, and may include a formal call-for-
ronmental and business communities, and projects. In fall 2007, VTA issued a call
the general public. These decisions are based for VTP 2035 projects. In general, projects
on consistent, technically sound evaluation included in VTP must result from a planning
of project proposals and preceded by clear study and public review process, be suf-
and consistent communications with outside ficiently defined to have project descriptions
organizations. After decisions are made to and reasonable cost estimates, and spon-
move projects from planning to programming sored by a jurisdiction or public agency (such
phases, the VTP 2035 approach includes as a city, the county, Caltrans or Caltrain).
sustained commitment to major planned proj- This criterion ensures local knowledge of,
ects in order to secure funding and proceed and commitment to, proposed projects.
successfully to project delivery. Projects are next submitted to VTA for

consideration in one or more of the program

Many steps are involved in delivering a capital
areas identified in VTP 2035. This process
project. However, for the purposes of VTP
also provides a venue for project sponsors to
2035 three general processes govern how
update project descriptions and cost esti-
projects move from planning documents to
mates, and to add or remove projects from
construction:
existing lists.

VA L L E Y T R A N SP ORTAT I O N PLAN 2035 | 131

 FIGURE 4-1 Project Selection Process

City Council/
Member
Board of Supervisors
Agencies
approval

General
public

List of candidate
projects for
BOD* review
countywide
VTA of
plan
project lists**

Projects for TDA BOD* meets to:

Article 3, TFCA,
Caltrans, Hear input on
TLC funding* VTP 2035
Caltrain, evaluation results
VTA performs
ACE, other Identification 25-Year
technical
public Finalize and of funding Capital
evaluation
agencies approve sources Investment
using approved
methodologies prioritized list Program***
Separate of projects
evaluation and
programming
processes
subject to BOD*
approval
Results: Project lists
presented at
public workshops

Transit program extends to 2036

VTA then evaluates the proposed projects Once the VTA Board approves the list of

using technical methodologies that are projects it is submitted to MTC for inclusion

approved by VTA’s Technical Advisory in the RTP, and individual projects can

Committee and Board. Evaluation results proceed into programming phases. Projects

are presented to Member Agencies and at must be included in the fiscally constrained

committee meetings. This step functions as section of the RTP to be eligible for State or

a feedback loop to provide for public Federal funding, to purchase right-of-way, or

comment on VTA’s evaluation. Based on to move into environmental or construction

evaluation scores, the VTA Board then phases.

finalizes and approves the list of projects.

132 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 C H AP TE R FO UR IMP LEMENTATIO N

FIGURE 4-2 Project Planning, Programming and Delivery

MTC includes
MTC Regional projects in Federal
Transportation Funds available
Transportation
Plan for obligating
Consistency required Improvement
(25-year horizon) to specific projects
Program (FTIP)

Projects Project Project

expecting to obligates delivery
receive State funds
and
Federal funds

VTP 2035 Congestion

Capital VTP 2035 Project Management VTA BOD
Investment implementation studies for Program makes decision
Program schedules for top-ranked Capital to program
(25-year base top-ranked projects Improvement funds to
funding scenario)* projects Program specific projects
(10-year horizon)

* Transit program extends to 2036

PROJECT PLANNING, studies or engineering. Based on these

PROGRAMMING, AND planning studies, the VTA Board places the
DELIVERY PHASES
top-ranked projects in the CMP’s CIP. Top-
This section describes what happens to a
ranked projects are determined by using a set
project once it emerges from VTP 2035 as
of Board-adopted evaluation criteria similar
an agency priority. Figure 4-2 presents a
to those developed for the initial project
flowchart of the process by which a transpor-
evaluation but more focused on elements of
tation project moves from VTP 2035 through
project delivery including project readiness,
project delivery.
availability of funds and environmental
At the local level, projects appearing in VTP clearances. The VTA Board can then make
2035 generally result from VTA and Member decisions to program funding for specific
Agency planning studies. In cases where projects—a process which may involve
project planning or engineering studies have another set of evaluation criteria.
already been completed, those studies will
Beyond the local level, the MTC takes
provide the starting point for more advanced
projects appearing in VTP 2035’s CIP and

VA L L E Y T R A N SP ORTAT I O N PLAN 2035 | 133

 FIGURE 4-3 Updates and Additions
YEAR 0 YEAR 1 YEAR 2
Adopt VTP 2035 VTP 2035 Implementation activities; VTP 2035 Update
no scheduled updates

Approved
for submittal Full project
VTP 2035 Special circumstance Locally
by city evaluation,
requiring quick Proposed
Goals & objectives council or selection and
action? Projects
of the plan Board of approval
Supervisors process
25-Year Capital*
Investment Program
Locally Technical
Transportation and Proposed evaluation
Land Use Program Project using
approved Updated
Near-term methodology VTP 2035
Implementation (adopted 2009)
Program Public
Participation
BOD decision by
* Transit program majority to amend
extends to 2036 VTP 2035 during
odd year

Project added to VTP

places them in MTC’s RTP where they may UPDATING THE VTP
appear in the constrained or unconstrained Notwithstanding VTP 2035’s process of analy-
portion of the RTP. Once the VTA Board sis and evaluation, things change and VTA
approves the programming of funds to regularly updates the plan at a minimum of
specific projects from specific sources, every four years in a cycle coinciding with the
MTC places those projects in its Federal update of the RTP. Plan updates will include
Transportation Improvement Program the project planning, selection, programming
(FTIP). Only projects in the RTP can be and delivery processes described above.
placed in the FTIP. Funds from State and
However, VTA recognizes that special circum-
Federal sources are then made available to
stances may arise that require a plan amend-
be obligated to these projects. Finally, the
ment during an off-year. The VTP therefore
agencies’ sponsors of the projects obligate
includes a process for amending the plan that
the funds in order to finance construction.

134 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 C H AP TE R FO UR IMP LEMENTATIO N

allows for off-year changes. A flowchart of the “unconstrained” portion of the VTP 2035 and

process for amending VTP 2035 is shown in the RTP. Funding options for these projects

Figure 4-3. will be re-evaluated with the next update of

the VTP.
Special circumstances such as time-limited

funding availability, a new source of State or If funding for a project is identified before

Federal funding, or contributions from a local VTP 2035 is updated, and the sponsoring

developer, may require quick action. In these agency has determined the project is a top

cases, the VTP process allows for projects priority, it may move into planning and pre-

to be added in off-years. Off-year project liminary design phases without needing to be

proposals undergo the same technical analysis included in the financially constrained portion

required during full plan updates, and a of VTP 2035 or the RTP. If the project is con-

majority vote of the VTA Board is required to sidered of “regional significance” and needs

approve VTP amendments. Project proposals to acquire right-of-way or move into final

not accepted during off-years can be recon- environmental, engineering and construction

sidered during the subsequent update of the phases before the next VTP update, VTP 2035

entire plan. VTA will conduct a public partici- and the RTP need to be amended, requiring

pation process for the proposed amendment, at minimum regional transportation systems

the level of which will be based on the scale of and air quality conformance analysis involv-

the proposed amendment. ing significant staff time and resources. In

these cases, Member Agencies should notify

VTP 2035 PROJECTS WITHOUT
VTA as soon as possible so staff may explore
ALLOCATED FUNDING
a range of possible actions and coordinate
Projects appearing in the VTP 2035 Capital
activities with MTC.
Investment Program that do not have allocated

funding for construction are considered in the

VA L L E Y T R A N SP ORTAT I O N PLAN 2035 | 135

CHAPTER FIVE strategic planning element 5
The Strategic Planning Element provides a framework

for VTA to ensure that the agency is positioned to

deliver the planning, funding, building and operating

solutions described in VTP 2035. VTA Strategic

Planning considerations reach beyond VTP 2035 and

encompass all facets of the organization—from Board

and Committee responsibilities to administrative functions

such as human resource management, budgeting and

financial planning to project delivery functions such as

construction management and transit operations.

VA L L E Y T R A N SP ORTAT I O N PLAN 2035 | 137

 THE PURPOSE OF merger also created a closer link between

THE VTA STRATEGIC transportation planning and land use policy.

PLANNING ELEMENT
VTA’s mission and organizational structure
The Strategic Planning Element is a new
served it well during its formative years. VTA
component of the Valley Transportation Plan
successfully built and operated many of the
development process. Given the economic,
transportation systems identified in predecessor
environmental, regulatory and societal
plans. However, the recent recession and revenue
changes that are likely to occur over the
shortfalls, combined with rising transportation
course of VTP 2035, VTA as an agency must
costs and evolving housing and employment pat-
continually evolve to maintain its effective-
terns within the county, are compelling reasons
ness. The strategic plan will be updated
to reexamine transportation strategies.
periodically to ensure that VTA continues

to be well-positioned to respond to these To adapt to this changing environment, VTA

anticipated changes. initiated a series of activities to reexamine not

only its mission and vision, but also how it is

VTA was formed in 1995 through the merger
organized and governed to deliver services.
of the Santa Clara County Transit District
This examination identified changes that
and the Congestion Management Agency. As
are needed to ensure that VTA continues to
a result, VTA manages a wide spectrum of
meet its responsibilities in the future. VTA
transportation decision-making processes for
responded by making key strategic changes
the county, including transportation plan-
and accomplished the following:
ning, programming and service delivery. The

138 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 C H AP TE R FIV E S TRATE G IC PL ANNING ELEMENT

• Developed a new mission and vision goals and specific strategies to achieve these

• Realigned VTA’s internal organization to goals. It shows how VTA is transforming so

improve its ability to achieve its mission that it is prepared to deliver VTP 2035 pro-
effectively and efficiently
grams and projects, and how it will continue to
• Assisted the Board of Directors with taking undergo critical analysis to improve its ongoing
a more countywide/regional approach to
functions and evolve its corporate culture.
transportation decision-making

VTA’s Strategic Plan aligns the agency’s vision

VISION, MISSION AND
and mission with goals that support VTA’s
VALUES
ability to obtain the objectives of VTP 2035.
VTA’s new vision and mission statements
Supporting the goals are strategies that VTA
provide strategic direction and establish a
will follow to advance the programs and proj-
framework for decision-making. VTA recently
ects enumerated in the plan. VTA will track key
evolved these statements to capture its primary
indicators to determine its success in delivering
focus on providing market-based services that
the plan. Figure 5-1 illustrates the relationship
are tailored to respond to the needs of the com-
of these strategic planning elements.
munity, reflect resource constraints, protect

The Strategic Plan Element describes VTA’s environmental resources and emphasize the

new mission and vision, and the new gover- importance of designing solutions that improve

nance and organizational structure. It charts mobility and increase ridership to improve

the analysis of the agency’s strengths and the quality of life for the people in Santa Clara

weaknesses, as well as its opportunities and County. Concurrently, VTA adopted a set of

external threats. It describes VTA’s strategic values that support the vision and mission.

VA L L E Y T R A N SP O RTAT I ON PLAN 2035 | 139

 VISION Integrity
VTA builds partnerships to deliver transportation We conduct our business in an ethical, honest,
solutions that meet the evolving mobility needs of transparent manner.
Santa Clara County.
Diversity

MISSION We value, respect and serve the unique needs

VTA provides sustainable, accessible, of our community.

community-focused transportation options

Accountability
that are innovative, environmentally responsible
As stewards of the natural resources and tax
and promote the vitality of our region.
revenues of the county, we take responsibility

for our actions and honestly report our

VALUES
successes and challenges to stakeholders and
VTA’s values reflect what we believe and how we
the public.
will behave. They guide the agency’s decision-

making and are applied to everything VTA does.

ORGANIZATIONAL
Dependability STRUCTURE
We provide services, and deliver projects, on
This Strategic Plan Element describes how
schedule and within budget.
VTA is structured to fulfill its responsibilities

Quality for transportation planning, programming

We ensure that the services we deliver, and and service delivery. The new structure is

projects that we build, are well designed and guided by a critical review of the agency’s past

maintained to preserve the investment that performance.

has been made.

RESTRUCTURING VTA
Sustainability At the urging of the Board chair, and under

We design our services and projects to minimize the leadership of the new General Manager,

the negative impacts on our environment, and VTA initiated a comprehensive assessment

in a way that can be maintained over time. of its organizational structure and financial

management. This independent review was

Safety
designed to examine how VTA conducts
Our services are delivered in a way that
business and assess its performance. It recom-
promotes the health and safety of our
mended changes to improve VTA’s ability to
employees and the public.

140 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 C H AP TE R FIV E S TRATE G IC PL ANNING ELEMENT

FIGURE 5-1 VTA Strategic Plan

VISION

VTA builds partnerships to deliver transportation solutions

that meet the evolving needs of Santa Clara County.
MISSION

VTA provides sustainable, accessible, community-focused transportation

options that are innovative, environmentally-responsible
and promote the vitality of the region.
VALUES

Dependability Accountability Sustainability Quality Safety Integrity Diversity

Integrate Build Improve

GOALS

Maintain Improve Enhance Increase Deliver on

Transportation Ridership Relationships
Financial Mobility and Customer Employee Capital
and on Transit Throughout
Stability Access Focus Ownership Programs
Land Use System the County
KEY INDICATORS

Financial Travel Land Use Public Quality Project

Ridership Partnerships
Health Options Changes Satisfaction Workforce Delivery

deliver cost-effective service and provided to develop and institutionalize both structural

recommendations in three areas: governance, and procedural changes throughout the organi-

organizational structure and financial zation. The results of these changes are evident

management. Table 5-1 (page 144) shows the in the Board governance practices and in the

recommendations from the organizational organizational structure described below.

and financial assessment.

Governing Board
The Board endorsed the findings and recom-
VTA’s organizational structure is centered
mendations, and directed the General Manager
around the Board of Directors. The Board sets

VA L L E Y T R A N SP ORTAT I O N PLAN 2035 | 141

 VTA policy and has decision-making author- fully vet strategic policy matters, the Board,
ity. The Board has 12 voting members and two during this last year, considered and approved
ex-officio, non-voting members, all of whom a number of policies intended to strategically
are elected officials appointed to serve on the guide the development of VTA business pro-
Board by the jurisdictions they represent. grams over the long term. Before approving

these policies the Board sought input from the

In the past year, the Board has taken steps to
Board advisory and standing committees. An
address the governance findings and recom-
example of such a policy is the Board’s adop-
mendations from the organizational assessment.
tion of the Transit Sustainability Policy. This
Among the substantive changes, the Board:
policy serves to guide the development of new
• Eliminated the rotation schedule within
service plans for VTA’s bus business and was
city groupings to promote longer tenure
and build transportation expertise among presented to the Board advisory committees
Directors for their consideration and input. The Transit

• Created an Audit Committee as a stand- Sustainability Policy was also considered by

ing committee of the Board with fiduciary and recommended to the Board for adop-
oversight responsibilities
tion by the Transit Planning and Operations
• Developed a Board work plan to support Committee. The Board intends to continue
decision-making and guide the activities of
to use this model for policy development
standing and advisory committees
and adoption as it considers new or revised
• Initiated a process to engage advisory
policies in its future work plans. Policies for
committees in improving their input to the
Board on matters within their respective future development and consideration include
areas of responsibility and expertise a policy that will serve to ensure the long-term

• Improved the quality and timing of Board financial health of VTA, a policy that will pro-
materials, including additional information vide guidance for the delivery of the Measure
about financial impacts, potential conflicts
A Program, and a joint development policy
of interest and input from standing com-
mittee discussions that will guide the management and develop-

ment of VTA’s real estate portfolio.

The Board’s work is now more transparent

and accessible to stakeholders and the public. Board Committees

The VTA Board of Directors has established a
In an effort to further satisfy its responsibil-
set of standing and advisory bodies to review
ity for providing policy guidance to the VTA
and provide input on policy matters. This
staff and utilizing the governance structure to
allows Board members to carry out an in-depth

142 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 C H AP TE R FIV E S TRATE G IC PL ANNING ELEMENT

review of a wide range of complex policy issues Audit Committee Exercises the Board’s

before the Board takes final action. Four stand- fiduciary and oversight responsibilities,

ing committees consist of four Board members including the integrity of VTA’s financial

each. Five advisory committees meet monthly, statements, compliance with legal and

and a handful of policy advisory boards meet regulatory requirements, and assuring an

when projects in their area of focus are active. effective system of internal management and

financial controls. The Audit Committee is

Standing Committees
responsible for selecting the Auditor General
The Board has four standing committees that
and approving the annual audit work plan. It
advise on policy matters within their assigned
also recommends a public accounting firm to
areas of responsibility, as defined in the admin-
conduct the annual financial audit.
istrative code. Committee input and recom-

mendations are noted in the materials that are Advisory Committees

forwarded to the full Board for final approval. The Board has established a group of advisory

committees. These committees do not set

Administration and Finance Committee
VTA policy, but instead review policies under
Reviews policy recommendations about the
development to ensure that they meet the needs
general administration of VTA, including
of constituents, customers, elected officials, the
administrative policies and procedures, legisla-
business community and other stakeholders. In
tive affairs, human resources and fiscal issues.
addition, designated policy advisory boards meet
Congestion Management Program and when projects in their area of focus are active.
Planning Committee Reviews policy
The five advisory committees meet once a
recommendations about the Congestion
month. The role of each committee and its
Management Program and Countywide
membership is described below.
Transportation Plan, including the integra-

tion of transportation and land-use planning, Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory

the programming of discretionary State and Committee Advises the Board on funding

Federal funds, and air-quality planning. and planning issues for bicycle and pedestrian

projects, and serves as the countywide bicycle

Transit Planning and Operations
advisory committee for Santa Clara County.
Committee Reviews policy recommenda-

tions about transit planning, transit capital This committee is comprised of 16 voting

projects, transit operations and marketing. members, one from each of the 15 cities and

one from the county.

VA L L E Y T R A N SP O RTAT I ON PLAN 2035 | 143

 Citizens Advisory Committee Advises the human service agencies within the county,

Board on issues of interest to the committee’s 12 individuals with disabilities, and one

members and the communities they represent Board member as a liaison.

and serves as the oversight body for the 2000

Policy Advisory Committee Ensures that
Measure A Transit Sales Tax Program.
all jurisdictions within the county have access

This committee consists of 17 members rep- to the development of VTA’s policies.

resenting business, labor, environmental and

This committee includes 16 members, one
other community groups.
from each of the 15 cities and one represent-

Committee for Transit Accessibility ing the county.

Advises the Board on bus and rail access-

Technical Advisory Committee Advises
ibility issues, paratransit service, public facili-
the Board on technical issues related to
ties and programs and the Federal Americans
transportation.
with Disabilities Act (ADA).
This committee is composed of 16 members,
This committee is made up of 21 members,
one from each of the 15 cities and one from
including nine representatives from
the county.

TABLE 5-1 Organizational and Financial Assessment Recommendations

GOVERNANCE

Recommendation Implement governance processes and practices to enable transformation

Detailed Elements
‡ Adopt the spirit of Sarbanes-Oxley ‡ Make the Board structure > Change the Oath of 2I¿FH
practices, where applicable function effectively to require a regional focus
> Establish an Audit Committee > Make the General Manager > Improve the conduct of
> Implement an Auditor General a Board member Board and Committee
function > Develop an annual Board meetings
> Establish Board training on Work Plan ‡ Improve the quality of
duties and responsibilities > Revalidate the Board’s role information that the Board
in VTA policy making receives
> Focus the Board on its ¿GXFLDU\
responsibilities > Reduce the number of
> Conduct annual Board self- Advisory Committees
evaluations

144 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 C H AP TE R FIV E S TRATE G IC PL ANNING ELEMENT

TABLE 5-1 (CONT’D) Organizational and Financial Assessment Recommendations

ORGANIZATION

Recommendation Operate VTA like a business

Detailed Elements

‡ Establish goals, objectives and ‡ Delegate appropriate authority ‡ Initiate a program to identify
performance management processes and accountability and implement required
for the executive management team ‡ Require that all decisions controls
be made within ¿QDQFLDO
constraints

Recommendation Align VTA’s mission with its operating practices

Detailed Elements
‡ Revise VTA’s Mission to focus on transportation ‡ Develop a comprehensive transformational
as a core business strategy and plan

Recommendation Align the organization structure and executive team under the new strategy

‡ General Manager WRGH¿QH and ‡ Appoint or hire a Chief ‡ Select and appoint the new
communicate the Vision and Transformation 2I¿FHU executive management team
near-term structural changes ‡ Create the 2I¿FH of External
Affairs

Build VTA’s commitments to the Commercial Development Program

Recommendation Build

Detailed Elements
‡ Commit to the Commercial ‡ Adhere to the policies and ‡ Establish an account for the
Development Program’s goals and procedures set forth by VTA’s revenues generated by the
objectives development experts Program, and develop a
philosophy about how these
revenues will be used

Recommendation Make VTA a better place to work

Detailed Elements

‡ Establish norms for the conduct of ‡ Establish and communicate ‡ Create and implement an
business roles and responsibilities on a Organizational Development
‡ Communicate the need for and pur- broad basis Plan, making training a priority
pose of VTA’s new mission, strategy ‡ Establish and implement a
and structure performance management
system

VA L L E Y T R A N SP ORTAT I O N PLAN 2035 | 145

 TABLE 5-1 (CONT’D) Organizational and Financial Assessment Recommendations

FINANCIAL

Recommendation Upgrade the SAP System

Detailed Elements
‡,PPHGLDWHO\LQLWLDWHDSURMHFWIRULPSOHPHQWLQJ ‡&RQVLGHULPSOHPHQWLQJQHZPRGXOHVWKDWVXSSRUW
the latest upgrades for the SAP software VTA’s operational and financial transformation initiatives

Recommendation Develop a labor negotiation strategy that is aligned with VTA’s ¿QDQFLDO capabilities

Detailed Elements
‡'HYHORSDODERUFRQWUDFWQHJRWLDWLRQVWUDWHJ\WKDW ‡([WHQG97$¶VODERUPDQDJHPHQWSDUWQHUVKLSWR
reflects the context of the existing expenditure contract negotiations
constraints

Recommendation ,PSURYH97$¶V¿nancial condition and stability

Detailed Elements

‡%DODQFH97$¶V<HDU5HYHQXHDQG ‡6WUHQJWKHQ¿nancial reporting ‡,GHQWLI\DQGSURPRWH¿nancial

Expenditure Plan for VTA decision-making strategies within VTA
‡'HYHORSDQHIIHFWLYHDVVHW ‡3URYLGHWKHWUXHSLFWXUHRI97$¶V ‡([SORUHPHDVXUHVWRUHGXFH
management system ¿nancial condition and liquidity unfunded pension and retiree
‡Cash ‡,QVWLWXWLRQDOL]HIXOOGLVFORVXUH health care obligations

‡Real estate about the short- and long-term ‡'HYHORSQHZUHYHQXHVRXUFHV

¿nancial consequences of for VTA
‡&DSLWDOSURMHFWSODQQLQJDQG
proposals ‡&ORVHWKHJDSEHWZHHQFDSLWDO
maintenance
‡,QFOXGH¿nancial policy as a project demands and funding
prominent part of Board ‡5HGXFHUHOLDQFHRQRSHUDWLQJ
fiduciary duty reserves

Transportation Corridor Policy elected officials from jurisdictions within the

Advisory Boards Ensures that local corridor.

jurisdictions affected by major transportation

VTA’S STRUCTURE
improvement projects are involved in plan-
The organizational assessment found that
ning, design and construction.
VTA’s structure could be better aligned
These boards are comprised of a rotating
to more effectively deliver services. VTA’s
group with two VTA Board members and
transformation efforts addressed this concern

146 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 C H AP TE R FIV E S TRATE G IC PL ANNING ELEMENT

by redefining the roles and responsibilities of agency staff (including the General Manager

each division to reduce overlap and redun- and division chiefs), as well as external

dancy and foster coordination and coopera- assessments conducted by an independent

tion between divisions. consultant and by the Bureau of State Audits,

VTA has compiled a list of strengths, weak-

VTA’s broad array of responsibilities and
nesses, opportunities and threats (SWOT).
functions are organized into seven divisions, as
The SWOT analysis (Table 5-2 on page 150)
depicted in the organization chart (Figure 5-2
is being used by the Agency to make strategic
on the following page). With the same respon-
choices that will ensure that it can deliver the
sibilities of a president and chief executive
programs described in VTP 2035.
officer, VTA’s General Manager oversees and

manages all facets of the organization under

policy direction from the Board of Directors. GOALS AND STRATEGIES

While each division has distinct roles and Strategic goals are a fundamental component

responsibilities, they work collaboratively to of the planning process, as they provide a

deliver results. The streamlined organizational framework for the development of strategies

structure aligns VTA’s operating practices with to attain the objectives of VTP 2035. VTA’s

the agency’s new vision and mission. Strategic Plan is built on its vision, mission

and values. The agency has defined eight

VTA’s structure continues to transform and
goals that, taken together, advance VTA’s new
evolve to ensure an efficient and effective
vision and mission.
organization, which is the primary objective of

the reorganization. VTA STRATEGIC PLAN GOALS

1. Maintain Financial Stability:
VTA seeks to manage costs, maximize
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
revenues and balance system expansion
An understanding of the current and future with maintenance of existing service.
environment in which VTA operates can
2. Improve Mobility and Access: VTA
help to identify the opportunities and threats will invest resources and services in
potentially facing the Agency. Similarly, areas with greatest need to enhance the
quality of life of all residents, including
identifying VTA’s strengths and weaknesses
vulnerable populations. VTA will provide
can help build a more efficient and effective a selection of transportation modes to
organization. Drawing on interviews with attract choice riders, as well as promote

current and former Board members and with the economic vitality of our region.

VA L L E Y T R A N SP ORTAT I O N PLAN 2035 | 147

 FIGURE 5-2 VTA’s Responsibilities and Organization

Board of Directors

General Counsel Auditor General

General Manager

External Administrative Congestion Engineering Fiscal SVRT

Affairs Services Management & Construction Resources Operations Program
Agency

Board Employee Project Rails & Accessible SVRT

Development Accounting Services Program
Secretary Relations Facilities

Highways & SVRT

Communications Human Planning/ Asset Project
Environmental Engineering Management Administration
& Marketing Resources Engineering
Clearance Support Services
Support

Contracts & Analysis

Government Safety Programming SVRT Project
Material Reporting
Relations Management & Grants Design
Management & Systems

Media Capital
Property
Relations Projects Enterprise Risk
Technology Development Maintenance
& Community Group Management
& Management
Outreach

Protective
Finance
Services

Services &
Revenue
Operations
Services
Planning

Transportation

148 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 C H AP TE R FIV E S TRATE G IC PL ANNING ELEMENT

3. Integrate Transportation and Land in Table 5-3 (page 151). Division managers
Use: VTA will advance the principles and have defined near-term activities (those that
practices in the Community Design and
can be accomplished within a two-year time-
Transportation Program and promote
transit-oriented and pedestrian develop- frame) under each strategy. These activities
ment in the county. and associated performance measures are

4. Enhance Customer Focus: VTA will reflected in division work plans, which are
put customers first by providing safe, reviewed by the General Manager to ensure
reliable, demand-driven service that
that ongoing efforts are aligned with the
reflects community input and promotes
the benefits of transit. strategic plan.

5. Increase Employee Ownership: VTA

aims to offer professional development, KEY INDICATORS
advancement opportunities and reward
The VTP 2035 Strategic Planning Element has
personal investment to make VTA an
employer of choice. eight key indicators, which will help VTA track

progress toward achieving its goals:

6. Build Ridership on Transit System:
Increase VTA’s operating efficiency, • Financial Health
reduce road congestion and promote
• Travel Options
sustainability.
• Land Use Changes
7. Improve Relationships through-
out the County: Leverage resources, • Public Satisfaction
facilitate information sharing and tap
• Quality Workforce
expertise in private and public sector
organizations. • Ridership

8. Deliver on Capital Program: Build • Partnerships

projects that complement and enhance
• Project Delivery
the core services within available
resources.
Appendix D, Systemwide Performance

Results, provides a summary of the per-

DIVISION STRATEGIES
formance of the VTP 2035 programs and
Building on VTA’s goals and objectives,
projects. This includes traffic level-of-service,
each division has defined the strategies it
mode split, vehicle miles traveled, vehicle
will employ to ensure its efforts support the
hours of delay (duration of congestion), air
vision and mission. Division strategies are
quality, transit access, and travel time.
aligned with one or more goals, as illustrated

VA L L E Y T R A N SP O RTAT I ON PLAN 2035 | 149

 TABLE 5-2 VTA SWOT Analysis
Strengths Weaknesses
• VTA is proactively advocating for public support for land use • High transit operating cost compared industry average
patterns that support transit, biking and walking, and for the • Funding demands greatly exceed projected resources
use of new technologies and programs • Funds to build are more reliable than funds to operate and
• VTA has dedicated revenue sources for both capital and maintain
operating expenditures • Long-term maintenance has been a low priority
• VTA combines the organizational structure of multiple trans- • More effort would help fully engage agency partnerships
portation agencies (e.g. transit builder and operator, CMA,
• Board members tend to focus on local rather than VTA/county-
funding authority) and enjoys integration and opportunity of
wide/regional issues
scale efficiencies compared with neighboring counties
• High turnover rates limits the historical perspective of the
• Fleet and infrastructure are relatively new and in good condition
Board
INTERNAL

• Board of elected officials from each jurisdiction provides a

• High learning curve for new Board members
solid framework for policy making
• Difficult to find Board members with transportation experience
• Staff is experienced and dedicated
• Predicted employee retirements could trigger significant loss of
• General Manager is experienced and willing to innovate
institutional knowledge
• Organization demonstrated high level of responsiveness to
• Financial controls can be improved
internal audit findings
• Dependence on sales tax (+70% of operating revenues)
• Recent organizational changes and new Board and evolving
leaves agency vulnerable to economic cycles
policies are reshaping the agency to achieve greater efficiency
and service effectiveness • Pool of elected officials who know transportation issues well to
serve as potential board members is limited
• New transit service model is focusing on key corridors where
transit is in high demand and competitive with automobiles • Board members, as local elected officials, are challenged to
support regional measures, where local benefit appears to be
• Can improve Board and committee structure and procedures
limited
• Can improve Board focus on regional/countywide VTA trans-
• Retirements of senior staff will result in leadership gaps and
portation issues
loss of institutional knowledge
• Employee rotation programs and succession planning efforts
can support evolving agency needs

Opportunities Threats
• Santa Clara County is a desirable place to live and work • Typical low-density, single-use development pattern is difficult
• Network of potential express lanes may provide new local to efficiently serve with transit
revenue sources • Limited political support and advocacy for VTA efforts
• Santa Clara County citizens have a proven willingness to tax • Growth; VTA will be challenged to maintain the status quo in
themselves for desired programs light of projected growth in population and jobs
• Projected Santa Clara County growth over 25 years can yield • Funding needs for capital, operations and maintenance
EXTERNAL

significant improvements in transit and pedestrian friendly • Historic and current typical land development patterns
development patterns • Continued financial uncertainty at State and Federal levels
• Transit’s significant role with climate protection, energy use and • Certain areas of VTA’s work force competes with other agen-
other environmental factors cies for skilled labor force and businesses that often have
• Rising fuel costs can attract new ridership higher pay and better benefits
• Public support for public transit is growing • Regional, State and national policies can create new
• Public is more willing to consider new funding mechanisms, unfunded mandates
especially those that manage growth in congestion and provide
for transit expansion
• Increasing support for public/private partnerships
• Legislation including AB32 and SB375 contain requirements
that support agency goals
• History as a self-help county
• Current levels of jobs and population and projected growth in
the county

150 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 C H AP TE R FIV E S TRATE G IC PL ANNING ELEMENT

TABLE 5-3 Division Strategies and Goals

DIVISION STRATEGIES GOALS (refer to Figure 5-1 for key)

Administrative ‡ 0DQDJHDJHQF\ULVNWKURXJKULVNLGHQWL¿cation,
Services mitigation and prevention
‡ Build human capital
‡ Promote partnerships with represented and non-
represented employees
‡ Leverage technology to deliver agency services

Congestion ‡ Secure grants and leverage local contribution

Management Agency ‡ Establish vision and path for transportation investments
in Santa Clara County
‡ Set up projects for success
‡ Capture the value of VTA assets
‡ Align division resources and future responsibilities and
challenges

Engineering and ‡ Develop and implement a uniform project delivery

Construction model
‡ Deliver projects (on time and within budget)
‡ Develop comprehensive reporting structure on project
and program status

External Affairs ‡ Increase revenue

‡ Manage division resources
‡ 3URPRWHEHQH¿ts of VTA services
‡ Learn and share information about evolving mobility
and accessibility needs
‡ Promote importance of integrated land use and educate
community
‡ Improve communication with staff at all levels in VTA
and solicit input in decision-making and planning efforts
‡ Ensure response to and resolution of customer
complaints

Fiscal Resources ‡ 6DWLVI\H[WHUQDO¿nancial reporting requirements

‡ 'HYHORSDQGPDLQWDLQ¿nancial planning tools
‡ Prepare and disseminate information for agency
financial decision-making
‡ 0DQDJH¿nancial transactions
‡ Support development of new revenue sources
‡ Provide procurement and contract management services
that meet the needs of other division objectives
‡ 0DQDJHDJHQF\ULVNWKURXJKULVNLGHQWL¿cation,
mitigation and prevention

VA L L E Y T R A N SP O RTAT I ON PLAN 2035 | 151

 TABLE 5-3 (CONT’D) Division Strategies and Goals
‡ 0DQDJHDJHQF\ULVNWKURXJKULVNLGHQWL¿cation,
DIVISION mitigation and prevention
STRATEGIES GOALS

Operations ‡ 0DLQWDLQDQHIIHFWLYHDQGHI¿cient annual service plan

‡ 5H¿ne and expand application of performance tools
‡ Factor operating and maintenance expenses into capital
project planning
‡ 0DQDJH'LYLVLRQUHVRXUFHVIRUJUHDWHUHI¿ciency and
effectiveness
‡ Improve system security
‡ Upgrade Fleet Maintenance Management Program
‡ Review paratransit service delivery

Silicon Valley ‡ Reenter Federal New Starts process and position project
Rapid Transit for federal funding
‡ 'HYHORS6957¿nancial plan and seek funding revenues
‡ Position SVRT project as a high priority at the local and
regional levels
‡ Build the SVRT Project Delivery Team

MEASURES AND METRICS mode split, vehicle miles traveled, vehicle

VTA currently uses a wide range of measures hours of delay (duration of congestion), air

and metrics to gauge the performance and quality, transit access, and travel time.

status of its activities. Table 5-4 presents

UPDATING THE STRATEGIC PLAN
measures for gauging VTA’s progress with
ELEMENT
achieving its Strategic Plan Element goals. VTA
In conclusion, the Strategic Planning Element is
is currently in the process of developing addi-
dynamic, and will be periodically updated and
tional strategies for measuring and refining
used to measure VTA’s progress in meeting its
its services and business practices, and better
goals. It will be considered in each update of the
linking those with its goals. The results of this
VTP, if not more frequently, and used to inform
process may refine or add to those listed in
the Board’s discussion of programs and projects.
Table 5-4. This includes traffic level-of-service,

152 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 C H AP TE R FIV E S TRATE G IC PL ANNING ELEMENT

TABLE 5-4 Goals, Indicators, Measures and Metrics

KEY
GOALS INDICATORS MEASURES METRIC

Maintain Financial Financial Health Maintain adequate levels of funding to sustain the existing y/n
Stability transit system and secure new funds for expansion

Improve Mobility Travel Options Diversification of mode share +/-

and Access
Increase share of alternate modes (transit, carpool, car- +/-
share, walk, bike)

Decrease VMT and VHT +/-

Percent of population with access to transit +/-

Integrate Transportation Land Use Jobs and housing approvals within 1.3 mile of transit and +/-
and Land Use Changes cores, corridors and station areas

City Plan changes that focus development within 1/3 mile +/-
of transit

Enhance Customer Public Increase VTA’s customer satisfaction rate +/-

Focus Satisfaction
Maintain or improve system reliability y/n

Ensure that comprehensive public participation is a key y/n

input to transportation plans and projects

Build awareness of VTA (measure through annual phone +/-

surveys)

Increase Employee Quality Conduct annual employee surveys and respond to key y/n
Ownership Workforce areas of organizational areas identified

Provide training, education and coaching opportunities for y/n

employees

Build Ridership on the Ridership Increase ridership: riders per capita, ridership in COA +/-
Transit System core corridors, ridership in CDT cores, corridors and
station areas, ridership per passenger mile, ridership per
passenger hour

Improve Relationships Partnerships Build support for VTA services and programs +/-
Throughout the County

VA L L E Y T R A N SP ORTAT I O N PLAN 2035 | 153

 appendices

Appendix A: Detailed Project Lists and Descriptions

Appendix B: Community Design and Transportation Program

Appendix C: Transportation, Energy and Air Quality Program

Appendix D: Systemwide Performance Measures

Appendix E: Summary of VTA Guiding Policies

Appendix F: Glossary of Terms

VA L L E Y T R A N SP O RTAT I ON PLAN 2035 | 155

 Appendix A: Detailed Project Lists
and Descriptions
LOCAL STREETS AND COUNTY ROADS CONSTRAINED PROJECT LIST

TOTAL
PROJECT PROJECT VTP
VTP SPONSOR/ COST ALLOCATION
ID PROJECT TITLE LOCATION (‘08 $MILLIONS) (‘08 $MILLIONS)

R1 Hacienda Ave. Improvements— Campbell $3.5 $2.8

Reconstructs and reconfigures Hacienda
Ave. between Winchester Blvd. and San
Tomas Aquino Rd.

R2 Campbell Ave. Bicycle and Pedestrian Campbell $3.0 $2.4

Improvements under SR 17—Widen
both sides of Campbell Ave.; install new side-
walk behind the abutment walls; replace the
existing abutment walls with new retaining
and wing walls with portals on both sides of
East Campbell Ave.

R3 Rancho Rinconada Traffic Calming Cupertino $0.1 $0.1

Project—Develops a neighborhood traffic
management plan for the Rancho Rinconada
Neighborhood.

R4 IOOF Ave. Overcrossing—Construct Gilroy $14.5 $9.5

a new overcrossing at US 101 and IOOF
Ave. The new overcrossing will consist of a
two-lane structure with six-foot shoulders/
bicycle lanes and eight-foot sidewalks.

156 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 AP P ENDIX A

TOTAL
PROJECT PROJECT VTP
VTP SPONSOR/ COST ALLOCATION
ID PROJECT TITLE LOCATION (‘08 $MILLIONS) (‘08 $MILLIONS)

R5 Gilroy Orbital Concept (NW Gilroy $8.5 $6.0

Quadrant): Buena Vista Ave. to
Monterey Rd.—Construct a new four-lane
arterial that extends Buena Vista Ave. from
Santa Teresa Blvd. to Monterey Rd.

R6 Las Animas Ave. Overcrossing— Gilroy $9.2 $6.4

Construct new overcrossing at US 101 and
Las Animas Ave. The new overcrossing will
consist of a two-lane structure with six-
foot shoulders/bicycle lanes and eight-foot
sidewalks.

R7 Tenth St. Bridge Project—Construct a Gilroy $14.0 $9.5

four-lane bridge across Uvas Creek that con-
nects existing Tenth St. on the east side of
the channel with a new section of Tenth St.
on the west side of the channel. The bridge
will have four travel lanes plus bike lanes
and sidewalks. The project also includes a
new traffic signal at the intersection of Tenth
St. and Uvas Park Dr.

R8 Miramonte Ave. Bikeway Los Altos $1.4 $1.1

Improvements—Upgrades the bike route
(Class III) on Miramonte Ave. to a bike
lane (Class II) between Mountain View City
Limits at the northern end of Foothill Expwy.
at the southern end.

R9 SR 9 Gateway Enhancements at Los Gatos $3.0 $2.4

University Ave. and North Santa Cruz
Ave.—Enhance the capacity and appear-
ance by reconfiguring the intersections for
bicycle and pedestrian safety with traffic
signalization.

R10 Blossom Hill Rd. at University Ave. Los Gatos $1.0 $0.0
Intersection Improvements—Install
sidewalk, wheelchair ramps and a bicycle
lane to improve pedestrian and bicycle
movements. This project will also replace
existing outdated traffic signals.

VA L L E Y T R A N SP O RTAT I ON PLAN 2035 | 157

 TOTAL
PROJECT PROJECT VTP
VTP SPONSOR/ COST ALLOCATION
ID PROJECT TITLE LOCATION (‘08 $MILLIONS) (‘08 $MILLIONS)

R11 Calaveras Blvd. Overpass Widening Milpitas $70.0 $56.0

with Operational Improvements—
Replace the four-lane bridge over the
Union Pacific railroad tracks with a new
six-lane structure as well as new bicycle and
pedestrian facilities on both sides. Includes
intersection improvements at Abel St. and
from the overpass west to Abbott Ave. on
Calaveras Blvd.

R12 Montague Expwy. and Great Mall Milpitas $60.0 $48.0

Pkwy./Capitol Ave. Grade Separation—
Elevate Great Mall Pkwy./Capitol Ave. over
Montague Expwy., placing it at the same
level of the Tasman East Light Rail system.
Montague Expwy. and all turn movements
will remain at-grade level.

R13 Dixon Landing Rd. Widening—Project Milpitas $60.0 $48.0

consists of widening Dixon Landing Rd.
from four to six travel lanes between North
Milpitas Blvd. and I-880. This project will
also include provision of bicycle lanes,
sidewalks and an upgrade to the Union
Pacific Railroad crossing (located just east
of the Milmont Rd. signalized intersection).
These improvements will allow for enhanced
traffic flow on this critical east-west connec-
tor route.

R14 Dixon Landing Rd. and North Milpitas Milpitas $3.0 $2.4
Blvd. Intersection Improvements—The
Dixon Landing Rd. and North Milpitas Blvd.
intersection is a key northern gateway into
the City of Milpitas. Construct an additional
northbound and southbound left-turn lane
and an eastbound left and right-turn lane to
improve level of service at this location.

R15 Butterfield Blvd. South Extension— Morgan Hill $18.8 $9.4

Extends Butterfield Blvd. from Tennant Ave.
to Watsonville Rd. Constructs new roadway
segment and railroad overpass bridge,
extends drainage channel, upgrades traffic
signals, installs median and landscaping,
bike lanes and sidewalks.

158 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 AP P ENDIX A

TOTAL
PROJECT PROJECT VTP
VTP SPONSOR/ COST ALLOCATION
ID PROJECT TITLE LOCATION (‘08 $MILLIONS) (‘08 $MILLIONS)

R16 Santa Teresa Blvd. Improvements— Morgan Hill $10.2 $5.1

Construct a new roadway segment to provide
connection between West Main Ave. and
DeWitt Ave. at Spring Ave. The new segment
will be a four-lane arterial with median,
landscaping, sidewalks and bike lanes.

R17 Rengstorff Ave. Grade Separation— Mountain View $65.0 $64.9

This project will construct a grade separa-
tion, depressing Rengstorff Ave. under
the Caltrain tracks and reconnecting the
roadway to a new at-grade Rengstorff Ave.
and Central Expwy. intersection.

R18 Palo Alto Smart Residential Arterials— Palo Alto $10.0 $8.0
Designs and constructs Automated Traffic
Signal System elements, Electronic
Driver Speed Advisory signs and lighted
pedestrian crossings along five residen-
tial streets: Embarcadero Rd., University
Ave., Middlefield Rd., Charleston Rd. and
Arastradero Rd.

R19 Autumn Pkwy. Improvement from San Jose $33.0 $26.4

Union Pacific Railroad to Park Ave.—
Extend new four-lane multimodal street
from Union Pacific Railroad crossing to St.
John St. and improve existing Autumn St.
from St. John St. to Park Ave.

R20 North First St. Core Area Grid Streets— San Jose $61.0 $0.0
Several local streets will be constructed to
form a “grid system” of streets to serve future
development and provide connections to all
major arterials in North San Jose.

R21 Chynoweth Ave. Extension from San Jose $15.0 $12.0

Almaden Expwy. to Winfield Blvd.—
Road will provide a new four-lane connec-
tion. Chynoweth Ave. bridge will include
construction of a new connector, bike lanes
and sidewalks.

VA L L E Y T R A N SP ORTAT I O N PLAN 2035 | 159

 TOTAL
PROJECT PROJECT VTP
VTP SPONSOR/ COST ALLOCATION
ID PROJECT TITLE LOCATION (‘08 $MILLIONS) (‘08 $MILLIONS)

R22 Charcot Ave. Extension Over I-880— San Jose $34.0 $17.0
Planned Charcot Ave. overpass will cross
I-880 and provide extension from Charcot
Ave. to Old Oakland Rd. Connection will pro-
vide an alternative east/west route to Brokaw
Rd. and Montague Expwy. as well as provide
for bicycle and pedestrian access.

R23 Coleman Ave. Widening from I-880 San Jose $13.0 $10.4
to Taylor St.—Widen Coleman Ave. to six
lanes as part of an enhanced highway gate-
way to serve planned expansion of Downtown
San Jose.

R24 King Rd. Bridge Replacement and San Jose $5.0 $4.0
Widening at Penitencia Creek—
Eliminate roadway bottleneck along King
Rd. and replace bridge to accommodate
flood control and bicycle and pedestrian trail
facilities along Penitencia Creek, a bicycle
and pedestrian access route to the planned
Berryessa BART station.

R25 Branham Ln. Widening from Vista San Jose $10.3 $8.2
Park Dr. to Snell Ave.—Widen Branham
Ln. to four lanes and add sidewalks, bike
lanes and median islands. Eliminate roadway
bottleneck and enhance bicycle and pedes-
trian facilities to create part of a multi-modal
transportation corridor along planned
“agriculture heritage” park and connecting
with Branham Light Rail Station, Guadalupe
River Trail and Coyote Creek Trail.

R26 Blossom Hill Rd. Bike/Ped San Jose $10.0 $0.0

Improvements—Provides bicycle and
pedestrian overcrossing at Blossom Hill Rd./
Monterey Highway area over Union Pacific
Railroad tracks.

R27 Caltrain Pedestrian Crossing Bridge at San Jose $2.5 $0.0

Blossom Hill Station—Pedestrian bridge
connecting Edenvale Transit Village, which
includes 2,000 housing units, to Caltrain Rail
Station.

160 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 AP P ENDIX A

TOTAL
PROJECT PROJECT VTP
VTP SPONSOR/ COST ALLOCATION
ID PROJECT TITLE LOCATION (‘08 $MILLIONS) (‘08 $MILLIONS)

R28 Almaden Rd. Improvement from San Jose $5.4 $4.2

Malone Rd. to Curtner Ave.—Project will
provide significant bottleneck relief, continu-
ous bicycle and pedestrian improvements,
sidewalk improvements and bicycle trail
connections.

R29 Downtown Couplet Conversion San Jose $22.0 $11.0

Projects—Conversion of one-way couplets
to two-way streets, reduce lanes and add bike
lanes along 10th St. and 11th St., Almaden
Ave. and Vine St., and 2nd St. and 3rd St.

R30 North San Jose Bicycle and Pedestrian San Jose $33.0 $0.0
Improvements—New bike lanes and side-
walks to convert previously auto-oriented
streets into multimodal streets.

R31 Snell Ave. Widening from Branham San Jose $4.0 $3.2
Ln. to Chynoweth Ave.—Widen Snell Ave.
and add median landscaping to relieve con-
gestion, improve safety, enhance aesthetics.

R32 Zanker Rd. Widening from US 101 to San Jose $54.0 $0.0
Tasman Dr.—Widen Zanker Rd. from to six
lanes to support traffic circulation in North
San Jose area.

R33 Branham Ln./Monterey Hwy Grade San Jose $30.0 $24.0

Crossing Project—Reconstructs the
Branham Ln. intersection with Monterey
Hwy below the Caltrain and Union Pacific
Railroad corridor to improve safety and
accommodate California High Speed Rail.
Includes R35 - Caltrain Grade Separation at
Branham Ln.

R34 Neiman Blvd. Pedestrian Overcrossing San Jose $8.0 $6.4

at Capitol Expwy.—Project provides new
connection for bicycle and pedestrian safety
and improved access to Eastridge Transit
Center.

R35 Caltrain Grade Separation at Branham San Jose — —

Ln.—Included in R33.

VA L L E Y T R A N SP ORTAT I O N PLAN 2035 | 161

 TOTAL
PROJECT PROJECT VTP
VTP SPONSOR/ COST ALLOCATION
ID PROJECT TITLE LOCATION (‘08 $MILLIONS) (‘08 $MILLIONS)

R36 Senter Rd. Widening from Umbarger San Jose $5.4 $4.3
Rd. to Lewis Rd.—Eliminates roadway
bottleneck, improves bicycle and pedestrian
facilities and installs median landscaping.

R37 North San Jose Miscellaneous San Jose $29.0 $0.0

Intersection Improvements—Makes
improvements to various intersections in
North San Jose.

R38 Bird Ave. Pedestrian Corridor— San Jose $3.0 $2.4

Development of bicycle lanes, sidewalks and
interchange improvements.

R39 Park Ave. Improvements from Bird San Jose $4.1 $3.3
Ave. to SR87—Widen Park Ave. to add
median islands and improve bike/ped facili-
ties at gateway to Downtown San Jose.

R40 Oakland Rd. Improvements from 101 San Jose $10.0 $5.0
to Montague – Phase 2—Completes
widening of Oakland Rd. to six lanes for
improved capacity and traffic flow and adds
median islands for enhanced safety and
aesthetics.

R41 Auzerais Ave. Bicycle and Pedestrian San Jose $1.9 $1.5
Improvements from Sunol St. to Race
St.—Adds bicycle lanes, sidewalks and
streetscape amenities in the Midtown area
improving connection between high-density
housing and Light Rail Transit.

R42 Caltrain Grade Separation at Skyway San Jose $25.0 $20.0

Dr.—Roadway underpass grade separation
at Caltrain railroad tracks and future High
Speed Rail. Includes significant safety and
multimodal access improvements.

R43 San Carlos St. Bridge Replacement San Jose $10.0 $8.0
and Widening at Caltrain/ Vasona
LRT—Replace structurally deficient bridge
with improved facilities for biking and
walking.

162 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 AP P ENDIX A

TOTAL
PROJECT PROJECT VTP
VTP SPONSOR/ COST ALLOCATION
ID PROJECT TITLE LOCATION (‘08 $MILLIONS) (‘08 $MILLIONS)

R44 Great America Pkwy./Mission College Santa Clara $6.5 $5.2

Blvd. Intersection Improvements—
Intersection Improvements at the intersec-
tion of Great American Pkwy. and Mission
College Blvd. This includes widening and
capacity improvements to add triple left
turns in two directions and traffic signal
upgrades.

R45 El Camino Real and Lafayette St. Santa Clara $1.0 $0.8
Intersection Improvements—Widening
and capacity improvements and signal
systems upgrades at the intersection of El
Camino Real and Lafayette St.

R46 Reconstruction/Rehabilitation of Santa Clara $15.0 $12.0

Various Streets—Reconstruction and
Rehabilitation of entire streets network.
Includes street pavements, sidewalks, curbs
and gutters and utilities.

R47 El Camino Real/San Tomas Expwy. Santa Clara $0.8 $0.6

Intersection Improvements—
Intersection Improvements at El Camino
Real and San Tomas Expwy., including
widening and capacity improvements and
traffic signal upgrades.

R48 Center Ave. and Marcella Ave. two- Santa Clara County $3.0 $2.4
lane Connection—Extend Center Ave.
approx. 0.2 miles as a two-lane roadway to
connect to Marcella Ave.

R49 DeWitt Ave./Sunnyside Ave. Santa Clara County $6.6 $5.3

Realignment at Edmunsen Ave.—
Aligns DeWitt Ave. with Sunnyside Ave. to
eliminate the existing offset intersection and
introduce shoulder treatments.

R50 Hill Rd. Extension from East Main Santa Clara County $8.0 $6.4
Ave. to Peet Rd.—Constructs a new two-
lane alignment for Hill Rd. from East Main
Ave. across Half Rd. and connect to Peet Rd.
Project also includes realigning existing Peet
Rd. approach to Half Rd. to line up and con-
nect with an extension of Hill Rd.

VA L L E Y T R A N SP O RTAT I ON PLAN 2035 | 163

 TOTAL
PROJECT PROJECT VTP
VTP SPONSOR/ COST ALLOCATION
ID PROJECT TITLE LOCATION (‘08 $MILLIONS) (‘08 $MILLIONS)

R51 Marcella Ave. Two-Lane Santa Clara County $6.0 $4.8

Realignment—Realign existing two-lane
Marcella Ave. into a straighter line (elimi-
nate 90-degree zig-zag along the alignment)
to improve line of sight and level of service.

R52 Foothill-Loyola Bridge—Widen Loyola Santa Clara County $1.0 $0.8

Bridge over Foothill Expwy. to add a third
lane (for left turns), six-foot shoulders for
bicycle use and five-foot sidewalks with
pedestrian ramps.

R53 Fitzgerald Ave./Masten Ave. Santa Clara County $0.6 $0.5

Realignment at Monterey Rd.—
Straighten the existing off-set intersection
to provide an aligned intersection and add a
left-turn lane to Fitzgerald Ave. It will also
provide bike lanes and sidewalks.

R54 Alum Rock Ave. Pedestrian Santa Clara County $0.4 $0.3
Connection to Miguelita Bridge—
Construct pedestrian facilities, pedestrian
ramps and install signage, striping and
crosswalks to close the sidewalk gap on Alum
Rock Ave. eastbound approach to the newly
constructed Miguelita Creek Pedestrian
Bridge.

R55 Santa Teresa Blvd. & Tilton Ave. Santa Clara County $0.6 $0.5
Traffic Signal Improvements—
Installation of traffic signal at the intersec-
tion of Santa Teresa Blvd. and Tilton Ave.

R56 Railroad Crossing Improvements at Santa Clara County $0.7 $0.6

Church Ave. and Monterey Hwy.—
Improves the railroad crossing and traffic
operation and safety at the Church Ave. and
Monterey Hwy. intersection for all modes of
transportation.

R57 McKee Rd. Pedestrian Santa Clara County $0.4 $0.3

Improvements—Construct sidewalks and
pedestrian ramps along McKee Rd. between
White Rd. and Staples Ave. Install signage,
striping and crosswalks; and create parking
restricted zone due to visual obstruction if
needed.

164 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 AP P ENDIX A

TOTAL
PROJECT PROJECT VTP
VTP SPONSOR/ COST ALLOCATION
ID PROJECT TITLE LOCATION (‘08 $MILLIONS) (‘08 $MILLIONS)

R58 Watsonville Rd. Center Turn Lane— Santa Clara County $7.0 $5.6
Add center lane and right turn improve-
ments where needed to serve driveways and
cross streets and improve paved shoulders
for bicycle use.

R59 Santa Teresa Blvd. & San Martin Santa Clara County $0.6 $0.5
Ave. Traffic Signal Improvements—
Installation of traffic signal at the intersection
of Santa Teresa Blvd. and San Martin Ave.

R60 Doyle Rd. Bicycle and Pedestrian Santa Clara County $0.4 $0.3
Trail Connection—Provide bicycle and
pedestrian access from where Doyle Rd.
deadends into Lawrence Expwy. (currently a
T-intersection) to the trail west of Lawrence
Expwy. Project involves adding a crosswalk
on Lawrence Expwy., modifying the signal
system for the crossing, modifying a sound-
wall to create an opening for the bicyclist/
pedestrians and making other bicycle/
pedestrian improvements necessary for trail
access.

R61 SR 9 Pedestrian Safety Improvement— Saratoga $2.0 $1.6

SR 9 Pedestrian Safety Improvements
consist of pedestrian sidewalk/paths and
include supporting improvements such as
AC dikes, drainage improvements, util-
ity under grounding/relocation, retaining
walls/concrete barriers, driveway/property
restorations, ADA compliant curb ramps,
clearing/grubbing, tree removal and signing/
striping. A bicycle and pedestrian bridge
spanning Los Gatos Creek and connecting
to the existing creek trail is also part of this
project.

R62 Citywide Signal Upgrade Project Phase Saratoga $0.5 $0.4

II—Provide Traffic Management System at
City Hall and communication equipment to
all upgraded signals. Interconnect signals
along Coordination Corridors and coordinate
with Management System.

VA L L E Y T R A N SP ORTAT I O N PLAN 2035 | 165

 TOTAL
PROJECT PROJECT VTP
VTP SPONSOR/ COST ALLOCATION
ID PROJECT TITLE LOCATION (‘08 $MILLIONS) (‘08 $MILLIONS)

R63 Herriman Ave./Saratoga Ave. Traffic Saratoga $0.3 $0.2

Signal—Install a traffic signal at the inter-
section of Herriman Ave. and Saratoga Ave.
that currently meets traffic warrants.

R64 Prospect Rd. Median Project—This Saratoga $2.0 $1.6

project will provide new medians with land-
scape along Prospect Rd. between Saratoga
Ave. and Saratoga-Sunnyvale Rd. This is a
joint project between the City of Saratoga
and City of San Jose. The existing median
along Prospect Rd. consist of State detail 22
striping.

R65 Verde Vista Ln. Traffic Signal—Install Saratoga $0.3 $0.2

a traffic signal at the intersection of Verde
Vista Ln. and Saratoga-Sunnyvale Rd. that
currently meets traffic warrants.

R66 Saratoga Ave. Rehabilitation and Saratoga $0.8 $0.6

Overlay Project—Provide pavement reha-
bilitation and overlay for several segments
along Saratoga Ave., including new striping
and bike facilities in the final striping wher-
ever feasible and consistent with local plans.
The project will consist of two phases along
Saratoga Ave.

R67 Saratoga Ave. Sidewalk Pedestrian Saratoga $0.3 $0.2

Improvement—Provide the necessary
sidewalk gap closure that exists between the
project limits, including new concrete gut-
ters, curbs, sidewalks and handicap ramps.

R68 Mary Ave. Extension—Reduces conges- Sunnyvale $58.0 $29.0

tion and increases access to the Moffett
Industrial Park area by extending Mary
Ave. north across SR-237, reconfiguring
the Mathilda Ave./US-101 interchange,
re-routing Moffett Park Dr. and modifying
the eastbound SR 237/Northbound Mathilda
Ave. flyover to create an alternative north/
south route.

166 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 AP P ENDIX A

TOTAL
PROJECT PROJECT VTP
VTP SPONSOR/ COST ALLOCATION
ID PROJECT TITLE LOCATION (‘08 $MILLIONS) (‘08 $MILLIONS)

R69 Lawrence Expwy. and Wildwood Sunnyvale $5.0 $4.0

Ave. Realignment and Signalization—
Realigns Wildwood Ave. to connect directly
with Lawrence Expwy. and creates a new
signalized intersection at Lawrence Expwy.
and Wildwood Ave.

R70 Comprehensive Sidewalk Network for Sunnyvale $8.1 $6.5

Employment Areas—Completion of side-
walks on all City streets in industrial areas.

R71 Sunnyvale Local Street Sunnyvale $14.7 $0.0

Improvements—Intersection widening
and sidewalk improvements at various loca-
tions citywide.

R72 Sunnyvale Downtown Specific Plan Sunnyvale $13.0 $10.4

Transportation Improvements—
Intersection and streetscape enhancements,
bikeways, signal improvements and roadway
reconfiguration.

R73 Installation of Pedestrian Countdown Sunnyvale $0.2 $0.2

Signals—Installation of pedestrian count-
down signals at all signalized intersections
citywide.

LOCAL STREETS AND COUNTY ROADS UNCONSTRAINED PROJECT LIST

R74 Blossom Hill Rd. and Union Ave. Los Gatos $3.0 $0.0
Intersection Improvements—Widen
roadway, install new traffic signals and
modify intersection to improve circulation
and safety.

R75 Los Gatos-Almaden Rd. Los Gatos $2.5 $0.0

Improvements—Installation of storm
drain system, curb and gutter and sidewalk
to provide continuous bicycle and pedestrian
facilities from Cherry Blossom Ln. to Taft Dr.

VA L L E Y T R A N SP ORTAT I O N PLAN 2035 | 167

 TOTAL
PROJECT PROJECT VTP
VTP SPONSOR/ COST ALLOCATION
ID PROJECT TITLE LOCATION (‘08 $MILLIONS) (‘08 $MILLIONS)

R76 Los Gatos Blvd. Widening - Lark Ave. Los Gatos $0.8 $0.0
to Samaritan Dr.—Road widening and
installation of sidewalks and bicycle lanes
between Lark Ave. and Samaritan Dr.

R77 Union Ave. Widening and Sidewalks— Los Gatos $0.6 $0.0
Widen Union Ave. and install sidewalks to
complete pedestrian and bicycle routes and
improve circulation.

R78 Wedgewood Ave. Traffic and Los Gatos $1.0 $0.0

Pedestrian Safety Improvements -
Phase II—Addresses traffic safety improve-
ments, pedestrian safety improvements and
storm drainage issues.

R79 Wood Rd. Gateway on Santa Cruz Los Gatos $1.0 $0.0
Ave.—Installation of a roundabout to calm
traffic entering and exiting SR 17 adjacent to
Wood Rd.

R80 Downtown Palo Alto Traffic Signals Palo Alto $1.2 $0.0
Upgrade—Install emergency vehicle
pre-emption detectors and video detection
cameras at 30 signalized intersections on
University Ave., Lytton Ave. and Hamilton
Ave. between Middlefield Rd. and Alma St.

R81 Quito Rd. Sidewalk Improvements— Saratoga $0.3 $0.0

This project will provide the necessary
sidewalk gap closure that exists between the
project limits. This project will include new
concrete gutters, curbs, sidewalks and handi-
cap ramps. Approximately 1100 linear feet of
sidewalk will be placed along the eastside of
Quito Rd.

R82 Citywide Traffic Calming Program— Sunnyvale $3.0 $0.0

Traffic calming capital construction in
Sunnyvale residential neighborhoods.

R83 Installation of In-Pavement Lighted Sunnyvale $0.7 $0.0

Crosswalks—Installation of in pavement
lighted crosswalks at 10 locations citywide.

168 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 AP P ENDIX A

TOTAL
PROJECT PROJECT VTP
VTP SPONSOR/ COST ALLOCATION
ID PROJECT TITLE LOCATION (‘08 $MILLIONS) (‘08 $MILLIONS)

R84 Installation of Radar Speed Signs for Sunnyvale $0.2 $0.0

School Areas—Installation of 20 pole
mounted radar speed feedback signs in
school zones or on school routes.

R85 Replacement of Signal Controllers Sunnyvale $2.7 $0.0

Citywide—Replacement of signal control-
lers that have reached the end of their
functional life.

R86 SR 82 Gateway Program—Enhance Sunnyvale $4.0 $0.0

gateways to Sunnyvale on El Camino Real
with focal point features such as towers,
fountains, beacons, gateposts, pylons and/
or signs.

R87 Junipero Serra Blvd. Traffic Calming— Santa Clara County $1.7 $0.0
Construct a continuous eight to twelve foot
wide median with bulb-outs at each end and
possibly in the middle as a traffic calming
measure near Stanford University.

R88 Magdalena at Country Club intersec- Santa Clara County $0.7 $0.0
tion signal—Install new traffic signals at
the Magdalena Ave./Country Club Dr. inter-
section and coordinate with existing signals
at Foothill Expwy. and Magdalena Ave. as
well as Fremont Ave. and Springer Rd.

VA L L E Y T R A N SP O RTAT I ON PLAN 2035 | 169

 HIGHWAY CONSTRAINED PROJECT LIST

TOTAL
PROJECT PROJECT VTP
VTP SPONSOR/ COST ALLOCATION
ID PROJECT TITLE LOCATION (‘08 $MILLIONS) (‘08 $MILLIONS)

H1 SR 85 Express Lanes: US 101 (South Mountain View, Los $72.0 $72.0

San Jose to Mountain View)—Convert Altos, Sunnyvale,
existing HOV lanes on SR 85 to express Cupertino, Saratoga,
lanes. Campbell, Los Gatos
and San Jose

H2 SR 87 Express Lanes: SR 85 to US San Jose $30.0 $30.0

101 (Conversion)—Convert HOV lane to
express lane.

H3 US 101 Express Lanes: San Mateo Palo Alto, Mountain $12.0 $12.0
Countyline to SR 85 in Mountain View View, Sunnyvale,
(Conversion)—Convert existing HOV lanes Santa Clara, San
to express Lanes on US 101 from the San Jose
Mateo County line to SR 85 in Mountain
View.

H4 US 101 Express Lanes: SR 85 (San San Jose, Morgan $23.0 $23.0

Jose) to Cochrane Rd. (Conversion)— Hill, Santa Clara
Convert existing HOV lanes to express lanes County
on US 101 from SR 85 in South San Jose to
Cochrane Rd. in Morgan Hill.

H5 US 101 Express Lanes: SR 85 in Palo Alto, Mountain $90.0 $90.0

Mountain View to SR 85 in San Jose View, Sunnyvale,
(Conversion)—Convert existing HOV lanes Santa Clara, San
to express lanes on US 101 between SR 85 Jose
Mountain View and SR 85 in San Jose.

H6 US 101 HOV/Express Lanes: Cochrane Morgan Hill, Santa $93.0 $93.0

Rd. to Masten Ave.—Build HOV/express Clara County
lanes on US 101 from Cochrane Rd. to
Masten Ave.

H7 US 101 HOV/Express Lanes: Masten Gilroy, Santa Clara $59.0 $59.0

Ave. to 10th St.—Build HOV/express lanes County
on US 101 from Masten Ave. to 10th St. in
Gilroy.

H8 US 101 HOV/Express Lanes: 10th St. to Gilroy, Santa Clara $43.0 $43.0
SR 25—Build HOV/express lane on US 101 County
between 10th St and SR 25 in Gilroy.

170 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 AP P ENDIX A

TOTAL
PROJECT PROJECT VTP
VTP SPONSOR/ COST ALLOCATION
ID PROJECT TITLE LOCATION (‘08 $MILLIONS) (‘08 $MILLIONS)

H9 SR 237 Express Lanes: I-880 to Milpitas, San $20.0 $20.0

Mathilda Ave. (Conversion)—Convert Jose, Santa
existing HOV lanes to express lanes from Clara, Sunnyvale,
I-880 to Mathilda Ave. Mountain View

H10 SR 237 Express Lane Connectors Milpitas $5.0 $5.0

(Milpitas) to I-880—Convert HOV direct
freeway connectors, I-880 southbound to
SR 237 westbound and SR 237 eastbound
to I-880 northbound to express direct
connectors.

H11 SR 237 HOV/Express Lanes: Mathilda Sunnyvale and $70.0 $70.0

Ave. to SR 85—Build new HOV/express Mountain View
lanes on SR 237 between Mathilda Ave. and
SR 85.

H12 I-280 Express Lanes: Leland Ave. to San Jose, Cupertino, $50.0 $50.0
Magdalena Ave. (Conversion)—Convert Los Altos
existing HOV lanes to express lanes on I-280
from Leland Ave. to Magdalena Ave.

H13 I-280 Express Lanes: US 101 to Leland San Jose $21.0 $21.0
Ave.—Build HOV/express lanes on I-280
between US 101 and Leland Ave.

H14 I-280 HOV/Express Lanes: Los Altos Hills $12.0 $12.0

Southbound El Monte Rd. to
Magdalena Ave.—Build HOV/express lane
on I-280 southbound from El Monte Rd. to
Magdalena Ave.

H15 I-680 HOV/Express Lanes: Calaveras Milpitas and San $30.0 $30.0
Blvd. to US 101—Convert to HOV/express Jose
lane on I-680 between Calaveras Blvd. and
US 101.

H16 I-880 Express Lanes: Alameda Morgan Hill, Santa $20.0 $20.0
Countyline to US 101 (Conversion)— Clara County
Convert existing HOV lanes to express lanes
on I-880 from Alameda Countyline to
US 1o1.

VA L L E Y T R A N SP ORTAT I O N PLAN 2035 | 171

 TOTAL
PROJECT PROJECT VTP
VTP SPONSOR/ COST ALLOCATION
ID PROJECT TITLE LOCATION (‘08 $MILLIONS) (‘08 $MILLIONS)

H17 SR 17 Southbound/Hamilton Ave. Campbell $1.0 $1.0

Off-Ramp Widening—Widen off ramp
to include extra lane at Hamilton Ave. from
southbound SR 17.

H18 SR 25/Santa Teresa Blvd./US 101 Gilroy $233.0 $233.0

Interchange (includes US 101 widen-
ing between Monterey Rd. and SR
25 and connection to Santa Teresa
Blvd.)—Constructs a full interchange at
the intersection of US 101 and SR 25. The
project also includes a widening of US 101
between Monterey Hwy and SR 25 and an
extention to Santa Teresa Blvd.

H19 SR 85 Northbound to Eastbound SR Mountain View $26.0 $26.0

237 Connector Ramp and Northbound
SR 85 Auxiliary Lane—Widens off-ramp
from northbound SR 85 to eastbound SR 237
to two lanes. Constructs auxiliary lane on
eastbound SR 237 between SR 85 on-ramp
and Middlefield Rd. Constructs braided
off-ramp on eastbound SR 237 between SR
85 and Dana St.

H20 Fremont Ave. Improvements at SR Sunnyvale $3.0 $3.0

85—Ramp improvements at Fremont Ave.
interchange and reconfiguration at Bernardo
Ave.

H21 SR 85/Cottle Rd. Interchange San Jose $5.0 $0.0

Improvements—Interchange improve-
ments with minor ramp reconfiguration at
SR 85 and Cottle Rd.

H22 SR 87/Capitol Expwy./Narvaez Ave. San Jose $10.0 $5.0

Interchange Improvements—Make
changes to the SR 87 interchange, with
possible adjustment at Narvaez Ave.

H23 US 101/Montague Expwy./San Santa Clara County $12.0 $10.0

Tomas Expwy./Mission College Blvd.
Interchange Improvements—Construct
partial cloverleaf interchange at US 101 and
Montague Expwy.

172 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 AP P ENDIX A

TOTAL
PROJECT PROJECT VTP
VTP SPONSOR/ COST ALLOCATION
ID PROJECT TITLE LOCATION (‘08 $MILLIONS) (‘08 $MILLIONS)

H24 US 101/Trimble Rd./De La Cruz San Jose $34.0 $17.0

Blvd./Central Expwy. Interchange
Improvements—Modifies existing loop
cloverleaf ramp from southbound US 101 to
Trimble Rd. into a partial cloverleaf ramp
(diagional ramp with signalized intersec-
tion). The southbound US 101 on-ramp from
De La Cruz Blvd./Central Expwy. will be
modified to one mixed-flow lane and one
HOV lane with ramp metering equipment.

H25 US 101/Blossom Hill Rd. Interchange San Jose $20.0 $9.0

Improvements—Reconfigure interchange
at US 101/Blossom Hill Rd. in San Jose;
modifications are on the local roadway
system, including widening of Blossom Hill
Rd. over US 101.

H26 US 101/Mabury Rd./Taylor St. San Jose $49.0 $24.0

Interchange Improvements—Constructs
a new interchange with full access to the
US 101 freeway.

H27 US 101 Southbound Auxiliary Lane: Sunnyvale $3.0 $3.0

Great America Parkway to Lawrence
Expwy.—Auxiliary lane on US 101 from
Great America Pkwy. to Lawrence Expwy.

H28 US 101/Old Oakland Rd. Interchange San Jose $20.0 $10.0

Improvements—Interchange improve-
ments at US 101 and Old Oakland Rd.
Project may include additional widening of
Old Oakland Rd.

H29 US 101 Southbound Widening from San Jose $63.0 $0.0

Story Rd. to Yerba Buena Road—Adds
a lane on southbound US 101 between south
of Story Rd. to Yerba Buena Rd. The project
also includes the modification of the US 101/
Tully Rd. interchange to a partial cloverleaf.

VA L L E Y T R A N SP O RTAT I ON PLAN 2035 | 173

 TOTAL
PROJECT PROJECT VTP
VTP SPONSOR/ COST ALLOCATION
ID PROJECT TITLE LOCATION (‘08 $MILLIONS) (‘08 $MILLIONS)

H30 US 101/Capitol Expwy. Interchange San Jose $40.0 $40.0

Improvements (includes new
Northbound on-ramp from Yerba
Buena Rd.)—Converts the interchange into
partial cloverleaf interchage and adds ramp
storage capacity.

H31 US 101/Tennant Ave. Interchange Morgan Hill $17.0 $8.5

Improvements—Constructs a new bridge
parallel to existing bridge over US 101,
widens Tennant Ave. to four lanes with bike
lanes and sidewalks. A northbound loop
on-ramp will be constructed.

H32 US 101 Southbound Auxiliary Lane San Jose $9.0 $9.0

Widening: I-880 to McKee—US 101
Southbound add an auxiliary lane from
1-880 to McKee Rd.

H33 US 101 Auxiliary Lanes - SR 85 to Mountain View $103.0 $0.0

Embarcadero Rd.—Auxiliary lanes on
US 101 in Mountain view and Palo Alto, from
SR 85 to Embarcadero Rd.

H34 US 101 Ramp Metering Facilities: Santa Clara County $7.0 $7.0
10th St—Installation of ramp metering
devices at the 10th St. interchange, with
possible ramp widening.

H35 US 101 Ramp Metering Facilities at Santa Clara County $10.0 $10.0
Leavesley Rd.—Installation of ramp
metering devices at the interchange, with
possible ramp widening.

H36 US 101 Ramp Metering Facilities: Santa Clara County $5.0 $5.0
Masten Ave.—Installation of ramp meter-
ing devices at the interchange, with possible
ramp widening.

H37 US 101 Ramp Metering Facilities: San Santa Clara County $5.0 $5.0
Martin Ave.—Installation of ramp meter-
ing devices at the interchange, with possible
ramp widening.

174 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 AP P ENDIX A

TOTAL
PROJECT PROJECT VTP
VTP SPONSOR/ COST ALLOCATION
ID PROJECT TITLE LOCATION (‘08 $MILLIONS) (‘08 $MILLIONS)

H38 US 101 Ramp Metering Facilities: Santa Clara County $6.0 $6.0
Tennant Ave.—Installation of ramp meter-
ing devices at the interchange, with possible
ramp widening.

H39 US 101 Ramp Metering Facilities: Santa Clara County $5.0 $5.0
E. Dunne Ave.—Installation of ramp
metering devices at the interchange, with
possible ramp widening.

H40 US 101 Ramp Metering Facilities: Santa Clara County $6.0 $6.0
Cochrane Ave.—Installation of ramp
metering devices at the interchange, with
possible ramp widening.

H41 US 101 Ramp Metering Facilities: Santa Clara County $5.0 $5.0
Coyote Creek Golf Dr.—Installation of
ramp metering devices at the interchange,
with possible ramp widening.

H42 US 101 Ramp Metering Facilities: Santa Clara County $4.0 $4.0
Bailey Ave.—Installation of ramp meter-
ing devices at the interchange, with possible
ramp widening.

H43 US 101 Ramp and Intersection Santa Clara County $1.0 $1.0
Improvements: Southbound off-ramp
at Tennant Ave.—Widen off-ramp from
to three lanes to provide a second right turn
lane.

H44 US 101 Ramp/Intersection Santa Clara County $3.0 $3.0

Improvements: Southbound Ramp at
10th St.—Improve the US 101 southbound
ramp at 10th St.

H45 US 101 Ramp/Intersection Santa Clara County $1.0 $1.0

Improvements: US 101 Southbound
and Northbound Ramps at Masten
Ave.—Signalize ramp termini.

H46 US 101 TOS Improvements—Incident Santa Clara County $35.0 $35.0

management, CCTV, speed control system
in South County area between SR 85 and
Monterey Rd.

VA L L E Y T R A N SP O RTAT I ON PLAN 2035 | 175

 TOTAL
PROJECT PROJECT VTP
VTP SPONSOR/ COST ALLOCATION
ID PROJECT TITLE LOCATION (‘08 $MILLIONS) (‘08 $MILLIONS)

H47 US 101/Hellyer Ave. Interchange San Jose $14.0 $12.0

Improvements—Reconfigure interchange
at US 101/Hellyer Ave. in San Jose by widen-
ing the overcrossing from to four lanes and
installing traffic signals at each of the two
off-ramp intersections.

H48 US 101/Zanker Rd./Skyport San Jose $90.0 $45.0

Dr./Fourth St. Interchange
Improvements—Constructs a new
interchange connecting Zanker Rd. and Old
Bayshore Highway, with North Fourth St.
and Skyport Dr. at US 101.

H49 US 101 Southbound Auxiliary Lane Sunnyvale $4.0 $4.0

Improvement Between Ellis St. and
SR 237—Constructs a southbound auxilliary
lane on US 101 from Ellis St. interchange to
eastbound SR 237.

H50 US 101 Ramp/Intersection Santa Clara County $1.0 $1.0

Improvements: Southbound off-ramp
at Cochrane Rd.—Widen southbound off
ramp to three lanes.

H51 US 101 Ramp/Intersection Santa Clara County $1.0 $1.0

Improvements:Northbound off-ramp
at Cochrane Rd.—Widen eastbound
approach to Cochrane to provide 2nd thru
lane.

H52 US 101 Ramp/Intersection Santa Clara County $2.0 $2.0

Improvements at Dunne Ave.—Local
street improvements.

H53 US 101/Buena Vista Ave. Interchange Gilroy $27.0 $27.0

Improvements—Project includes con-
struction of a flyover southbound on-ramp to
braid with the existing truck exit at the CHP
Inspection Station. Off-ramp diagonal ramps
will be constructed.

H54 US 101 Ramp/Intersection Santa Clara County $1.0 $1.0

Improvements: US 101 Southbound
Ramps at San Martin Ave.—Signalize
ramp termini at US 101 and San Martin Ave.

176 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 AP P ENDIX A

TOTAL
PROJECT PROJECT VTP
VTP SPONSOR/ COST ALLOCATION
ID PROJECT TITLE LOCATION (‘08 $MILLIONS) (‘08 $MILLIONS)

H55 US 101 Southbound Improvements Palo Alto, Mountain $19.0 $19.0

from San Antonio Rd. to Charleston View
Rd./Rengstorff Ave.—Southbound
improvements on US 101 from San Antonio
Rd. to Charleston Rd./Rengstorff Ave.

H56 US 101 Widening to Six-Lane Freeway: Santa Clara County $170.0 $0.0
SR 25 to SR 129—Widen US 101 to six
lanes from SR 25 to SR 129.

H57 SR 152 Improvements: Intersection Santa Clara County $2.0 $2.0

Improvement at Ferguson Road—
Provides lighting and widening improve-
ments at the intersection of SR 152 from
Ferguson Rd.

H58 SR 152 Ramp/Intersection Santa Clara County $2.0 $2.0

Improvements: SR 152 at Bloomfield
Ave.—Ramp and intersection improvements
for SR 152 at Bloomfield Ave.

H59 SR 152 Ramp/Intersection Santa Clara County $2.0 $2.0

Improvements: SR 152 at Frazier Lake
Rd.—Intersection improvements at SR 152
at Frazier Lake Rd.

H60 SR 152 Ramp/Intersection Santa Clara County $3.0 $3.0

Improvements: SR 152 at Watsonville
Rd.—Construct a left turn lane on eastbound
SR 152 at the Watsonville Rd. intersection,
add a refuge area for motorists turning
left onto eastbound SR 152, improve the
shoulders to provide motorists with addi-
tional recovery area and overlay the existing
pavement.

H61 New SR 152 Alignment: SR 156 to Gilroy, Santa Clara $350.0 $350.0
US 101—Construct new SR 152 alignment and San Benito
Counties
between SR 156 and US 101 and conversion
to toll highway.

VA L L E Y T R A N SP ORTAT I O N PLAN 2035 | 177

 TOTAL
PROJECT PROJECT VTP
VTP SPONSOR/ COST ALLOCATION
ID PROJECT TITLE LOCATION (‘08 $MILLIONS) (‘08 $MILLIONS)

H62 SR 237/El Camino Real/Grant Rd. Mountain View $4.0 $4.0

Intersection Improvements—Extends
the westbound SR 237 left-turn storage
lane, extends the northbound El Camino
Real right-turn lane to Yuba Drive, extends
southbound El Camino Real left-turn storage
lane and constructs southbound El Camino
Real right-turn lane to Grant Rd.
H63 SR 237 Westbound On-Ramp at Mountain View $11.0 $11.0
Middlefield Rd.—Construct westbound
loop on-ramp from northbound Middlefield
Rd. to westbound SR 237. Eliminate the
signalized intersection at Middlefield Rd./
westbound SR 237 diagonal on-ramp. Realign
frontage road to form a new intersection at
Middlefield Rd./Ferguson Dr.
H64 SR 237 Eastbound Auxiliary Lane San Jose, Santa $7.0 $7.0
between Zanker Rd. and North First Clara County
St.—SR 237 eastbound auxiliary lane
between Zanker Rd. and North First St.

H65 SR 237/Mathilda Ave. and Sunnyvale $15.0 $15.0

US 101/Mathilda Ave. Interchange
Improvements—Convert north side of
northbound US 101/Mathilda Ave. inter-
change to partial cloverleaf; remove north-
bound US 101 loop ramp to southbound
Mathilda Ave.; add diagonal ramp from
southbound Mathilda Ave. to northbound
US 101; add auxiliary lane on northbound
US 101 between Mathilda Ave. and SR 237;
remove Mathilda Ave. on-ramp to west-
bound SR 237.

H66 SR 237/North First St. Interchange San Jose $2.0 $0.0

Improvements—Interchange improve-
ments at SR 237 and North First St.

178 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 AP P ENDIX A

TOTAL
PROJECT PROJECT VTP
VTP SPONSOR/ COST ALLOCATION
ID PROJECT TITLE LOCATION (‘08 $MILLIONS) (‘08 $MILLIONS)

H67 SR 237 Westbound to Northbound Sunnyvale $9.0 $9.0

US 101 Ramp Improvements —Widens
westbound Route 237 on-ramp from SR 237
to northbound US 101 to two lanes. Adds
auxilliary lane on northbound US 101 from
SR 237 on-ramp to Ellis St. interchange.

H68 SR 237 Eastbound Auxiliary Lanes: Sunnyvale $6.0 $6.0

Mathilda Ave. to Fair Oaks Ave.—Build
auxiliary lanes between Mathilda Ave. and
Fair Oaks Ave. on eastbound SR 237.

H69 I-280 Northbound - Second Exit Lane Cupertino, Los Altos $2.0 $2.0
to Foothill Expwy.—Constructs a second
exit lane from northbound I-280 to Foothill
Expwy.

H70 I-280 Northbound Winchester Blvd. San Jose — —

Interchange Improvements—Included
in H73.

H71 I-280 Downtown Access San Jose $25.0 $20.0

Improvements between 3rd St. and
7th St.—Reconstructs the existing north-
bound I-280 off-ramp at 7th St. to connect
directly to 3rd St.

H72 I-880/Montague Expwy. Interchange Milpitas, San Jose, $12.0 $0.0

Improvement—Construct partial clover- Santa Clara County
leaf interchange at US 101 and Montague
Expwy.

H73 I-880/I-280/Stevens Creek Blvd. San Jose $64.0 $59.0

Interchange Improvements—Eliminates
the eastbound off-ramp loop and recon-
figures the off-ramp to eastbound Stevens
Creek Blvd. which will include construc-
tion of a signal and highway lighting.
This project also includes H70 - I-280
Northbound Winchester Blvd. Interchange
improvements.

VA L L E Y T R A N SP ORTAT I O N PLAN 2035 | 179

 TOTAL
PROJECT PROJECT VTP
VTP SPONSOR/ COST ALLOCATION
ID PROJECT TITLE LOCATION (‘08 $MILLIONS) (‘08 $MILLIONS)

H74 I-880 Widening for HOV Lanes from Milpitas, San Jose $95.0 $0.0
SR 237 to Old Bayshore—Widen I-880
for HOV lanes in both directions between
Route 237 in Milpitas to US 101 in San Jose.

H75 I-880 Northbound Auxiliary Lane - San Jose $13.0 $13.0

Coleman Ave. to First St.—I-880 north-
bound auxiliary lane between Coleman Ave.
and First St.

HIGHWAY UNCONSTRAINED PROJECT LIST

H76 I-880 HOV/Express Lanes: US 101 to San Jose $160.0 $0.0

I-280—Build HOV/Express Lane on I 880
between US 101 and I 280.

H77 SR 85 Southbound Auxiliary Lanes Cupertino $15.0 $0.0

from Stevens Creek Blvd. to Saratoga-
Sunnyvale Rd.—Constructs auxiliary lane
on SR 85 northbound/southbound from
Saratoga-Sunnyvale to Stevens Creek Blvd.
and related TOS improvements.

H78 I-880 Southbound Auxiliary Lane - First San Jose $17.0 $0.0
St. to Coleman Ave.—I-880 Southbound
Auxiliary lane between Coleman Ave. and
First St.

H79 SR 237 Westbound Auxiliary Lane Milpitas, San Jose $17.0 $0.0
between Coyote Creek Bridge and
North First St.—Widens and constructs
auxiliary lane on eastbound SR 237 between
North First St. to Zanker Rd.; and includes
TOS elements.

H80 US 101 Northbound Auxiliary Lane San Jose $10.0 $0.0

Widening: I-880 to McKee—Northbound
auxiliary lane widening on US 101 between
I-880 and McKee Rd.

180 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 AP P ENDIX A

TOTAL
PROJECT PROJECT VTP
VTP SPONSOR/ COST ALLOCATION
ID PROJECT TITLE LOCATION (‘08 $MILLIONS) (‘08 $MILLIONS)

H81 SR 85/ El Camino Real Interchange Mountain View $21.0 $0.0

Improvement—SR 85 auxiliary lanes
between El Camino Real and SR 237,
and SR 85/El Camino Real interchange
improvements.

H82 SR 85 Northbound Auxiliary Lanes Saratoga, San Jose, $18.0 $0.0

from North of Winchester Blvd. to Campbell, Los Gatos
Saratoga Ave.—Proposes auxiliary lanes
from Saratoga Ave. to Winchester Blvd. on
SR 85 in both directions along with related
TOS improvements.

H83 US 101 Northbound Auxiliary Lane Morgan Hill, Santa $11.0 $0.0
Widening: Tennant Ave. to Dunne Clara County
Ave.—Auxiliary lane widening on US 101
between Tennant Ave. and Dunne Ave. in
Morgan Hill.

H84 US 101 Southbound Auxiliary Lane Morgan Hill, Santa $11.0 $0.0
Widening: Tennant Ave. to Dunne Clara County
Ave.—Auxiliary lane widening on US 101
Southbound between Tennant Ave. and
Dunne Ave.

H85 I-680/Montague Expwy. Interchange San Jose (Santa $18.0 $0.0

Improvement—Construct partial clover- Clara County)
leaf interchange at I-680 and Montague
Expwy. including improvements on
Montague Expwy.

H86 SR 85 Auxiliary Lanes: Homestead Sunnyvale, $22.0 $0.0

Ave. to Fremont Ave.—Creates SR 85 Cupertino
northbound and southbound auxiliary lanes
between Homestead Ave. and Fremont Ave.

H87 US 101 Auxiliary Lane Widenings: San Jose, Santa $12.0 $0.0
Trimble Rd. to Montague Expwy.— Clara
Widen US 101 for northbound and south-
bound auxiliary lane from Trimble Rd. to
Montague Expwy.

VA L L E Y T R A N SP O RTAT I ON PLAN 2035 | 181

 TOTAL
PROJECT PROJECT VTP
VTP SPONSOR/ COST ALLOCATION
ID PROJECT TITLE LOCATION (‘08 $MILLIONS) (‘08 $MILLIONS)

H88 SR 85 Northbound Auxiliary Lanes Cupertino, San Jose $15.0 $0.0

from Stevens Creek Blvd. to Saratoga/
Sunnyvale Road—Constructs auxiliary
lanes on northbound and southbound
SR 85 between Saratoga-Sunnyvale Rd.
and Stevens Creek Blvd. and related TOS
improvements.

H89 I-280 Northbound Saratoga Ave. - San Jose $20.0 $0.0

Connect Auxiliary Lanes to Complete
Fourth Lane—Connect auxiliary lanes to
complete fourth lane on northbound I-280
at Saratoga Ave.

H90 SR 85 Southbound Auxiliary Lanes Saratoga, San Jose, $18.0 $0.0

from North of Winchester Blvd. to Campbell, Los Gatos
Saratoga Ave.—Proposes auxiliary lanes
from Saratoga Ave. to Winchester Blvd. on
SR 85 in northbound and southbound direc-
tions along with related TOS improvements.

H91 US 101 Southbound Braided Ramps San Jose $24.0 $0.0

between Capitol Expwy. and Yerba
Buena Rd.—Adds a braided ramp onto
southbound 101 between Capitol Expwy. and
Yerba Buena Rd. Includes improvements at
Capitol Expwy. interchange.

H92 SR 237 Eastbound to Mathilda Ave. Sunnyvale $20.0 $0.0

Flyover Off-Ramp—Convert north
side of northbound US 101 at Mathilda
Ave. interchange to partial cloverleaf.
Remove Northbound US 101 loop ramp to
southbound Mathilda Ave. Add diagonal
ramp from southbound Mathilda Ave. to
northbound US 101; add auxiliary lane on
northbound US 101 between Mathilda Ave.
and SR 237. Remove Mathilda Ave. on-ramp
to westbound SR 237.

182 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 AP P ENDIX A

TOTAL
PROJECT PROJECT VTP
VTP SPONSOR/ COST ALLOCATION
ID PROJECT TITLE LOCATION (‘08 $MILLIONS) (‘08 $MILLIONS)

H93 SR 237 Westbound to Southbound SR Mountain View $37.0 $0.0

85 Connector Ramp Improvements
(including SR 85 auxiliary lanes
between El Camino Real and SR
237)—Construct a collector/distributor road
in the westbound direction on SR 237 from
the Central Expwy. overcrossing to SR 85.
Widen off-ramp from westbound
SR 237 to southbound SR 85 to two lanes.
Add auxiliary lane in the southbound direc-
tion between SR 237 and the El Camino Real
interchange on SR 85.

H94 US 101 Northbound Auxiliary Lane Gilroy $20.0 $0.0

Widening: 10th St. to Leavesley Rd.—
US 101 northbound widening of auxiliary
lane between 10th St. and Leavesley Rd. in
Gilroy.

H95 US 101 Southbound Auxiliary Lane Gilroy $21.0 $0.0

Widening: 10th St. to Leavesley Rd.—
US 101 southbound widening of the auxiliary
lane from 10th St. to Leavesley Rd.

H96 I-280 Northbound Braided Ramps Cupertino, Los Altos $40.0 $0.0
between Foothill Expwy. and SR 85—
Reconfigures the existing I-280 northbound
off-ramp to Foothill Expwy. into a braided
ramp with the southbound SR 85 to north-
bound I-280 direct connector.

H97 US 101 Northbound Braided Ramps San Jose $24.0 $0.0

between Capitol Expwy. and Yerba
Buena Rd.—Adds a braided ramp onto
northbound US 101 between Capitol Expwy.
and Yerba Buena Rd., including improve-
ments at the Capitol Expwy. interchange.

H98 SR 85 Northbound/Southbound San Jose, Saratoga $37.0 $0.0

Auxiliary Lanes from Saratoga-
Sunnyvale Rd. to Saratoga Ave.
—Proposes auxiliary lanes from Saratoga-
Sunnyvale Rd. to Saratoga Ave. on SR 85
in northbound and southbound directions,
along with related TOS improvements.

VA L L E Y T R A N SP ORTAT I O N PLAN 2035 | 183

 TOTAL
PROJECT PROJECT VTP
VTP SPONSOR/ COST ALLOCATION
ID PROJECT TITLE LOCATION (‘08 $MILLIONS) (‘08 $MILLIONS)

H99 Moffett Blvd./US 101 Overcrossing Mountain View $20.0 $0.0

Replacement—Replacement of Moffett
Blvd over crossing of US 101.

H100 US 101/Oregon Expwy./Embarcadero Santa Clara County $50.0 $0.0

Rd. Improvements—Improvements to US
101/Oregon Expwy./Embarcadero Rd.
H101 US 101 Southbound to Eastbound SR Sunnyvale $64.0 $0.0
237 Connector Improvements—Realign
exit lane from southbound US 101 to
eastbound SR 237 loop ramp. Widen loop
ramp from southbound US 101 to eastbound
SR 237 to two lanes. Construct new SR 237
bridge over US 101 to provide auxiliary
lane leading to the new two-lane connector.
Reconstruct the eastbound SR 237 off-ramp
to southbound US 101.
H102 SR 85 Auxiliary Lanes between Los Altos, Mountain $56.0 $0.0
Fremont Ave. and El Camino Real— View, Sunnyvale
Construct auxiliary lanes in both directions
between Homestead Rd. and El Camino
Real, reconstruct The Dalles Ave. pedestrian
overcrossing, widen Fremont Ave. overcross-
ing structure and widen the Stevens Creek
Blvd. structure.

H103 US 101/Coyote Valley Parkway San Jose $25.0 $0.0

Interchange—Reconfigure interchange at
US 101 and Coyote Valley Pkwy. by widening
on-ramps and off-ramps.

H104 I-680 Northbound/Southbound San Jose $53.0 $0.0

Auxiliary Lanes from McKee Rd. to
Berryessa Rd.—Addition of auxiliary lanes
in both directions of I-680.

H105 I-880/US 101 Interchange San Jose $1,000.0 $0.0

Improvements—Reconfiguration of the
interchange at I-880 and US 101.

184 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 AP P ENDIX A

EXPRESSWAY CONSTRAINED PROJECT LIST

TOTAL
PROJECT PROJECT VTP
VTP SPONSOR/ COST ALLOCATION
ID PROJECT TITLE LOCATION (‘08 $MILLIONS) (‘08 $MILLIONS)

X1 Almaden Expwy. – Widen Coleman to Santa Clara County $10.5 $10.5

Blossom Hill—Widen Almaden Expwy.
to eight lanes between Coleman Ave. and
Blossom Hill Rd.

X2 Capitol Expwy. – TOS Infrastructure— Santa Clara County $3.5 $3.5

Add TOS infrastructure on Capitol Expwy.
between US 101 and Almaden Expwy.

X3 Central Expwy. – Auxiliary Lanes Santa Clara County $17.0 $17.0

between Mary Ave. and Lawrence
Expwy.—Provide auxiliary acceleration
and/or deceleration lanes on Central Expwy.
between Lawrence Expwy. and Mary Ave. to
improve ramp operations and safety.

X4 Central Expwy. – Convert Measure Santa Clara County $0.1 $0.1

B HOV lane (De La Cruz Blvd. to San
Tomas Expwy.)—Converts Measure B
HOV lane on Central Expwy. between San
Tomas Expwy. and De La Cruz Blvd. to
mixed flow.

X5 Central Expwy. – Convert HOV queue Santa Clara County $0.1 $0.1
Jump Lane at Bowers Ave.—Convert
HOV queue jump lanes along Central Expwy.
at Bowers Ave. to general use

X6 Central Expwy. – Six lanes from Santa Clara County $13.6 $13.6
Lawrence Expwy. to San Tomas
Expwy.—Widen Central Expwy. between
Lawrence Expwy. and San Tomas Expwy.
to six through lanes, consistent with the
original planned width of Central Expwy.

X7 Foothill Expwy. – Extend decelera- Santa Clara County $0.7 $0.7

tion lane at San Antonio Rd.—Extends
the existing westbound deceleration lane of
Foothill Expwy. at San Antonio Rd. by 250
feet.

VA L L E Y T R A N SP O RTAT I ON PLAN 2035 | 185

 TOTAL
PROJECT PROJECT VTP
VTP SPONSOR/ COST ALLOCATION
ID PROJECT TITLE LOCATION (‘08 $MILLIONS) (‘08 $MILLIONS)

X8 Foothill-Loyola Bridge—Widen Loyola Santa Clara County $7.0 $5.0

Bridge over Foothill Expwy. to add a third
lane for left turns, six-foot shoulders for
bicycle use and five-foot sidewalks with
pedestrian ramps.

X9 Lawrence Expwy. – Additional Left Santa Clara County $2.6 $2.6

Turn Lane at Prospect—Provide a second
left turn lane from eastbound Prospect Rd.
to northbound Lawrence Expwy. and modify
existing traffic signals.

X10 Lawrence Expwy. – Close Median, Santa Clara County $1.5 $1.5
Right In/Out—Close median at Lochinvar
Ave. and right-in-and-out access at DeSoto
Ave., Golden State Dr., Granada Ave.,
Buckley St., and St. Lawrence Dr./Lawrence
Station Rd. on-ramp.

X11 Lawrence Expwy. – Arques Square Santa Clara County $45.0 $0.0
Loop Grade Separation—Construct inter-
change at intersection of Lawrence Expwy.
and Arques Ave. with square loops on Kern
Ave. and Titan Way.

X12 Lawrence Expwy. – Expand to Eight Santa Clara County $5.2 $5.2
Lanes from Moorpark Ave. to South
of Calvert Dr.—Widens Lawrence Expwy.
from to eight lanes between Moorpark Ave./
Bollinger Rd. and south of Calvert Dr.

X13 Montague Expwy. – Eight Lanes from Santa Clara County $20.0 $7.0
Trade Zone Blvd. to Park Victoria
Dr.—Widen Montague Expwy. to eight lanes
between Trade Zone Blvd. and I-680 and to
eight lanes between I-680 and Park Victoria
Dr., including filling in deck over I-680.
Designate new lanes between Trade Zone
Blvd. and I-680 as HOV lanes.

186 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 AP P ENDIX A

TOTAL
PROJECT PROJECT VTP
VTP SPONSOR/ COST ALLOCATION
ID PROJECT TITLE LOCATION (‘08 $MILLIONS) (‘08 $MILLIONS)

X14 Montague Expwy. – Eight Lanes Santa Clara County $12.0 $0.0
from Lick Mill Blvd. to Trade Zone
Blvd.—Widen Montague Expwy. to eight
lanes between Lick Mill Blvd. and Trade
Zone Blvd. and widening of Guadalupe River
Bridge and Penitencia Creek Bridge. The
new lanes will be HOV lanes.

X15 Montague Expwy. – Trimble Rd. Santa Clara County $32.0 $0.0
Flyover—To construct a new flyover inter-
change at Trimble Rd. and Montague Expwy.

X16 Montague Expwy. – Mission College Santa Clara County $4.0 $4.0
Blvd. At-Grade Improvements—To
provide intersection improvements by
enhancing and modifying the operational
characteristics of the intersection.

X17 Oregon Expwy./Page Mill Rd. – I-280 Santa Clara County $6.6 $6.6
Page Mill Rd. Modification for Bicycle
Travel—Modifies the I-280 freeway connec-
tions to enhance safety and improve opera-
tions primarily for bicyclists and pedestrians
traveling on Page Mill Rd. through the
interchange area.

X18 San Tomas Expwy. – SR 17/San Tomas Santa Clara County $2.6 $2.6
Expwy. Improvements—At-grade
improvements at SR 17/San Tomas Expwy:
Re-stripe the eastbound through lane on
White Oaks Rd. to provide an optional left as
a third left turn lane; provide second right-
turn lane on southbound off-ramp.

X19 San Tomas Expwy. Box Culvert— Santa Clara County $13.2 $13.2
Rebuild 3.9 miles of box culvert under San
Tomas Expwy.

X20 San Tomas Expwy. – Eight Lanes Santa Clara County $40.7 $40.7
between Williams Rd. and El Camino—
Widens San Tomas Expwy. to eight lanes
between Williams Rd. and El Camino Real
(SR82) with additional left-turn lane from
eastbound and westbound El Camino Real to
San Tomas Expwy.

VA L L E Y T R A N SP ORTAT I O N PLAN 2035 | 187

 TOTAL
PROJECT PROJECT VTP
VTP SPONSOR/ COST ALLOCATION
ID PROJECT TITLE LOCATION (‘08 $MILLIONS) (‘08 $MILLIONS)

X21 Santa Teresa Blvd./Hale Ave. Corridor Santa Clara County $2.5 $2.5
– Realign DeWitt Ave. S-Curve—Realign
existing “S” curve between approximately
Edmundson Ave. and Spring Ave.

X22 Santa Teresa Blvd./Hale Ave. Corridor Santa Clara County $5.0 $5.0
– TOS Infrastructure Improvements—
Add TOS Infrastructure on Santa Teresa
Blvd. between Day Rd. and Mesa Rd.

X23 SCC Motorist Traffic Information and Santa Clara County $5.0 $5.0
Advisory Systems—Install traffic informa-
tion outlets such as electronic information
changeable message signs along express-
ways, advisory radio, cable TV feeds and web
page to provide real time traffic information
to expressway users.

X24 Signal Coordination/Interconnect Santa Clara County $5.0 $5.0

with Cross Streets—To implement signal
coordination between expressway signals
and major cross-street signals.

X25 TOS Infrastructure Improvements— Santa Clara County $10.0 $10.0

Implement ITS elements: Automated
Traffic Count Collection System, Wireless
Controller Communication System, Wireless
Vehicular Detection System and Signal and
Video Infrastructure Upgrades.

N/A Almaden Expwy. SR 85 Interchange Santa Clara County $0.4 $0.0

PSR—Initiate a Caltrans Project Study
Report/Project Development Study (PDS) to
reconfigure SR 85/Almaden interchange.

N/A Central Expwy. – Median Curbs—Install Santa Clara County $0.8 $0.0
median curbs where missing and enhance
existing median curbs as needed between
SR 85 and SR 237 to improve safety and
operations.

N/A Lawrence Expwy. – I-280 Project Study Santa Clara County $1.0 $0.0
Report—Prepare Caltrans Project Study
Report for Tier 1C project at the Lawrence
Expwy./Calvert Dr./I-280 interchange area.

188 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 AP P ENDIX A

TOTAL
PROJECT PROJECT VTP
VTP SPONSOR/ COST ALLOCATION
ID PROJECT TITLE LOCATION (‘08 $MILLIONS) (‘08 $MILLIONS)

N/A Oregon Expwy. – Alma Bridge Santa Clara County $0.3 $0.0
Feasibility Study—Alma Bridge
Replacement Feasibility Study.

EXPRESSWAY UNCONSTRAINED PROJECT LIST

TBD Lawrence Expwy. – Kifer Rd. Santa Clara County $59.0 $0.0
Interchange—Construct urban interchange
at the intersection of Lawrence Expwy. and
Kifer Rd.

TBD Lawrence Expwy. – Monroe St. Santa Clara County $59.0 $0.0
Interchange—Construct urban interchange
at the intersection of Lawrence Expwy. and
Monroe St.

TBD Montague Expwy. – McCarthy Blvd. Santa Clara County $37.0 $0.0
Square Loop Interchange—Construct
a square loop grade separation project at
Montague Expwy. and McCarthy Blvd./
O’Toole Ave. intersection.

TRANSIT PROJECTS

T1 Additional Measure A Operating and All Cities $1,954.0 $1954.0

Capital Needs1

T2 ACE Upgrade—The proposed project will Santa Clara, San $24.0 $24.0
provide VTA’s share of funds for additional Jose
train sets, passenger facilities and service
upgrades for the ACE service from San
Joaquin and Alameda Counties.

T3 BART to Milpitas, San Jose and Santa Milpitas, San Jose, $6,172.0 $6,172.0
Clara2—Extend BART from Fremont Santa Clara
through Milpitas to downtown San Jose and
the Santa Clara Caltrain Station.

1
Funds assumed to be available over the 25-year plan timeframe to fund the Measure A Program and additional transit capital and
operating expansion projects
2
BART cost includes total TCRP programmed to BART extension Warm Springs to Santa Clara/San Jose, including prior expenditures.

VA L L E Y T R A N SP ORTAT I O N PLAN 2035 | 189

 TOTAL
PROJECT PROJECT VTP
VTP SPONSOR/ COST ALLOCATION
ID PROJECT TITLE LOCATION (‘08 $MILLIONS) (‘08 $MILLIONS)

T4A Bus Rapid Transit – El Camino BRT3— Mountain View, $207.0 $207.0
The proposed project will implement a new Palo Alto, Los Altos,
Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) corridor in The Sunnyvale, Santa
Alameda and El Camino Real. (This is not an Clara, San Jose,
R3434 project.) Cupertino

T4B Bus Rapid Transit – Stevens Creek Mountain View, $127.0 $127.0
BRT4—The proposed project will implement Palo Alto, Los Altos,
a new Bus Rapid Transit corridor along San Sunnyvale, Santa
Carlos St./Stevens Creek Blvd. from Diridon Clara, San Jose,
Station to De Anza College. Cupertino

T5A Caltrain Electrification Tamien to San Palo Alto, Mountain $222.0 $222.0
Francisco5—The project includes the View, Los Altos,
installation of ten traction power sub- Sunnyvale, Santa
stations, an overhead catenary system to Clara, San Jose,
supply power to the trains, signal and grade Morgan Hill, Gilroy
crossing circuitry changes and related com-
munications improvements.

T5B Caltrain Electrification Gilroy to Palo Alto, Mountain $123.0 $123.0

Tamien6—Electrify Caltrain line from View, Los Altos,
Tamien to Gilroy Sunnyvale, Santa
Clara, San Jose,
Morgan Hill, Gilroy

T6 Caltrain Service Upgrades—Construct Palo Alto, Mountain $203.0 $203.0

service improvements on Caltrain line such View, Sunnyvale,
as locomotives, access and signal systems. Santa Clara, San
Jose, Morgan Hill,
Gilroy

3
Project from Diridon Station to Palo Alto
4
Project from downtown San Jose to De Anza College
5
Project is electrification only. Does not include capital funds needed for additional vehicles or service
expansions. VTA share of cost only.
6
Project is electrification only. Does not include capital funds needed for additional vehicles or service
expansions

190 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 AP P ENDIX A

TOTAL
PROJECT PROJECT VTP
VTP SPONSOR/ COST ALLOCATION
ID PROJECT TITLE LOCATION (‘08 $MILLIONS) (‘08 $MILLIONS)

T7 Caltrain – South County—Double track San Jose, Morgan $86.0 $86.0

segments on the Caltrain line between San Hill, Gilroy
Jose and Gilroy.

T8A Santa Clara/Alum Rock Phase I: San Jose $128.0 $128.0

BRT7—The project will provide Bus Rapid
Transit as Phase I of the project in the Santa
Clara-Alum Rock corridor with the ability
to convert to light rail at a future date if the
community desires

T8B Santa Clara/Alum Rock Phase II: San Jose $265.0 $265.0
LRT8—The near term development strategy
(Phase I) for the corridor is Bus Rapid
Transit in the Santa Clara-Alum Rock
Corridor with the ability to convert to light
rail at a future time (Phase II) if the com-
munity desires.

T8C Capitol Expwy. LRT9—Provides light rail San Jose $334.0 $334.0
extension in the East Valley. Extends the
Capitol Ave. light rail line 2.6 miles from
the existing Alum Rock Transit Center to a
rebuilt Eastridge Transit Center.

T8D Nieman LRT Extension10—Phase II of San Jose $137.0 $137.0

Capitol Expwy. project that would extend
light rail from Eastridge Transit Center to
the Capitol Station on the Guadalupe LRT
line.

T8E Monterey Hwy BRT11—One of three San Jose $87.0 $87.0

DTEV projects that would build Bus Rapid
Transit on Monterey Hwy.

T9 Dumbarton Rail Corridor—Rehabilitate Palo Alto $44.0 $44.0

existing rail infrastructure, procure rolling
stock and commission rail transit service
over the Dumbarton bridge between com-
munities on east bay and peninsula.

7
Project from Eastridge via Capitol Expressway/Alum Rock/Santa Clara to Downtown San Jose
8
Project from Santa Clara/Alum Rock to Diridon Station
9
Project from Eastridge to existing Alum Rock LRT Station
10
Project from Eastridge south to Nieman Ave.
11
Project from Downtown San Jose to Santa Teresa LRT Station

VA L L E Y T R A N SP ORTAT I O N PLAN 2035 | 191

 TOTAL
PROJECT PROJECT VTP
VTP SPONSOR/ COST ALLOCATION
ID PROJECT TITLE LOCATION (‘08 $MILLIONS) (‘08 $MILLIONS)

T10 Hwy 17 Bus Service Improvements— Los Gatos, Campbell, $2.0 $2.0
The proposed project will increases bus San Jose
service between Santa Clara County and
Santa Cruz County over SR 17.

T11 Vasona Junction12—Extension of Vasona Los Gatos, Campbell $99.0 $99.0

Light Rail line two stations to Vasona
Junction in Los Gatos.

T12 Mineta San Jose International Airport San Jose $264.0 $264.0
APM Connector—The proposed proj-
ect will provide transit link to San Jose
International Airport from VTA’s Guadalupe
Light Rail Transit Line, and from Caltrain
and future BART in Santa Clara, using
automated People Mover technology.

T13 Palo Alto Intermodal Center—Expand Palo Alto $59.0 $59.0

the Palo Alto Caltrain Station and Bus
Transit Center.

T14 ZEB Demonstration Program— All Cities $20.0 $20.0

Demonstration program to achieve goal of
zero emmissions to be in compliance with
CARB’s fleet rule.

T15 ZEB Facilities Program—The ZEB pro- All Cities $78.0 $78.0
gram includes installation and modification
of VTA facilities to support the demonstra-
tion program.

T16 Sunnyvale-Cupertino BRT13—Bus Rapid Sunnyvale/ $68.0 $68.0

Transit between Sunnyvale and Cupertino. Cupertino

T17 North San Jose Transit San Jose $35.0 $35.0

Enhancements14

12
Project from Campbell to Netflix/Highway 85 via Winchester Blvd.
13
Project not in 2000 Measure A ballot
14
Project included the North San Jose Development Area Deficiency Plan

192 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 AP P ENDIX A

TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS OPERATIONS & MANAGEMENT (ITS) PROJECTS

TOTAL
PROJECT PROJECT VTP
VTP SPONSOR/ COST ALLOCATION
ID PROJECT TITLE LOCATION (‘08 $MILLIONS) (‘08 $MILLIONS)

S1 Hamilton Ave. Intelligent Campbell $0.4 $0.0

Transportation System—Expand on the
ITS infrastructure currently on Hamilton
Ave. by linking three signals via wireless
interconnect to the Smart Corridor signals to
the east. Will include signal retiming of these
three signals.

S2 Citywide Traffic Signal System Campbell $0.2 $0.0

Upgrade—Replace older traffic signal
controllers with new controllers and
signal system software that is compatible
with NTCIP and Silicon Valley-ITS Data
Exchange Network Software protocols.

S3 Winchester Blvd. Intelligent Campbell $0.4 $0.0

Transportation System—Expand upon
existing ITS equipment on Winchester Blvd.
by installing new conduit, fiber and fiber
equipment.

S4 Reactivation of Traffic Count Campbell $0.1 $0.0

Stations—Reactivating traffic count sta-
tions along arterials such as Hamilton Ave.,
Winchester Blvd. and Campbell Ave.

S5 Installation of Pedestrian Countdown Campbell $0.2 $0.0

Timers—Install countdown pedestrian
signals at locations near schools, locations
with frequent jaywalking and locations with
high pedestrian volumes.

S6 City of Gilroy Adaptive Traffic Control Gilroy $0.9 $0.0

System

VA L L E Y T R A N SP O RTAT I ON PLAN 2035 | 193

 TOTAL
PROJECT PROJECT VTP
VTP SPONSOR/ COST ALLOCATION
ID PROJECT TITLE LOCATION (‘08 $MILLIONS) (‘08 $MILLIONS)

S7 City of Gilroy Event Management Gilroy $0.9 $0.0

System—Develop and implement change-
able message signs, highway advisory radio,
information kiosk and traveler informa-
tion system for special events and incident
management in the Gilroy area.

S8 City of Gilroy Traffic Signal System Gilroy $3.9 $0.0

Upgrade—Upgrade traffic signal controller
and communications systems with the cur-
rent technology, including Interconnect, to
replace outdated equipment and provide city
with centralized traffic management system.

S9 City of Gilroy Flood Watch Camera Gilroy $0.5 $0.0

Installations—Deployment of CCTV
cameras to provide real-time video to the
City of Gilroy Emergency Operations Center
to be used to conduct traffic management
and emergency operations activities in times
of significant flooding.

S10 ITS Enhancements on Santa Teresa Gilroy $2.0 $0.0

Blvd.—Signalization modifications along
Santa Teresa Blvd.

S11 10th St. and Downtown Signals Gilroy $1.5 $0.0

Upgrade—Controllers, adaptive, detectors
along 10th St. in Gilroy.

S12 SR 152 Signal System Upgrade Gilroy $2.3 $0.0

S13 Gilroy Community Bus Signal Priority Gilroy $0.4 $0.0

S14 Gilroy Other Signals Upgrade Gilroy $1.0 $0.0

S15 Gilroy Downtown Parking Gilroy $0.3 $0.0

Management System

S16 Town of Los Gatos Traffic Signal Los Gatos $0.3 $0.0
System Upgrade

S17 South Milpitas Blvd. SMART Corridor Milpitas $0.5 $0.0

S18 City of Milpitas Traffic Signal Milpitas $0.8 $0.0

Upgrade—Citywide improvements to signal
timing.

194 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 AP P ENDIX A

TOTAL
PROJECT PROJECT VTP
VTP SPONSOR/ COST ALLOCATION
ID PROJECT TITLE LOCATION (‘08 $MILLIONS) (‘08 $MILLIONS)

S19 Citywide Traffic Signal Operation Morgan Hill $1.3 $0.0

Center—Construct traffic signal operation
center.

S20 Citywide Wireless Vehicle Detection Morgan Hill $0.9 $0.0

System Installation—Install wireless
vehicle detection system at all signalized
intersections within the City.

S21 Citywide Traffic Signal Upgrade and Mountain View $2.5 $0.0
IP Traffic Signal Access—Upgrade the
City’s existing traffic signal system through
the installation of new traffic signal control-
lers, software and Internet accessible traffic
signal communications.

S22 Grant Rd. Adaptive Traffic Signal— Mountain View $1.4 $0.0
Upgrade the existing traffic signal inter-
connect system on Grant Rd. to a new
adaptive traffic signal system.

S23 Shoreline Blvd. Adaptive Traffic Mountain View $1.7 $0.0

Signals—Upgrade the existing signal inter-
connect system to adaptive traffic signals.

S24 Rengstorff Ave. Traffic Signal Mountain View $0.4 $0.0

Improvements—Along Rengstorff Ave.,
modify signal timing and upgrade certain
signals.

S25 Smart Residential Arterials Project— Palo Alto $6.2 $0.0

Project consists of design and construction
of Automated Traffic Signal System ele-
ments, Electronic Driver Speed and Travel
Advisory signs and lighted pedestrian cross-
ings along five residential arterial streets.

S26 Citywide Traffic Signal System Palo Alto $1.8 $0.0

Upgrades—Replace outdated traffic signal
controllers, cabinets and communication
chips including installation of time of day
GPS system equipment for each signalized
intersection.

VA L L E Y T R A N SP ORTAT I O N PLAN 2035 | 195

 TOTAL
PROJECT PROJECT VTP
VTP SPONSOR/ COST ALLOCATION
ID PROJECT TITLE LOCATION (‘08 $MILLIONS) (‘08 $MILLIONS)

S27 Citywide Traffic Signal CCTV/ Palo Alto $1.4 $0.0

Emergency Vehicle Preemption
Project—A citywide program to give prior-
ity to emergency vehicles via signal timing
adjustments.

S28 Silicon Valley Transportation and San Jose $7.5 $0.0

Incident Management Center—Setup of
a location that will monitor traffic incidents
as well as travel information.

S29 San Jose Proactive Signal Retiming San Jose $25.0 $0.0
Program—A citywide program that will
monitor current traffic signals and improve
them where necessary.

S30 San Jose Transportation San Jose $24.0 $0.0

Communications Network
Enhancements—Provides fiber optic
communications to support advanced traffic
management infrastructure.

S31 San Jose Traffic Signal System San Jose $8.0 $0.0
Upgrades—A citywide program that will
look at older signal systems and upgrade
them where needed.

S32 Downtown San Jose Area Freeway San Jose $2.0 $0.0
Management System—An equipment
package that will monitor downtown
freeways and provide incident management
tools to assist with traffic.

S33 Downtown San Jose Local Street San Jose $3.0 $0.0
Advanced Traffic Management
System—Expands “real time” traffic man-
agement system provided in Arena area.

S34 Downtown San Jose CMS Upgrades— San Jose $1.4 $0.0
Upgrades aging changeable message sign
infrastructure in Arena area.
S35 King Rd./Story Rd. Area Advanced San Jose $3.0 $0.0
Traffic Management System—Provides
“real time” traffic management for high traffic
congestion location.

196 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 AP P ENDIX A

TOTAL
PROJECT PROJECT VTP
VTP SPONSOR/ COST ALLOCATION
ID PROJECT TITLE LOCATION (‘08 $MILLIONS) (‘08 $MILLIONS)

S36 Silicon Valley ITS Program Upgrades— San Jose $27.0 $0.0
Upgrades infrastructure for existing county-
wide ITS system.
S37 Countywide Freeway Traffic San Jose $25.0 $0.0
Operation System and Ramp Metering
Improvements—Complete planned
installation of monitoring cameras, elec-
tronic message signs and ramp metering on
freeway system.

S38 Silicon Valley TiMC – San Jose Police San Jose $2.0 $0.0
Department Integration—Allows for
special management of traffic signals for
public safety incidents.

S39 City of San Jose Red Light Running San Jose $0.5 $0.0
Enforcement Program—Installation of
cameras at various intersections to capture
red light runner incidents.

S40 San Jose Traffic Signal Interconnect San Jose $4.0 $0.0

S41 SVITS Hybrid Analogy/Digital Video San Jose $0.2 $0.0

System—An video component of a greater
traffic management system.

S42 Silicon Valley TiMC-Ramp Metering San Jose $8.0 $0.0

Integration

S43 Coyote Valley ITS—A system of signal San Jose $6.0 $0.0
upgrade, interconnect, and CCTV cameras
throughout Southern San Jose in the Coyote
Valley.

S44 Monterey Highway ITS—A system of San Jose $4.8 $0.0

signal upgrade, interconnect, and CCTV
cameras throughout the Monterey Highway
area.

S45 San Jose Mobile Video Surveillance San Jose $0.3 $0.0
for Emergency Response

S46 San Jose Emergency Vehicle San Jose $6.6 $0.0

Preemption System

VA L L E Y T R A N SP ORTAT I O N PLAN 2035 | 197

 TOTAL
PROJECT PROJECT VTP
VTP SPONSOR/ COST ALLOCATION
ID PROJECT TITLE LOCATION (‘08 $MILLIONS) (‘08 $MILLIONS)

S47 SVITS Connection to Sunnyvale—A San Jose $3.5 $0.0

system of CCTV, signage and the develop-
ment of a traffic management center in the
City of Sunnyvale.

S48 Construction Information San Jose $0.1 $0.0

Management System—A system of
signage and other traffic notifications to alert
travelers of any delays.

S49 Winchester/Stevens Creek Area San Jose $2.0 $0.0

Advanced Traffic Management
System—A system of traffic cameras, signal
timing upgrades and other traffic manage-
ment tools.

S50 Eastridge/Evergreen Area Advanced San Jose $4.0 $0.0

Traffic Management System—A system
of traffic cameras, signal timing upgrades
and other traffic management tools.

S51 Almaden/Blossom Hill Area Advanced San Jose $2.0 $0.0

Traffic Management System—A system
of traffic cameras, signal timing upgrades
and other traffic management tools.

S52 Santa Clara Communications Network Santa Clara $3.5 $0.0

Upgrade—Convert City’s existing copper
twisted wire pair communication infrastruc-
ture to new fiber optic cable network.

S53 Santa Clara Traffic Signals Upgrade— Santa Clara $3.2 $0.0
Citywide traffic signal modifications.

S54 Santa Clara TMC Upgrade—Convert Santa Clara $0.4 $0.0

City’s existing traffic operations room to a
new Traffic Management Center.

S55 City of Saratoga Citywide Signal Saratoga $0.2 $0.0

Upgrade Project-Phase II

S56 Citywide Accessible Pedestrian Saratoga $0.3 $0.0

Signals—Update city-owned signals with
audible signals for the visually impaired.

198 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 AP P ENDIX A

TOTAL
PROJECT PROJECT VTP
VTP SPONSOR/ COST ALLOCATION
ID PROJECT TITLE LOCATION (‘08 $MILLIONS) (‘08 $MILLIONS)

S57 Traffic Adaptive Signal Controller Sunnyvale $3.3 $0.0

Update—Expand the City’s adaptive traffic
signal control system to all major arterials.

S58 Citywide CCTV Camera Deployment— Sunnyvale $1.1 $0.0

Installation of Closed Circuit Television
Cameras for traffic monitoring and incident
management on the major arterials.

S59 Citywide Traffic Signal Controller Sunnyvale $0.6 $0.0

Update—Acquire and install new traffic
signal controller and cabinets to upgrade
City-maintained traffic signals citywide.

S60 Citywide Count and Speed Monitoring Sunnyvale $1.0 $0.0

Stations—Deploy count and speed monitor-
ing stations at various locations around the
City to provide up-to-date/current statistical
information regarding vehicular traffic on
arterials.

S61 Citywide ITS Communications Sunnyvale $1.7 $0.0

Infrastructure—Install fiber optic cables
to support ITS implementation, communica-
tion, video and data sharing within the City
and with adjorning municipalities.

S62 Traffic Management Center Sunnyvale $0.3 $0.0

Integration—Implement physical connec-
tion to the area-wide data and video informa-
tion sharing networks to improve the ability
to coordinate operations with neighboring
transportation management systems.

S63 Emergency Preemption Receiver Sunnyvale $1.0 $0.0

Installation—Provide priority and safe
passage to emergency vehicles at signalized
intersections.

S64 Capitol Expwy. TOS—Install TOS Santa Clara County $3.5 $0.0
infrastructure on Capitol Expwy. including
fiberoptic trunkline, CCTV, ethernet-capable
controller, battery backup system and
system detector loops.

VA L L E Y T R A N SP O RTAT I ON PLAN 2035 | 199

 TOTAL
PROJECT PROJECT VTP
VTP SPONSOR/ COST ALLOCATION
ID PROJECT TITLE LOCATION (‘08 $MILLIONS) (‘08 $MILLIONS)

S65 County Expressway Countdown Santa Clara County $0.5 $0.0

Pedestrian Signal Heads—Replace signal
heads throughout the expressway system
where necessary.

S66 TOS Infrastructure Improvements— Santa Clara County $10.0 $0.0

Enhance expressway traffic operations
systems components and functions, improve
signal cross coordination with adjacent city
signals and provide connectivity between
Santa Clara County and cities for sharing of
ITS data/communications.

S67 Signal Coordination/Interconnect Santa Clara County $5.0 $0.0

with Cross Streets—Signal coordination/
interconnect between expressway signals
and city/Caltrans signals on cross streets.

S68 SCC Motorist Traffic Information and Santa Clara County $5.0 $0.0
Advisory Systems—Motorist traffic infor-
mation and advisory systems (electronic
changeable message signs, advisory radio
and web page).

S69 Adaptive Pedestrian Timing Santa Clara County $1.0 $0.0

Demonstration Project—Adaptive pedes-
trian timing-dynamic FDW by detecting
pedestrians in crosswalk.

S70 Expressway Bike Detection—Install Santa Clara County $2.1 $0.0

bicycle detection on expressway shoulders
close to stop bar at all signalized intersec-
tions in both directions of the expressway
approach to the intersections.

200 | VALLEY TRANS P O RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 AP P ENDIX A

BICYCLE PROJECTS CURRENTLY additional funding from the BEP are indicated
FUNDED BY BICYCLE EXPENDITURE
PROGRAM/VTP ALLOCATION by a footnote.

The Bicycle Program in VTP 2035 is presented

During spring 2009, the BEP was reviewed
with a programmatic area allocation of $160
and rescored, with the inclusion of requests for
million. The projects currently in the Bicycle
revised allocation amounts for existing BEP
Expenditure Plan (BEP) are listed along with
projects and the addition of new projects. This
their allocation. Some of these projects already
process created the new BEP project list for the
have programmed funds, totaling about $25
25-year timeframe.
million. Those projects not anticipated to need

TOTAL
PROJECT PROJECT VTP
VTP SPONSOR/ COST ALLOCATION
ID PROJECT TITLE LOCATION (‘08 $MILLIONS) (‘08 $MILLIONS)

B1 Campbell Ave. Improvements at SR 17 Campbell $1.50 $0.00

and Los Gatos Creek1—Widen both sides of
Campbell Ave. to accommodate bicycle lanes,
install new sidewalks to accommodate pedestri-
ans and replace abutting walls on both sides.

B2 Los Gatos Creek Trail Expansion on Campbell $2.50 $2.00

west side (Hamilton Ave. to Campbell
Ave.)—Bridge widening over Los Gatos Creek,
installing sidewalks and bike lanes. Trail goes
under Campbell Ave. but comes up to grade to
get onto roadway.

B3 Mary Ave. (I-280) Bicycle and Cupertino $15.00 $0.00

Pedestrian Overcrossing2—Scope of work
includes bridge, landscaping and associated
improvements.

B4 Uvas Creek Trail Feasibility Study— Gilroy $0.15 $0.12

Feasibility Study of three alternatives for the
Uvas Creek trail from Gilroy Sports Park to
Gavilan College.

B5 Adobe Creek Bicycle/Pedestrian Bridge Los Altos $0.50 $0.00

Replacement—Replace existing bridge over
Adobe Creek that is jointly owned by the Cities
of Los Altos and Palo Alto. It is located on the
bicycle/pedestrian pathway along the Hetch-
Hetchy right-of-way.

1 2
This project is receiving $950,000 in Transportation This project is fully funded; the BEP will need to reimburse the
Enhancement (TE) funds from the American Recovery and Local Program Reserve up to $3.5 million.
Reinvestment Act.

VA L L E Y T R A N SP O RTAT I ON PLAN 2035 | 201

 TOTAL
PROJECT PROJECT VTP
VTP SPONSOR/ COST ALLOCATION
ID PROJECT TITLE LOCATION (‘08 $MILLIONS) (‘08 $MILLIONS)

B6 Moody Rd./El Monte Rd. Bike Los Altos Hills $3.50 $0.00
Improvements Segments 1, 2 and
33—Bike and Pedestrian improvements along
Moody Rd. and El Monte Rd. that will create
new trail connections from Los Altos through
Foothill College.

B7 El Monte Rd. from Stonebrook Dr. to Los Altos Hills $0.20 $0.16
Voorhees—New landscaping and intersection
improvements to existing pathway.

B8 West Llagas Creek Trail4–Spring Rd. to Morgan Hill $0.65 $0.50

Edes Ct.—Install Class I bike path adjacent to
West Little Llagas Creek. Final phase- Spring
Ave. to Edes Ct.

B9 Stevens Creek Trail Reach 4 Segment 2 Mountain View $10.00 $7.00

(Sleeper Ave. to Dale/Heatherstone)—
Segment of Stevens Creek Trail will travel from
Sleeper Ave. on the west side of SR 85, over SR
85 to Dale Ave./Heatherstone Way.

B10 Stevens Creek Trail Reach 4 Segment 2 Mountain View $12.00 $10.00
(Dale/Heatherstone Wy. to Mountain
View High School)—Segment of Stevens
Creek Trail will travel from Dale Ave./
Heatherstone Way to Mountain View High
School by crossing SR 85, completing Stevens
Creek Trail in Mountain View.

B11 Bicycle Boulevards Network Project— Palo Alto $5.00 $3.93

Expand Bicycle Boulevard Network pursuant to
adopted bicycle plan.

B12 California Ave. Caltrain Undercrossing— Palo Alto $13.00 $10.40

replacement of California Ave. pedestrian and
bicycle undercrossing of Caltrain tracks with
new ADA compliant structure.

3 4
Segments 1–3 of this project (between Rhus Road and This project was designed and programmed in three segments.
Stonebrook Rd.) have received the full BEP allocation for this Segment 1—the Wildlife Trail—is completed. Segment 2 is
project and are fully funded. Segments 1 and 2 are open and fully programmed and under construction. Segment 3 from
Segment 3 is under construction. Segments 4 and 5 will need Spring Ace to Edes Court will need the remaining third of the
additional BEP allocation. BEP Allocation.

202 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 AP P ENDIX A

TOTAL
PROJECT PROJECT VTP
VTP SPONSOR/ COST ALLOCATION
ID PROJECT TITLE LOCATION (‘08 $MILLIONS) (‘08 $MILLIONS)

B13 Almaden Expwy. Bicycle and Pedestrian San Jose $5.70 $4.60
Overcrossing—Construct a 360-foot bicycle
and pedestrian bridge over expressway to con-
nect neary by trails and the Almaden Light Rail
Station.

B14 Guadalupe River Trail (Montague San Jose $5.00 $2.62

Expwy. to Alviso)— A partially paved trail
segment along the Guadelupe River from Gold
Street to Montague Expwy. Elements of the trail
include a 12-foot paved AC trail with striping
and signage, a seating area midpoint, call boxes,
and a gateway structure at Montague Expwy.
with historical elements.

B15 Los Gatos Creek Trail (Auzerais Ave. San Jose $5.00 $2.94
to Park Ave.)—San Carlos St. Segment—
Completion of the last reach of the Los Gatos
Creek Trail including design, land acquisition
and environmental review.

B16 Los Gatos Creek Trail (Park to Santa San Jose $7.30 $5.86
Clara)—Diridon Station Segment—
Completion of the last reach of the Los Gatos
Creek Trail, including design, land acquisition
and environmental review.

B17 Coyote Creek Trail (Montague Expwy. to San Jose $7.50 $6.00
Oakland Rd.)— The completion of the creek
trail in the North San Jose Segment.

B18 Coyote Creek Trail (Oakland Rd. to San Jose $7.50 $6.00
Watson Park)—The completion of the creek
trail of the Berryessa BART Station Segment.

B19 Coyote Creek Trail (Watson Park to San Jose $5.00 $4.00
Williams St. Park)—The completion of the
creek trail of the Northside to Naglee Park
Neighborhood Segment.

B20 Coyote Creek Trail (Williams St. Park to San Jose $2.50 $2.00
Kelley Park)—The completion of the creek
trail of the I-280 Underpass Segment.

VA L L E Y T R A N SP O RTAT I ON PLAN 2035 | 203

 TOTAL
PROJECT PROJECT VTP
VTP SPONSOR/ COST ALLOCATION
ID PROJECT TITLE LOCATION (‘08 $MILLIONS) (‘08 $MILLIONS)

B21 Branham Ln./US 101 Bicycle and San Jose $7.00 $5.60
Pedestrian Overcrossing—Pedestrian
overcrossing over US 101 connecting to
Branham Ln. on both sides. Extend bikeway
east connecting with Coyote Creek Trail, extend
west of Branham across town connecting with
87 Bike Path, Guadalupe river Trail and Los
Gatos Creek Trail.

B22 San Tomas Aquino Creek Trail–North of Santa Clara $10.00 $0.00
Monroe Ave. to SR 237.

B23 San Tomas Aquino Creek Trail– Monroe Santa Clara $1.60 $1.30
Ave. to Cabrillo Ave. to southern city limit.

B24 PG&E De Anza Trail (Reach 3)—Develop Saratoga $2.50 $0.22

and construct reach 3 trail along PG&E ease-
ment through Saratoga. Scope of work includes
bike path, bike/ped signals and bridges.

B25 SR 9 Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Saratoga/Los Gatos $2.70 $0.00

Improvements5—SR 9 through Monte
Sereno, Los Gatos and Saratoga; Bikcycle and
Pedestrian safety improvements includ- ing
new bike lanes and shoulder widening for
improved mobility for non-motorized public.
4.4 miles of SR 9 will be treated to improve
bicyclist and pedestrian safety and convenience
along this main route.

B26 Sunnyvale East Drainage Trail (JWC Sunnyvale $1.33 $1.04

Greenway to Tasman Dr.)—Provide access
to the trail and Tasman Drive from the mobile
home park located to the north of Tasman
Drive.

B27 Borregas Bike Lanes between Weddell Sunnyvale $0.06 $0.05

and Persian–Bike lanes between Weddell Dr.
and Persian Dr.

5
This project received the bulk of its funding from outside the
BEP; it is anticipated to be completed with only $20,000 of
BEP funds.

204 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 AP P ENDIX A

TOTAL
PROJECT PROJECT VTP
VTP SPONSOR/ COST ALLOCATION
ID PROJECT TITLE LOCATION (‘08 $MILLIONS) (‘08 $MILLIONS)

B28 Borregas Bike Bridge over US 101 and Sunnyvale $8.70 $0.00
SR 2376—Provides a straight continuous
bicycle and pedestrian connection on Borregas
Ave. alignment over two freeways.

B29 Bernardo Ave. Caltrain Undercrossing— Sunnyvale $8.50 $1.00

Eliminate a barrier for bicyclists traveling to
the north of Sunnyvale on Bernardo Ave. by
constructing an undercrossing of the Caltrain
railroad tracks.

B31 McKean Rd. Shoulder Improvements Santa Clara County $6.60 $3.96
(Harry Rd. to Bailey Ave.)—Shoulder Roads
improvements to facilitate bicycle travel.

B32 Foothill - Loyola Bridge7—Short-term: Santa Clara County $0.46 $0.00

restripe shoulders to 7 feet in width under the Roads
Loyola Bridge.

B33 Loyola Bridge over Foothill Expwy.— Santa Clara County $7.00 $1.00
Bicycle improvements on the Loyola Bridge Roads
over Foothill Expressways consisting of the
addition of bike lanes.

B34 Page Mill/I-280 Interchange Santa Clara County $6.60 $1.32

Improvements—Bicycle improvements at Roads
the Page Mill/I-280 interchange consisting of
improved access for bikes and pedestrians over
I-280.

B35 Santa Clara Caltrain Undercrossing— VTA $8.00 $2.73

Extend planned Caltrain tunnel to east side of
Union Pacific tracks.

B36 Pilot Bicycle Parking Program— Develop VTA $0.25 $0.03

a VTA systemwide station bicycle parking
program.

B37 Widen Los Gatos Creek Trail on east side Campbell $0.30 $0.24
(Camden Ave. to Campbell Ave.)—Widen
existing east side of the trail between Camden
Ave. and Campbell Ave. from eight feet to
twelve feet and include drainage improvements.

6
This project is fully programmed and funded and under reconstruction of the Loyola Bridge. The indicated Project Cost
construction and will most likely not need any additional funds and VTP Allocation, therefore, are much less than the previous
from the BEP. project. That project is still listed in the Expressway Element of
7 this plan.
This project was revamped to provide a more cost-effective
solution to bike access under the Loyola Bridge than a total

VA L L E Y T R A N SP ORTAT I O N PLAN 2035 | 205

 TOTAL
PROJECT PROJECT VTP
VTP SPONSOR/ COST ALLOCATION
ID PROJECT TITLE LOCATION (‘08 $MILLIONS) (‘08 $MILLIONS)

B38 San Tomas Aquino Creek Trail—Provide Campbell $1.50 $1.20

a connection between east and west banks of
San Tomas Aquino Creek in conjunction with
the development of a new San Tomas Aquino
Creek Trail.

B39 Portals Project: Widening Campbell Campbell $3.00 $2.40

Ave. under SR 17—Widen both the north and
south sides of Campbell Ave. for a bike lane and
install new sidewalk on both sides of Campbell
Ave.

B40 Western Ronan Channel SCVWD service Gilroy $2.70 $2.16

road (Leavesley Rd. to Llagas Creek)—12
foot wide bicycle/pedestrian trail with 18-24
inch wide aggregate shoulders on each side.

B41 Gilroy Sports Park (Santa Teresa Blvd./ Gilroy $4.80 $3.84
Mesa Rd. to Sports Park Ticket Booth)—
12 foot wide bicycle/pedestrian trail to connect
to Gavilan College and planned future resi-
dential development in Southern Gilroy to the
Sports Park.

B42 Lions Creek SCVWD service road west Gilroy $1.90 $1.52
of Kern Ave. (Kern Ave. to Day Rd.)—12
foot wide bicycle/pedestrian trail to follow the
existing SCVWD service road elevation and
alignment.

B43 Lions Creek SCVWD service road west Gilroy $0.60 $0.48
of Santa Teresa Blvd/Day Rd. (east)
intersection (Santa Teresa Blvd to Bike/
Ped bridge across Lions Creek)—12 foot
wide bicycle/pedestrian trail segment to con-
nect Christopher High School to surrounding
neighborhoods.

B44 Northern Uvas Creek SCVWD service Gilroy $1.90 $1.52

road (Santa Teresa Blvd. at Third St.
to Burchell Creek Bridge)—12 foot wide
bicycle/pedestrian trail will connect and expand
the existing Uvas Creek trail system.

206 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 AP P ENDIX A

TOTAL
PROJECT PROJECT VTP
VTP SPONSOR/ COST ALLOCATION
ID PROJECT TITLE LOCATION (‘08 $MILLIONS) (‘08 $MILLIONS)

B45 Lions Creek Service Road West—12 foot Gilroy $0.90 $0.72
wide bicycle/pedestrian trail to follow the
existing SCVWD service road elevation and
alignment.

B47 Miramonte Ave. Bikeway Improvement Los Altos $1.40 $1.12

Project—Upgrade the bike route (Class III)
on Miramonte Avenue to a bike lane (Class
II) between Mountain View City Limits at the
northern end of Foothill Expwy. to the southern
end.

B48 Stevens Creek Link Trail—Provide a link Los Altos $3.00 $2.40
from the proposed Stevens Creek Trail in the
vicinity of San Antonio Rd. and Adobe Creek.

B49 Blossom Hill Rd. Sidewalks and Bicycle Los Gatos $0.80 $0.64
Lanes—Widen roadway to install bicycle lanes
and sidewalks on both sides of Guadalupe river
Trail, Cottle Light Rail Station, Blossom Hill Rd.
planned pedes-trian overcrossing and Coyote
Creek Trail.

B50 Los Gatos Creek Trail Connector to SR Los Gatos $1.00 $0.80
9—Installation of pathway and bridge to con-
nect bicyclists and pedestrians to non- motor-
ized Los Gatos Creek trail to SR 9.

B51 Montague Expwy. Pedestrian Milpitas $15.00 $7.50

Overcrossing—Connect the future Milpitas
BART Station to the Great Mall of the Bay Area
and future transit-oriented develop- ment from
Great Mall Parkway to Piper Ln.

B52 US 101 and Cochrane Road—Install bike Morgan Hill $0.60 $0.48
lane and pedestrian sidewalk improvements on
the south side of Cochrane Rd. between DePaul
Dr. and Madrone Pkwy.

B53 Madrone Recharge Channel Bike Path— Morgan Hill $0.50 $0.40
Convert existing service road into a joint use
bicycle and pedestrian pathway.

VA L L E Y T R A N SP O RTAT I ON PLAN 2035 | 207

 TOTAL
PROJECT PROJECT VTP
VTP SPONSOR/ COST ALLOCATION
ID PROJECT TITLE LOCATION (‘08 $MILLIONS) (‘08 $MILLIONS)

B54 US 101/Permanente Creek Trail Bike/ Mountain View $9.50 $2.10

Ped Crossing—Construct an overcrossing of
US 101 and a grade separated crossing of Old
Middlefield Way at Permanente Creek Trail.

B55 Stevens Creek Trail/Middlefield Rd. Mountain View $0.70 $0.35

North Side Access—Construct a new access
point to Stevens Creek Trail from the north side
of Middlefield Rd.

B56 Stevens Creek Trail/Landels School Mountain View $0.60 $0.48

Trailhead Improvements—Widen the
existing pathway between the Landels School
Trailhead and Stevens Creek Trail.

B59 US 101/Adobe Creek Ped./Bicycle Grade Palo Alto $13.00 $10.40

Separation—Grade separation of US 101 for
pedestrians and bicyclists in the vicinity of San
Antonio Rd. and Adobe Creek.

B61 Blossom Hill - Calero Bikeways— San Jose $0.30 $0.24

Enhanced bikeway connecting Leigh Ave. bike-
way with Guadalupe Creek Trail, Guadalupe
River Trail, Cottle Light Rail Station, Blossom
Hill Rd. planned pedestrian overcrossing and
Coyote Creek Trail.

B62 Brokaw - Coleman - Airport Bikeway— San Jose $1.00 $0.80

Enhanced Onstreet bikeway connecting: Santa
Clara Caltrain Station/Planned BART Station
via pedestrian overcrossing with Guadalupe
River Trail and Airport Area. Treatment will
include bike lanes (regular and either buffered
or colored), sharrows, signs, multi-use path (on
north side of Airport Blvd., Coleman Ave. to
Guadalupe River Trail), etc.

B63 Capitol Ave./Capitol Expwy. Bikeway— San Jose $0.30 $0.24

Enhanced on-street bikeway connecting
Penitencia Creek Trail, Capitol Light rail Station
and Thompson Creek Trail. Treatment will
include enhanced bikeway (such as phsyically
separated bike lane, buffered bike lane, and/or
colored bike lane); signs, etc.

208 | VALLEY TRANS P O RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 AP P ENDIX A

TOTAL
PROJECT PROJECT VTP
VTP SPONSOR/ COST ALLOCATION
ID PROJECT TITLE LOCATION (‘08 $MILLIONS) (‘08 $MILLIONS)

B64 Charcot Bikeway—Enhanced on-street San Jose $0.40 $0.32

bikeway from Guadalupe river Trail eastward
to Coyote Creek Trail and existing Oakland
rd. bike lanes, via planned I-880 crossing.
Treatment will include bike lanes (regular
and either buffered or colored), signs and an
enhanced bikeway such as a physically sepa-
rated bike lane, etc.

B65 Five Wounds Trail (Watson Park to San Jose $5.00 $4.00
Williams St. Park)–Alum Rock BART
Station Segment—Conversion a former
railway alignment into a pedestrian corridor
that traverses the neighborhood from Watson
Park to Williams Street Park.

B66 Hedding St. Bikeway—Enhanced on- street San Jose $0.20 $0.16
crosstown bikeway between San Jose/Santa
Clara city limit with Guadalupe River Trail,
Coyote Creek Trail and Penitencia Creek Trail.
Treatment will include bike lanes (regular and
either buffered or colored), sharrows, signs, etc.

B67 Hwy 237 Bikeway—On-street connections— San Jose $0.40 $0.32

Enhanced Hwy 237 bikeway connecting to
Guadalupe River Trail, Bay Trail, Coyote Creek
Trail and cities of Santa Clara and Milpitas.
Improve on-street segments with enhance-
ments such as bike lanes (regular, buffered or
colored), physically separated bike lanes, signs,
etc.

B68 Monroe Bikeway—Enhanced on-street San Jose $0.10 $0.08

bikeway connecting existing city of Santa Clara
bike lanes to north, existing San Jose bike lanes
William to west, Valley Fair, pedestrian over-
crossing over I-280, pedestrian overcrossing
over SR 17, Bascom LRT station. Treatment will
include enhanced bikeway (such as phsyically
separated bike lane, buffered bike lane, and/or
colored bike lane); sharrows, signs, etc.

B69 Newhall St. Bike/Ped Overcrossing over San Jose $7.00 $5.60
Caltrain

VA L L E Y T R A N SP O RTAT I ON PLAN 2035 | 209

 TOTAL
PROJECT PROJECT VTP
VTP SPONSOR/ COST ALLOCATION
ID PROJECT TITLE LOCATION (‘08 $MILLIONS) (‘08 $MILLIONS)

B70 Park Ave./San Fernando St./San San Jose $0.10 $0.08

AntonioBikeway—Enhanced on-street
crosstown bikeway between San Jose/ Santa
Clara city limits with Diridon Transit Center,
Downtown San Jose, San Jose Creek Trails (Los
Gatos, Guadalupe, Coyote), SJSU and east San
Jose. Treatment will include bike lanes (regular
and either buffered or colored), sharrows, signs,
etc.

B71 Penitencia Creek Trail (Coyote Creek - San Jose $3.75 $3.00
King Rd.)—Berryessa BART Station Segment.

B72 Thompson Creek Trail: Eastridge San Jose $6.40 $4.25

Transit Center to Evergreen College—A
segment from yerba Buena to the Eastridge
Transit Center that includes the construction
of a 12 foot wide Class I Trail. Where the trail
intersects major streets, trail users will follow
existing sidewalks to signalized pedestrian
street crossings. The project will include
trailheads at major locations with possible
construction of bridges where feasible.

B73 Willow Glen Spur Trail—Provide a trail San Jose $2.50 $2.00
connection between the Los Gatos Creek Trail
to Kelley Park.

B74 San Tomas Aquino Creek Spur Trail— Santa Clara $1.00 $0.80
Bike/ped spur trail along creek right of way,
parklands, private easments and public streets.

B75 Blue Hills School Rail Crossing Safety Saratoga $0.38 $0.30
Project—Restore at-grade pedestrian crossing
between Fredericksburg Dr. and Guava Ct.

B76 Mary Ave. Bike Lanes—Creation of bike Sunnyvale $0.52 $0.42

Lanes from Evelyn Ave. to Fremont Ave.

B77 Maude Ave. Bike Lanes—Creation of bike Sunnyvale $0.22 $0.18

Lanes from Mathilda Ave. to Wolfe Rd.

B78 Stevens Creek Trail Connector—Construct Sunnyvale $1.40 $1.12

a connector to provide access to the Mountain
View reach 4 trail.

210 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 AP P ENDIX A

TOTAL
PROJECT PROJECT VTP
VTP SPONSOR/ COST ALLOCATION
ID PROJECT TITLE LOCATION (‘08 $MILLIONS) (‘08 $MILLIONS)

B79 Mathilda Ave. Bike Lanes—Creation of bike Sunnyvale $3.90 $3.12

lanes from US 101 to El Camino Real.

B80 Pastoria Ave.Bike Lanes—Creation of bike Sunnyvale $0.24 $0.19

lanes from El Camino Real to Evelyn Ave.

B81 Hendy Ave. Bike Lanes—Creation of bike Sunnyvale $0.67 $0.54

lanes from Sunnyvale Ave. to Fair Oaks Ave.

B92 Santa Teresa Blvd./Hale Ave. Bicycle Santa Clara County $0.50 $0.40
Delineation Roads

B93 Bicycle Detection—Expressways and Santa Santa Clara County $2.10 $1.68
Teresa/Hale. Roads

B94 Los Gatos Creek Trail - Lark Ave. to SCC Parks $1.50 $1.20
Blossom Hill Dr.—Rehabilitate and enhance
1.8 miles of trail along a regionally significant
trail alignment within the Vasona County Park.

B95 Coyote Creek Trail - Silicon Valley Blvd. SCC Parks $1.10 $0.88
to Metcalf Rd.—Rehabilitate and enhance
1.37 miles of trail along Coyote Creek Trail
within the Coyote Creek Parkway County Park.

B96 Capitol Caltrain Station Crossing— VTA $8.50 $1.00

Eliminate a barrier for passengers deboarding
at the Capitol Caltrain station by providing a
safe crossing or grade separation of the train
tracks to access the west side of the tracks.

VA L L E Y T R A N SP O RTAT I ON PLAN 2035 | 211

 Appendix B: Community Design and
Transportation Program
BACKGROUND its goal and objectives. It is also intended to

The Community Design and Transportation unite VTA planning, design, programming

Program is a collaborative and innovative and construction activities with common

program developed in partnership with local objectives. It is designed to inspire new

governments, community and advocacy thinking and actions about the form and

groups and the business community. Its function of growth, broaden the range of

framework of cores, corridors and station viable transportation choices and make the

areas has provided a model for emula- most efficient use of transportation and other

tion throughout the nation, including the resources in the county.

recent ABAG and MTC FOCUS Program

Fundamentally, CDT calls for change: across
and Priority Development Areas (PDA)
multiple disciplines, from design to finance
regional blueprint. In 2002, the VTA Board
to engineering, each of which has overlap-
of Directors adopted the CDT Program as its
ping importance to the other disciplines.
primary program for integrating transporta-
CDT challenges us to critically reexamine our
tion and land use. In 2003, the 16 city and
current pattern of outward growth and begin
county governments of Santa Clara County
working toward creating places that invite
endorsed the CDT program and its cores,
pedestrian activity, support transit and build
corridors and station areas framework
on the distinct qualities of each community.
through formal council or Board actions.
Through the CDT program, VTA is engag-

The CDT program was created to help ing its partners in a countywide dialogue to

achieve VTA’s land use vision and implement develop strategies for changing planning and

212 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 AP P ENDIX B

development processes to more consistently density development are strategically placed

support alternative travel modes and efficient throughout suburbia, providing neighbor-
automobile use. hood services and social and recreational

activities close to homes. They also contain

CDT PROGRAM VISION a variety of housing types that better serve
The CDT program envisions a new paradigm changing demographics and support a range
for reshaping our existing environment and of incomes and age groups. Interconnected
building new environments that better blend streets—some designed specifically to sup-
urban form and multimodal transportation port transit service—support bike paths
options such as walking, transit and biking. and attractive sidewalks, offering residents
Our built environments work to protect the options other than the car for moving around
climate, become accessible by many modes of their community. This new suburban form—
travel and are more pedestrian-oriented and together with more compact development in
energy efficient. There are many elements core areas—works to complement urban cen-
—and hurdles—to achieving such a vision; ters and halt the common pattern of sprawl-
however, as we approach our goals the follow- ing, low-intensity development, separation
ing visions could emerge. and decentralization.

Vision for Station Areas Vision for Concentrated

Transit station areas have become “places Development
to be,” and destinations in their own right. Most of the cities in Santa Clara County desire

Residents and workers located near these city- or village-style development in strategic

stations enjoy many benefits, having access locations. Although these places will vary
to a wide variety of activities and amenities greatly in form and character, the vision for all

without needing a car. This mixing of activi- includes people being able to get around com-

ties brings together the station and surround- fortably without a car. This requires devel-

ing areas and the station area has emerged as opments that are compact and diverse and

a highly valued community asset. capable of supplying the whole spectrum of

daily activities within easy walking distances.

Vision for Smarter Suburbs
The qualities that create these places differ in
A new form of suburbia emerges: these are
scale and emphasis, but consistently include:
areas less dominated by automobiles and

better designed for walking, biking and • A mix of land uses that enables residents
transit access. Pockets of mixed-use, higher- and workers to complete their errands and
obtain services without driving. The mix

VA L L E Y T R A N SP O RTAT I ON PLAN 2035 | 213

 includes retail, entertainment, a variety of efficient and is less dependent on non-
housing types, offices and civic activities renewable resources.
such as libraries and post offices.
Transportation Implications of
• Human-scale urban design that creates a Concentrated Development
vibrant environment and promotes walking
A recent Transportation Cooperative
and transit use through appropriate inten-
Research Program (TCRP) study noted
sity of use, a dynamic mix of land uses,
Transit Oriented Development (TOD)
site design conducive to pedestrians and
located within walking distance of frequent households typically own fewer cars because

transit service. they have smaller households and because

they may forgo extra cars due to transit’s

• Building design that creates safe and
proximity. TOD households are also almost
attractive pedestrian environments through
appropriate setbacks, building heights and twice as likely to not own any car and own

ground floor uses. almost half the number of cars of other

households. In addition, over a typical

• Street design that balances the use of
all modes of transportation rather than weekday period, the 17 surveyed TOD-

maximizing auto capacity, and as a result housing projects averaged 44 percent fewer

facilitates amenity-rich compact develop- vehicle trips than estimated by the Institute
ment, which in turn supports transit, of Transportation Engineers manual.
walking and bicycling.
Each of these elements is addressed in VTA’s
• Concentrations of major community
Community Design and Transportation
attractions that serve as destinations for
Program: A Manual of Best Practices for
people who live in and outside the area.
Integrating Transportation and Land Use.
These include education and health care
facilities as well as places for cultural
CDT PROGRAM APPROACH
activities and entertainment.
The approach of the CDT program reflects
• Attractive, safe and efficient transporta-
VTA’s role as a multimodal transportation
tion facilities for all modes of travel that
provider. It considers all transportation
enhance public spaces, along with appro-
modes and stresses the importance of a
priate accommodations for autos where
they are necessary. healthy pedestrian environment, concentrated

mixed-use development, integrated transit

• An urban form that reduces the produc-
service, innovative street design and the
tion of greenhouse gases, is more energy

214 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 AP P ENDIX B

interrelationships of buildings and sites with critical role in protecting valuable open space
transportation facilities and services. It is con- at the edge.
cerned with how policies shape these pieces
Cores, Corridors and
and how the pieces can be fitted together
Station Areas Defined
to create an attractive, safe and sustainable
• Cores are districts that contain concentra-
urban form. tions of residential areas, employment
sites, and other destinations such as retail,
The CDT program is designed around a
entertainment, academic and cultural
framework for application in community
activities. They are further distinguished as
cores, along the major transportation cor-
regional cores, such as downtown San Jose,
ridors and surrounding transit station areas. county cores such as downtown Mountain
On the following page is a CDT map of cores, View or Sunnyvale, or local cores such as
corridors and station areas designated by San Jose’s Willow Glen area and downtown
local agencies and VTA for the CDT program. Los Gatos.

These sites, discussed in more detail below, • Corridors are linear in shape, centered
are structured around a framework of cores, on a street or transit line, and often
corridors and station areas. They constitute function as a backbone for surrounding

the new frontiers for growth and are a primary communities. Corridors offer oppor-
tunities similar to cores for intensified
focus of the CDT program.
mixed-use development, but usually in

New Frontiers for Growth a more defined area within a block or so

of the corridor. Corridors also present
Untouched lands at the urban fringe have
tremendous opportunities for creating
generally been thought of as leading candi-
urban- or village-like nodes, especially at
dates for growth and development. However,
major intersections where several transit
Santa Clara County’s mature urban areas are
lines cross. With enhanced “boulevard-
also prime development opportunities. In like” pedestrian environments and other
fact, vacant or underutilized urban sites offer multimodal improvements such as transit
advantages over outlying areas because they preferential treatments and bike lanes,

are already connected with urban services corridors have real potential for becoming
cohesive community elements, offering a
and infrastructure. Moreover, accommo-
multitude of activities, a range of pleasant
dating growth in urban cores plays a more

VA L L E Y T R A N SP ORTAT I O N PLAN 2035 | 215

 environments, and several choices of ways Attractive urban design, multimodal trans-
to move along their length. portation improvements, and a variety of
all-day activities at station areas can create
• Station areas are locations adjacent to
vibrant centers of activity. Station areas
rapid transit stations that already serve,
become destinations in their own right
or will serve, as focal points for new infill
and add value to surrounding communi-
development and redevelopment. Station
ties. If located within a local core area,
areas have opportunities similar to cores
such as near a downtown or Main Street,
and corridors for intensified mixed-use
the station area design can complement
development, and offer unique oppor-
and enhance the overall urban experience
tunities for community “place-making.”
of those areas.

216 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 AP P ENDIX B

These are areas most likely to benefit from the actions of each can be mutually supportive
land use intensification and implementation and beneficial.
of the CDT best practices principles (discussed
This vision is outlined in four key concepts
in following sections) and are key land use
and ten principles that provide the basis for
opportunity areas for providing multimodal
the CDT program.
transportation alternatives that can serve the

needs of both existing and new residents and KEY CONCEPTS AND
workers. PRINCIPLES FOR INTEGRATING
TRANSPORTATION AND
MANUAL OF BEST LAND USE
PRACTICES FOR INTEGRATING The key concepts, summarized below, under-
TRANSPORTATION AND lie all aspects of the CDT Program and form
LAND USE
the foundation upon which the principles,
The CDT Manual of Best Practices for
practices and actions are built:
Integrating Transportation and Land Use is
• Interconnection—focuses on inter-
a key product of the CDT program and was
connecting street, bicycle and pedestrian
developed to support the implementation of
networks, transit modes, buildings and
VTA’s land use objective and goals. It docu-
activity centers to get more from trans-
ments proven and innovative best practices portation resources, and to form distinct
in urban design and transportation planning districts and more livable places
that support and enhance both VTA’s and its
• Place-making—focuses on the human-
Member Agencies’ investments in the commu-
scale elements of the built environment
nity. It provides planning and design guidance that create uniqueness and identity, and
for how to develop in the cores, corridors and that make places attractive, comfortable,
station areas. It also provides policy guidance memorable and lasting

and outlines steps that communities and

• Access-by-Proximity—focuses on
local governments can take to identify and clustering complementary land uses and
overcome barriers to developing more livable compact, well-designed development to
and sustainable communities. Moreover, it make the types of amenity-rich places that

articulates VTA’s vision for how communities allow trips to be combined, reduced or
eliminated, and made by transit, walking or
and a multimodal transportation system can
biking; and accordingly, this helps achieve
grow together, their respective roles and how

VA L L E Y T R A N SP O RTAT I ON PLAN 2035 | 217

 the kind of critical mass that makes vibrant 2. Intensify land uses and activities.
public life possible Compact, amenity-rich development
is essential to developing vibrant and
• Choice—focuses on the notion that one-
functional places. Higher-intensity land
size-does-not-fit-all, and seeks to expand
use in cores, corridors and station areas
the range of choices about the design of
facilitates walkability, creates viable
developments that we live and work in,
transportation options, promotes thriving
where activities are located, the character
businesses and develops a sense of place.
of the community, and the means of getting
High-quality urban design and architecture
around
must accompany intensified development
to make communities feel comfortable,
CDT PRINCIPLES FOR
attractive and safe.
INTEGRATING
TRANSPORTATION AND 3. Provide a diverse mix of uses. Mixed-
LAND USE
use developments offer users various
These time-proven planning and design prin- combinations of commercial, office and
ciples build upon and expand the big-picture residential land uses within close proxim-
key concepts described previously and create ity. A variety of uses attracts people during
a foundation for more detailed practices and all times of the day and creates synergies

actions covered in the CDT Manual. An over- that help these areas reduce the need for
automobile trips; make transit, walking and
view of each principle is provided below.
biking viable options; enhance community
1. Target growth in cores, corridors livability; and thrive both economically and
and station areas. Focusing growth on socially.
established cores, corridors and station
4. Design for pedestrians. The hallmark of
areas is about doing more with less. New
great places is the ability to walk between
growth in these areas capitalizes on existing
destinations. This principle, coupled with a
infrastructure and allows cities to avoid the
diverse mix of uses and high-quality project
costs of expanding and maintaining new
design, helps to create synergies that
infrastructure. Infill growth thwarts urban
encourage walking, enliven public spaces
fringe development, conserving open space,
and bring vitality to urban areas. Being able
resources and natural areas. Transit service
to walk to destinations also takes auto-
in these areas is more fully utilized and
mobile trips off the roadway network, and
productive.
reduces energy consumption and pollution.

218 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 AP P ENDIX B

5. Design in context. Designing in context context of adjacent land uses and the
focuses on the materials, design details needs of people.
and architectural styles that establish and
9. Integrate transit. Transit service
reinforce a unique community character.
benefits everyone; but transit can only
Designing in context is also about sensitiv-
function effectively when it is fully inte-
ity to the relationships between buildings,
grated with the community. Integration
streets and public spaces.
can be achieved either by extending the
6. Focus on existing areas. Before con- community fabric out to connect with
suming additional land and resources in transit facilities, or by bringing transit
outlying areas, greater attention should service directly into the heart of the
be given to using land already dedicated community. Transit stops and stations
to the urban fabric more efficiently. This should be viewed as valuable civic spaces
also means that sustaining the com- warranting public resources and high-
munity is just as important as improving quality design.
it—and that after-care and maintenance
10. Manage parking. Parking takes up
programs are as vital as good planning
enormous amounts of land and is today
and design are in creating a sense of place
perhaps the single most important element
and community.
influencing the design of urban areas. As
7. Create a multimodal transportation such, the design and placement of park-
system. Great places offer a multitude ing helps dictate the character of a place,
of ways to get around. Provision of viable determining whether it will feel isolated
transportation alternatives is not about from adjacent uses or integrated into a
destroying the automobile; rather, it is continuous urban fabric. These concepts
about balancing the needs of vehicle move- and principles are intended for imple-
ment with the needs of transit, walking and mentation together in fulfillment of a long
biking. range vision for growth and development.
Consistent and incremental implementa-
8. Establish streets as places. In
tion will create the types of synergy-rich
addition to being part of the multimodal
and amenity-rich environments that make
transportation system that moves people
urban spaces thrive, and bring wholesale
and goods, streets are the most abundant
positive results to the transportation
public space in cities. Rather than being
system and our communities.
viewed as just a thoroughfare for cars,
street design should also reflect the

VA L L E Y T R A N SP O RTAT I ON PLAN 2035 | 219

 CDT Manual Topics • Development density recommendations for
cores and corridors
The CDT Manual addresses critical topics

by illustrating best practices and identifying • Alternative use of level of service standards

implementation strategies and methods for • Rethinking parking requirements

propagating best practices throughout the • Model places and visualizing best practices
county. The manual in intended to be a living
• The role of local governments in best
document that evolves in response to new practices
information and opportunities.
• Building community support for best

Best practices topics covered in the CDT practices

Manual include: • Flexible zoning strategies

• Site and building design • Community planning for bus transit, rail
transit and station areas
• Street connectivity and multimodal street
design • Attracting developers to best practices
projects
• Innovative and efficient uses of land
• Transportation demand management
• Supporting concentrated development

220 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 AP P ENDIX B

Documents Supporting the Future CDT program publications providing

CDT Manual additional detail may include but not limited
The CDT Manual was conceived as a compre- to:
hensive “toolkit,” but some areas of planning
• Parking policies, strategies and design
and design covered in the manual warrant guidelines
greater detail. So in addition to updates of
• Station area access and design guidelines
the manual, the CDT program includes the
• Multimodal street and site design
development of other supporting documents. guidelines
For example, quality pedestrian and bicycle
• Strategies for community and economic
environments are critical to the vitality and
sustainability
success of communities and to the productiv-

ity of transit. To help plan and build better

pedestrian and bicycle environments, VTA has

developed pedestrian technical guidelines and

bicycle technical guidelines.

VA L L E Y T R A N SP O RTAT I ON PLAN 2035 | 221

 Appendix C: Transportation, Energy
and Air Quality Program
Public transportation agencies have a sig- VTA’s Transportation Energy and Air Quality

nificant role in addressing issues related to (TEAQ) Program.

climate protection and energy. Simply stated,

The TEAQ Program will provide a framework
the more things we can do to get people
for VTA to develop initiatives, projects and
out of their cars and into other transporta-
programs, conduct research and work with
tion modes such as transit, walking and
partner agencies—such as BAAQMD, MTC and
biking, the greater the cumulative positive
ABAG—to address climate change and energy
impact the transportation sector will have
issues over the coming years and decades. It
on climate protection and energy usage.
is envisioned as a dynamic program that will
Agencies can support land use changes that
evolve and adapt over time as new information,
make alternative modes more attractive,
technologies and programs emerge.
promote carpooling, encourage people to

make fewer and shorter trips, allocate existing TEAQ PROGRAM GOALS
and future resources more efficiently and • Offer options to reduce Vehicle Miles
effectively and create, adapt and use technol- Traveled (VMT) and Average Daily Trips

ogy to assist in the conservation of natural (ADT) by promoting more compact and
active development adjacent to high-
resources, reduction of greenhouse gases,
frequency transit corridors
prevention of pollution and use of renewable

energy and materials. When future genera- • Offer options to reduce Single Occupant

tions reflect on this era, they will realize that VMT by offering high-quality high-
frequency bus and rail transit in corridors
it wasn’t one action that addressed climate
where compact mixed-use development
and energy concerns—it was many solutions
exists or is planned
working in harmony. This is the focus of

222 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 AP P ENDIX C

• Promote land use strategies through the CDT example, methane is a much stronger green-
Program that foster changes in development house gas than CO2—about 25 times more
patterns to allow for a reduction in VMT and heat absorptive than CO2—but it is present in
increases in transit, walk and bike trips
much smaller concentrations. Methane also
• Promote energy efficiency in transportation has a large effect for a brief period (a net life-
through advocacy, education, research and time of 8.4 years in the atmosphere), whereas
leadership by example
CO2 has a small effect for a long period (a net

• Ensure that all VTA capital projects utilize lifetime of over 100 years in the atmosphere).
construction practices and building materi-
Greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide and
als that follow and/or implement LEED
methane come from a variety of manmade
guidelines
and natural sources. Animals produce CO2
• Provide high-efficiency transit services that
and methane and plants absorb carbon and
support compact mixed-use developments in
produce oxygen but release CO2 and methane
the CDT Cores, Corridors and Station Areas
when burned or when biologically degraded—
• Support proven and innovative programs
for example, waste landfills can be sources of
to reduce single-occupant automobile trips
methane when the materials biodegrade. The
and reduce congestion
burning of fossils fuels such as coal, natural

What Are Greenhouse Gases and gas and petroleum products (e.g., gasoline and
Where Do They Come From? diesel fuels) since the industrial revolution are
On Earth, the most abundant greenhouse thought to account for the majority of addi-
gases are, in order of relative abundance: tional greenhouse gases in our atmosphere.
water vapor, carbon dioxide (CO2), methane Fossil fuels are derived from organic sources
(CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), ozone (O2) and have very high levels of stored energy.
and chlorofluorocarbons (CFC) compounds.
In discussions about reducing greenhouse gas
According to research, water vapor causes
emissions from energy use and production, it is
about 36–70 percent of the greenhouse effect
important to distinguish between primary and
on Earth, carbon dioxide about 9–26 percent;
secondary sources. For example, switching cars
methane roughly 4–9 percent and ozone
from gasoline powered to electrically powered
at about 3–7 percent. These percentages
engines will only be partially effective if the
represent a combination of the strength of the
primary source of electrical energy generation
greenhouse effect of the gas and its abun-
is petroleum-based (i.e., oil, natural gas or
dance in the environment—the higher end of
coal). We don’t want our local actions to simply
the ranges quoted are for the gas alone; the
shift the problem to another area.
lower end, for the gas counting overlaps. For

VA L L E Y T R A N SP ORTAT I O N PLAN 2035 | 223

 Manmade Sources of It is apparent that the scope of the subject is
Greenhouse Gases large. To be effective in addressing greenho-
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency sue gas issues it will take creative and innova-
(EPA) ranks the major greenhouse gas con- tive thinking applied to multiple areas and
tributing end-user sectors in the following pursued with rigorous long-term commitment
order: industrial, transportation, residential, to change. The following are initial recom-
commercial and agricultural. Major sources of mended TEAQ Program action items.
an individual’s greenhouse gas include home

heating and cooling, electricity consumption TEAQ ACTION ITEMS

and transportation. Corresponding conserva- The TEAQ Program will subscribe to these

tion measures are: improving home building principles:

insulation, using compact fluorescent lamps and

Embrace technology. Since the early 1970s
choosing energy-efficient vehicles. BAAQMD
research and development of new tech-
estimates that 50 percent of greenhouse gases
nologies have improved fuel efficiency in the
generated in the Bay Area are from the transpor-
transportation sector, reduced production of
tation sector; however, this estimate does not
harmful emissions and broadened the spec-
account for emissions from electricity generated
trum of energy sources. In addition, greater
outside of the Bay Area, and since California
efficiencies can be realized from our existing
imports about twenty to thirty percent of its
infrastructures. It will be VTA policy to stay
total electricity, the percentage attributed to the
current on the development and application of
transportation sector may be overestimated.
new technologies and evaluate new technolo-

According to the EPA, fossil fuel combustion gies for application in VTA operations.

in the U.S. generates approximately 6 billion

Speak through the marketplace. In 2000
tons of CO2 annually. Of this, electrical energy
there was only one commercially available
production is responsible for about 2.38 billion
model of hybrid car sold in the United States—
tons of CO2/year, or about 40 percent of total
the Honda Insight. In 2001 the Toyota Prius
emissions. The transportation sector accounts
was introduced. In 2009, because the public
for 1.8 billion tons per year, or roughly 31
is demanding them, car manufacturers are
percent. Automobiles account for about 634
expected to offer 20 or more models of hybrid
million tons/year or about 10 percent of the
vehicles covering the full range of vehicle
total and 35 percent of the transportation
model types from ultra-economic sedans
sector. Light, medium and heavy duty trucks
to high-end SUVs and trucks—a 900 percent
account for about 13.5 percent of the total and
increase in eight years. If large numbers of
46 percent of the transportation sector.

224 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 AP P ENDIX C

consumers demand more fuel- home in Santa Clara County converted.

efficient and alternative fuel vehicles the
• Change incandescent lighting in your
strong market forces will compel manufac- household to compact fluorescent light-
tures to respond—if they wish to remain ing (CFL). Saves money by reducing your
competitive. The cumulative, long-term electric bill and also reduces CO2 emis-

effect of market forces can dwarf what can be sions by about 500 pounds annually. If
every household in the Santa Clara County
prescribed or legislated by government.
switched to CFLs about 250,000 tons/year
Act individually. For climate protection of CO2 would be prevented from entering
and energy use, many effective immediate and the atmosphere. In addition, the emerging
near-term actions can be taken by individu- Light Emitting Diode (LED) technology

als, private and public organizations such as portends even greater savings as produc-
tion costs decrease and lumen output
businesses, schools and public agencies—and
increases—possibly tripling this number.
many are not transport-related. In addition,

many of these individual actions save money • Plant trees. The average tree removes from
the atmosphere about 10 tons of CO2 over
as well as the environment. Following is a
its lifetime.
list of actions individuals could take and the

dramatic benefits that result. • Buy or lease a fuel efficient car. Reduces
greenhouse gases.
• Take transit. A recently released report
from the American Public Transportation • Leave your car at home two days a week.
Association (APTA) found that the single Can save on average about 1,600 pounds/
most effective way to cut one’s personal year of CO2.
quotient of carbon dioxide pollution is
• Insulate your home. Can save 3,000 pounds
switching from cars to public transit
of CO2 emissions per year/household.
(http://apta.com/research/info/online/
climate_change.cfm). According to APTA, • Support local farms, organic produce,

“when compared to other household and locally produced products. Reduces

actions that limit carbon dioxide (CO2), energy usage associated with transport and

taking public transportation can be more petroleum-based fertilizers.

than ten times more effective in reducing • Recycle newspaper, glass, and metal.
this greenhouse gas.” Reduce your garbage output by 25

• Change home appliances to Star Energy percent; could save an average of about

Saver appliances. Can save 3,000 pounds 1,850 pounds of CO2 emissions per year/

of CO2 emissions per year/household, or household.

approximately 1.5m tons of CO2/year if every

VA L L E Y T R A N SP O RTAT I ON PLAN 2035 | 225

 Develop and support locally produced funding for new programs and projects that

energy sources such as solar, wind, lead to long-term and sustainable reductions

geothermal, hydro, and tidal and wave in greenhouse gas emissions and other envi-

energy. This has a threefold benefit: first, ronmental and economic impacts. Possible

it reduces the need to import foreign energy sources of new funds for these uses include:

(predominantly oil) and keeps dollars spent

• Gasoline and diesel fuel surcharges
on energy in the country to function as an
• Countywide vehicle registration fee
additive to the economy; second, it can

develop local primary production jobs which • Portion of new sales or property taxes

help stimulate and power local economies; dedicated to climate protection programs

and third, it works toward the incremental • Portion of future express lane net revenue
realization of a green economy whereby an
Possible Uses of New Funds
entire new industry can be created. Such
• Additional transit service
actions reach beyond the transportation

sector and are inextricably tied to the health, • First and last mile transit connections

sustenance and long-term stability of our including possible shuttle and community
bus lines, bike and car sharing programs,
society as a whole.
and other modal improvements
Pursue New Funding. Some funding can
• Funding assistance for land use and
come from existing sources—such as using
pedestrian-oriented improvements
existing budgets to replace transportation
• Funding assistance for city programs
fleets (public and private) with low or zero
(transportation related)
emission vehicles instead of diesel or gasoline
vehicles. However, it is likely that new funds • Funding assistance for other agency pro-
grams (for example, school bus programs)
will be needed to accomplish society’s climate

and energy goals. • Ongoing research, education and advocacy

component
The pursuit of new funds to address climate

and energy issues has three fundamental VTA TEAQ PROGRAM

roles: first, to continue to maintain, operate IMPLEMENTATION
and expand transit, walk, bike and shared ride
Develop TEAQ Plans
modes of travel; second, to influence personal
The adage “Think Globally, Act Locally” is
choices in selecting places to live and trans-
good general advice—and bringing the adage
port modes and personal behavior regarding
closer to home—“Think Regionally, Act
energy consumption; and third,to provide
Locally” certainly rings true when it comes

226 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 AP P ENDIX C

to climate and energy issues and is the best to adopt a schedule of fees to be paid by regu-

way to realize meaningful long-term change. lated sources of greenhouse gas emissions, as

Many, if not most, options to reduce energy specified. Key dates include:

use and protect the climate are best imple-

• Approved by the State of a scoping plan no
mented at the local and individual level. later than January 1, 2009. The plan will
Accordingly, VTA’s TEAQ Program will focus outline measures and strategies for achiev-
on funding local efforts in coordination with ing the maximum technologically feasible

regional, State and national visions and goals. and cost-effective reductions in greenhouse
gas emissions from sources or categories of
Over the next few years VTA will work with
sources of greenhouse gases by 2020.
local jurisdictions and regional partners to

develop guidelines for preparing TEAQ plans • Adoption by January 1, 2010 of regulations

and/or incorporating TEAQ-related elements to implement the measures identified on

the list to achieve the maximum technologi-
within the structure of existing plans or
cally feasible and cost-effective reductions
programs. These plans may also serve to sup-
in greenhouse gas emissions from those
port legislative mandates; for example the two
sources or categories of sources identified.
recently passed State bills summarized below:
• To further achieve the Statewide green-
AB 32 (Nunez) California Global Warming house gas emissions limit the State board
Solutions Act of 2006. This bill requires the may adopt a regulation that establishes a
State board to adopt regulations to require system of market-based declining annual

the reporting and verification of Statewide aggregate emission limits for sources or
categories of sources that emit greenhouse
greenhouse gas emissions and to monitor
gas emissions, applicable from January 1,
and enforce compliance with this program.
2012, to December 31, 2020, inclusive, that
The bill further establishes Statewide green-
the State board determines will achieve
house gas emissions limit equivalent to the the maximum technologically feasible and
Statewide greenhouse gas emissions levels in cost-effective reductions in greenhouse
1990 to be achieved by 2020, as specified. The gas emissions, in the aggregate, from those
bill would require the State board to monitor sources or categories of sources.

compliance with and enforce any rule, regula- • After January 1, 2011, the State board may
tion, order, emission limitation, emissions revise regulations adopted pursuant to this
reduction measure, or market-based compli- section and adopt additional regulations to

ance mechanism adopted by the State board, further the provisions of this division.

pursuant to specified provisions of existing

Because the bill requires the State board
law. The bill would authorize the State board
to establish emissions limits and other

VA L L E Y T R A N SP ORTAT I O N PLAN 2035 | 227

 requirements that, if violated, constitute a planning organizations to be consistent with the

criminal act, it creates a State-mandated local sustainable communities strategy contained in

program. the regional transportation plan, but exempts

certain transportation projects programmed for

SB 375 (Steinberg), 2008—Transportation
funding on or before December 31, 2011 from
Planning: Travel Demand Models:
the sustainable communities strategy process.
Sustainable Communities Strategy:

Environmental Review. This bill would To the extent the SCS is unable to achieve the

require the California Transportation greenhouse gas emission reduction targets,

Commission (CTC) to maintain guidelines, as the bill requires affected metropolitan plan-

specified, for travel demand models used in ning organizations to prepare an alternative

the development of regional transportation planning strategy (APS) showing how the

plans by metropolitan planning organizations. targets would be achieved through alternative

This bill would also require the regional trans- development patterns, infrastructure, or addi-

portation plan for regions of the State with a tional transportation measures or policies.

metropolitan planning organization to adopt The State Air Resources Board is required to

a sustainable communities strategy (SCS), review each metropolitan planning organiza-

as part of its regional transportation plan, as tion’s sustainable communities strategy and

specified, designed to achieve certain goals alternative planning strategy to determine

for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions whether the strategy, if implemented, would

from automobiles and light trucks in a region. achieve the greenhouse gas emission reduc-

tion targets. Any SCS that is found to be

The bill requires the State Air Resources Board,
insufficient by the State board must be revised
working in consultation with the metropoli-
by the metropolitan planning organization,
tan planning organizations, to provide each
with a minimum requirement that the met-
affected region with greenhouse gas emission
ropolitan planning organization obtain State
reduction targets for the automobile and light
board acceptance that an alternative planning
truck sector for 2020 and 2035 by September
strategy, if implemented, would achieve the
30, 2010 and to appoint a Regional Targets
targets. The bill specifically States that the
Advisory Committee to recommend factors and
adopted strategies do not regulate the use of
methodologies for setting those targets and to
land and are not subject to State approval and
update those targets every eight years. The bill
that city or county land use policies, including
requires certain transportation planning and
the general plan, are not required to be con-
programming activities by the metropolitan
sistent with the regional transportation plan,

228 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 AP P ENDIX C

which would include the sustainable growth TEAQ Implementation Strategies

strategy, or the alternative planning strategy. In support of the TEAQ Program VTA will:

SB 375 exempts from CEQA a transit priority • Support TEAQ-related efforts through its
Legislative Program
project, as defined, that meets certain require-

ments and that is declared by the legislative • Support State, regional and local legislative
and voluntary climate protection actions
body of a local jurisdiction to be a sustainable

communities project. The transit priority project • Proactively implement VTA’s Sustainability
Program
would need to be consistent with a metropolitan
• Explore support from private sector devel-
planning organization’s SCS or APS that has been
opment though its capital and ongoing
determined by the State Air Resources Board to
operating programs
achieve the greenhouse gas emission reductions
• Support regional and local advocacy efforts
targets. The bill provides for limited CEQA review related to land use transportation integration
of various other transit priority projects.
• Support programs such as the EPA’s
With respect to other residential or mixed- “SmartWay” Program

use residential projects meeting certain • Improve transit; focusing on key corridors
where local jurisdictions are committed to
requirements, SB 375 exempts the environ-
land use intensification and on first/last
mental documents for those projects from
mile connections
being required to include certain informa-
• Develop express lanes and advocate for
tion regarding growth inducing impacts or pricing roadways and parking
impacts from certain vehicle trips. The bill
• Convert to alternative fueled/low- or zero-
also authorizes the local jurisdictions to adopt emissions fleets as technology becomes
traffic mitigation measures for transit priority cost-effective

projects and exempts a transit priority project • Support State and local building codes
seeking a land use approval from compliance that require LEED Certified construction
—insulation, energy efficient design and
with additional measures for traffic impacts, if
passive and active solar design elements
the local jurisdiction has adopted those traffic
• Explore new technologies through research,
mitigation measures.
test/pilot projects and partnerships with
Because the bill imposes additional duties other agencies

on local governments relative to the hous- • Develop and implement education and
ing element of the general plan, it imposes a awareness

State-mandated local program.

VA L L E Y T R A N SP ORTAT I O N PLAN 2035 | 229

 Appendix D: Systemwide Performance Measures

Performance measures provide a common existing conditions. The No Project scenario

framework to evaluate programs and includes the 2035 land use conditions but

projects. They also provide an indication of not the VTP 2035 projects. The 2035 Project

how well Santa Clara County’s transporta- scenario includes all of the base projects,

tion system serves the traveling public. plus the VTP 2035 Investment Program.

In 1999, the VTA Board adopted a set of This analysis scenario includes projects

multimodal performance measures as funded with 30 years of State and Federal

part of the Santa Clara County Congestion programming, as well as the 2000 Measure

Management Program (CMP). These A sales tax revenue and proposed express

performance measures are used to evaluate lane corridors. It also presumes that VTA is

the impacts of land use decisions and able to secure adequate funding to be able

projections on the county’s transportation to fully implement and operate the 2000

system. This section estimates how well the Measure A program of projects.

transportation system will perform in 2035,

given the additional growth in and out of the TRAFFIC LEVEL OF SERVICE

county and the implementation of the VTP Traffic level of service (LOS) measures the

2035 projects. interrelationship between travel demand

(volume) and supply (capacity) of the

The transportation system performance
transportation system. LOS is a quantitative
is evaluated using a 2005 base condition,
measure categorized into six levels, A
a 2035 No Project scenario and a 2035
through F—with LOS A representing ideal
Project scenario. The “base” refers to

230 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 AP P ENDIX D

TABLE D-1 Deficient Freeway and Expressway Miles

2035 NO
2035 PROJECT VS. 2035
2005 NO 2035 PROJECT NET PERCENT
BASE PROJECT PROJECT CHANGE CHANGE
AM Peak 100.5 302.6 297.2 -5.4 -1.8%
PM Peak 105.5 380.7 371.1 -9.6 -2.5%

conditions and LOS F representing poor the AM peak and 9.6 miles in the PM peak,

conditions or congested flow. a decrease of 1.8 percent and 2.5 percent,

respectively.
Roadways at LOS F are considered
deficient. The Santa Clara County CMP
MODAL SPLIT
considers freeway segments with a speed
Modal split measures the extent to
less than 35 miles per hour and expressway
which travelers use the various available
segments less than 13 miles per hour to
transportation modes. It is measured as the
be deficient (LOS F). Due to the growth
proportion of people making a trip using
within the county as well as the increase
a given mode. Modal split values shown
in travelers coming into the county, the
in Tables D-2 and D-3 on the following
number of roadways operating at LOS F will
page are for daily person trips in the base
increase between the base year and 2035.
year 2005 and in 2035. The 2035 Project
Nevertheless, the VTP 2035 Project scenario
scenario increases the viability of alterna-
shows some improvement over a No Project
tives to driving alone with investments in
scenario in miles of deficient roadway
transit, HOV improvements and express
segments.
lane conversions. These investments

By the year 2035, the miles of deficient will allow more alternative mode use, as

freeways and expressways are projected to indicated by the tables below. The percent-

be 302.6 miles in the AM peak and 380.7 age of drive-alone work trips decreases

miles in the PM peak for No Project condi- over 5 percent from 2005 to 2035 Project

tions. This represents an increase well over scenario. The proportion of commute

2005 base year conditions for both the AM trips for the shared-ride (HOV) mode is

and PM peak periods. With the VTP 2035 expected to increase by about 2 percent

Project scenario, deficient freeway and for both 2035 No Project and Project

expressway miles are projected to decrease scenarios. Transit experiences the largest

from the No Project scenario by 5.4 miles in increase in commute shares, increasing

VA L L E Y T R A N SP O RTAT I ON PLAN 2035 | 231

 TABLE D-2 Mode Split: Home-Based Work Trips
2035 NO
2005 PROJECT 2035 PROJECT
Drive Alone 79.90% 74.90% 73.90%
Shared Ride 13.30% 15.00% 14.90%
Transit 3.60% 5.60% 6.70%
Bike 1.00% 1.60% 1.60%
Walk 2.20% 2.90% 2.90%

TABLE D-3 Mode Split: All Trips

2035 NO
2000 PROJECT 2035 PROJECT
Drive Alone 56.90% 52.60% 52.30%
Shared Ride 32.70% 32.80% 32.70%
Transit 2.10% 3.60% 4.10%
Bike 1.70% 1.60% 1.50%
Walk 11.30% 9.40% 9.40%

from 3.3 percent in 2005 to 6.7 percent in over time, it is an indicator of the level

the 2035 Project scenario. While this is not of utilization for high-occupancy modes

a large percentage increase in transit mode (carpooling, transit, etc.). Vehicle hours

share, this increase over 2005 represents of travel per vehicle trip (VHT) are an

approximately 164,900 more daily transit indicator of the average amount of time

trips made in Santa Clara County. Trips travelers spend getting to their destination.

made by bicycle and walk modes also A decrease in these measures indicates

increase slightly over 2005 shares. people are traveling more efficiently and

mobility is improving. As shown in Tables

VEHICLE MILES OF TRAVEL D-4 and D-5, vehicle miles and vehicle
AND VEHICLE HOURS
hours of travel decrease under the 2035
OF TRAVEL
Project scenario, meaning that people
A vehicle mile of travel per vehicle trip
will travel more efficiently in the Project
(VMT) identifies the number of roadway
scenario than in the No Project scenario.
vehicle miles of travel required to satisfy
Vehicle miles and vehicle hours per trip
the demand for travel by vehicles, mea-
also decrease under the Project scenario.
sured in vehicle trips. When monitored

232 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 AP P ENDIX D

TABLE D-4 Vehicle Miles of Travel and Vehicle Hours of Travel, AM Peak
PERCENT
NO PROJECT PROJECT NET CHANGE CHANGE
VMT 10,879,800 10,732,000 -147,800 -1.40%
VHT 362,600 332,900 -29,700 -8.20%
Vehicle Trips 955,900 947,000 -8,900 -0.90%
VMT/Trip 11.38 11.33 -0.05 -0.40%
VHT/Trip 0.38 0.35 -0.03 -7.30%

TABLE D-5 Vehicle Miles of Travel and Vehicle Hours of Travel, PM Peak
PERCENT
NO PROJECT PROJECT NET CHANGE CHANGE
VMT 15,353,800 14,744,900 -608,900 -4.00%
VHT 848,800 567,700 -281,100 -33.10%
Vehicle Trips 1,501,800 1,491,500 -10,300 -0.70%
VMT/Trip 10.22 9.89 -0.34 -3.30%
VHT/Trip 0.57 0.38 -0.18 -32.70%

Systemwide VMT decreases about 1.4 Much of this decrease in time spent during

percent and 4.0 percent respectively the peak periods is due to the time savings

during the AM and PM peak for the Project offered by the express lane projects.

scenario. VMT per trip decreases from 11.38

to 11.33 miles for the AM peak hour (0.4 TRANSIT ACCESSIBILITY

percent reduction) and from 10.22 to 9.89 Transit accessibility is an indicator of the

miles during the PM peak hour (3.2 percent ease with which employment opportunities

reduction), which shows improved travel may be reached from a given traffic analysis

efficiency for individual travelers. Vehicle zone using a transit system. It is measured

hours per trip decrease for both the AM and using a gravity model formulation, which

PM periods. This decrease is particularly calculates accessibility, on a zonal basis,

significant for the PM peak period, as there as a sum of employment opportunities

is a 32.7 percent drop in VHT/trip, reduc- weighted by the households in the origin

ing the average trip time from 0.57 hours zone multiplied by the inverse of transit

(34 minutes) to 0.38 hours (23 minutes). travel time from this zone to those dispersed

VA L L E Y T R A N SP ORTAT I O N PLAN 2035 | 233

 opportunities. In the formula, a friction The lower map compares the increase in
factor parameter is also included to repre- transit accessibility in 2035 that results from
sent how people of different income groups adding the VTP projects to the projected 2035
perceive the relationship between transit land use intensification. As shown in the
travel times. maps, transit accessibility is anticipated to

significantly improve over the next 30 years

for several reasons:

• Transit improvements, particularly along

Where,
the BART corridor through Milpitas, San
Ai = Transit Accessibility in Zone i;
Jose and Santa Clara, as well as around
Ej = Employments in each destination zone j,
j=1 to total number of zones n; the airport and in the East Valley area
hhiq = Households of income group q in
• Improvements along the BRT lines on
Zone i, q =1 to 4;
Trij = Peak hour transit travel time between Steven Creek and from Sunnyvale to
zone i and j; Cupertino
FFq(TRij ) = A vector parameter of friction
• Improvements in the Northwest County
factor for individual income group q, The
higher the travel time TRij, the lower the area, potentially a result of the Line 522
friction factor. improvements (one of four future BRT
corridors), and Caltrain upgrades and
Accessibility thereby is an abstract measure
service increases
that can inform planners about the effect of
• Land use pattern changes concentrating
changes in two aspects: travel time to jobs
greater numbers of households and jobs
(transit system performance), and the number near transit services, in particular for the
and location of jobs and households (land North San Jose development corridor
use). The higher an area’s accessibility, the focused along the VTA light rail alignment

better the transit system is doing getting resi-

AIR QUALITY
dents to large concentrations of employment
Air pollutants caused by vehicle emissions
in minimal time.
are estimated for conformance with State
The maps on the facing page show the impacts CMP guidelines and are related to several
that land use and the VTP slate of projects are factors, including cold and hot starts and
projected to have on transit accessibility in stops, speed changes and idling time.
Santa Clara County. The upper map compares Air quality results were calculated from
transit accessibility in 2035 to the 2005 base California Air Resources Board (CARB)
year, assuming only land use intensification. air quality modeling methodologies using

234 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 AP P ENDIX D

Transit Accessibility: 2035 No Project Scenario versus 2005 Base Year

Transit Accessibility: 2035 Project Scenario versus 2035 No Project Scenario

VA L L E Y T R A N SP O RTAT I ON PLAN 2035 | 235

 TABLE D-6 Vehicle Emissions
PERCENT PERCENT
CHANGE CHANGE
TYPE OF TIME NO NO PROJECT PROJECT v.
EMISSION PERIOD 2007 PROJECT PROJECT v. 2007 NO PROJECT
Organic Gases AM 5.19 1.85 1.82 -64.40% -1.60%
(tons)
PM 6.88 2.38 2.33 -65.40% -2.10%
Carbon Monoxide AM 42.38 12.02 11.9 -71.60% -1.00%
(tons)
PM 59.79 17.24 16.73 -71.20% -3.00%
Oxides of Nitrogen AM 8.14 1.78 1.76 -78.10% -1.10%
(tons)
PM 11.32 2.56 2.48 -77.40% -3.10%
Carbon Dioxide AM 3.97 4.14 4.10 4.28% -1.00%
(tons x 1,000)
PM 5.47 5.87 5.68 7.31% -3.20%
PM10 (particulate AM 0.43 0.54 0.54 25.60% 0.00%
matter) (tons)
PM 0.59 0.77 0.75 30.50% -2.60%

EMFAC2007. Improvements in air quality decrease in both of those pollutants relative

may indicate the benefits of an efficient to the No Project. While there is an improve-

multimodal transportation system. As ment in most emissions, the fact that carbon

shown in Table D-6, air quality for the peak dioxide and particulate emissions increase

periods is expected to dramatically improve above 2007 base levels indicate that unless

between the base year 2007 (the base year there are more substantial shifts from auto

condition provided by CARB) and both the modes of travel to transit and non-motorized

2035 No Project and Project scenarios. As a modes and therefore generating less

result of the introduction of no/low emission vehicle-miles traveled, there are limitations

vehicles and the retirement of early-year as to how much those emissions can be

high emission vehicles (as assumed by decreased. Achieving substantive greenhouse

CARB) organic gases, carbon monoxide and gas emissions reductions as a goal may

oxides of nitrogen are expected to decrease. place an increasing emphasis on applying

However, both carbon dioxide (considered changes to land use development patterns

to be a primary agent in global warming) in order to increase transit market shares in

and large (PM10) particulates are expected coordination with pricing policies that would

to rise due to increases in both overall trips make transit and non-motorized travel more

and vehicle-miles of travel over 2007 levels. attractive options than automobile modes

Nevertheless, the 2035 Project shows a of travel.

236 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 AP P ENDIX D

DURATION OF CONGESTION, Severe bottleneck locations (four+ hours of

AM PEAK PERIOD congestion) are reduced from 27 segments to
Duration of congestion measures the length only 22 segments under the Project scenario,
of time that particular links are subject to however, 2035 traffic conditions are expected
congested conditions. This measure is calcu- to markedly degrade over 2005 base year
lated from the VTA Countywide model and conditions under either scenario.
is summarized for freeway segments with

less than one hour of congestion, between TRAVEL TIME

one to four hours of congestion and more This measure is an estimate of average travel

than four hours of congestion. Duration of time across drive-alone auto, carpool and

congestion is a measure of peak spreading transit modes summarized for ten origin/

and it provides a way of showing the length destination pairs located across Santa

of time over which congested traffic condi- Clara County. TableD-8 (page 239) shows

tions persist. Duration of congestion can travel time changes for the 2035 forecast

be affected by changes in travel demand or years, with improvements for most origin/

changes in transportation capacity such as destination pairs for the Project compared

adding highway lanes, improving intersec- to the No Project scenario. For all modes

tions, transit improvements and ITS strate- of travel, travel times are reduced for each

gies. As shown in TableD-7 (pages 238–239), origin-destination pair from the No Project

there are marked increases in the duration conditions, although there is considerable

of congestion for most freeway segments variation between corridors in terms of the

for the 2035 No Project compared to the amount of travel time improvement. While

2005 base year. There are 27 segments that transit travel times in many corridors are not

experience four or more hours of congestion competitive with drive-alone or shared ride

in the AM peak period under the No Project auto times, there are a few corridors where

scenario, up from only four segments in the transit improvements make transit more

year 2005 base. These locations represent competitive with auto users, particularly in

severe roadway bottlenecks. Under the the BRT corridors (Downtown San Jose to

Project scenario, the duration of congestion DeAnza College and Eastridge Mall to San

is expected to improve for eight specific Jose State University) and the BART corridor

segments, highlighted in bold in Table D-7. (Central Fremont to Downtown San Jose).

VA L L E Y T R A N SP O RTAT I ON PLAN 2035 | 237

 TABLE D-7 AM Peak Duration of Congestion
2035 NO 2035
2005 BASE PROJECT PROJECT
FREEWAY DIRECTION SEGMENT DURATION DURATION DURATION
SR 17 NB San Tomas to I-280 <1 1 to 4 1 to 4
I-880 NB I-280 to SR 87 <1 1 to 4 1 to 4
I-880 NB SR 87 to Brokaw Road <1 4+ 4+
I-880 NB Brokaw Road to Alameda County Line <1 1 to 4 1 to 4
I-880 SB Alameda County Line to Calaveras Road 4+ 4+ 4+
I-880 SB Calaveras Road to Montague Expressway 1 to 4 4+ 4+
I-880 SB Montague Expressway to N. First Street <1 1 to 4 1 to 4
I-880 SB SR 85 to Lark Street <1 1 to 4 1 to 4
US 101 NB Dunn Avenue to Cochrane Rd 1 to 4 4+ 4+
US 101 NB Cochrane Rd to SR 85 S <1 4+ 4+
US 101 NB SR 85 to Helleyer <1 1 to 4 1 to 4
US 101 NB Helleyer to McLaughlin <1 4+ 4+
US 101 NB McLaughlin to I-280 4+ 4+ 4+
US 101 NB I-280 to McKee <1 4+ 4+
US 101 NB McKee to I-880 4+ 4+ 4+
US 101 NB I-880 to San Tomas Expressway 1 to 4 4+ 4+
US 101 NB San Tomas Expressway to SR 237 <1 4+ 4+
US 101 NB SR 237 to SR 85 N <1 1 to 4 1 to 4
US 101 NB SR 85 N to Embarcadero 1 to 4 4+ 4+
US 101 NB Embarcadero to San Mateo County Line 1 to 4 4+ 1 to 4
US 101 SB San Mateo County Line to SR 85 N 1 to 4 4+ 4+
US 101 SB I-280 to Capitol Expressway <1 1 to 4 <1
US 101 SB Capitol Expressway to Cochrane <1 1 to 4 1 to 4
SR 85 NB US 101 S to SR 87 <1 4+ 4+
SR 85 NB SR 87 to Almaden Expressway <1 1 to 4 1 to 4
SR 85 NB Almaden Expressway to Camden <1 4+ 1 to 4
SR 85 NB Camden to I-280 1 to 4 4+ 4+
SR 85 NB I-280 to US 101 N <1 1 to 4 1 to 4
SR 85 SB I-280 to Saratoga Rd <1 1 to 4 <1
SR 85 SB Saratoga Rd to SR 17 <1 1 to 4 1 to 4
SR 85 SB Camden to Almaden Expressway <1 1 to 4 1 to 4
SR 85 SB SR 87 to US 101 S <1 1 to 4 1 to 4
SR 87 NB Capitol Expressway to Almaden Expressway <1 1 to 4 1 to 4
SR 87 NB Almaden Expressway to I-280 4+ 4+ 4+
SR 87 NB I-280 to US 101 <1 4+ 1 to 4

238 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 AP P ENDIX D

TABLE D-7 (CONT’D) AM Peak Duration of Congestion

2035 NO 2035
2005 BASE PROJECT PROJECT
FREEWAY DIRECTION SEGMENT DURATION DURATION DURATION
SR 237 WB I-880 to Lafayette <1 4+ 4+
SR 237 WB Lafayette to Lawrence Expressway 1 to 4 4+ 1 to 4
SR 237 WB Lawrence Expressway to US 101 <1 1 to 4 <1
SR 237 EB US 101 to N. First Street <1 1 to 4 1 to 4
SR 237 EB N. First Street to Zanker <1 1 to 4 <1
I-280 NB US 101 to 11th Street <1 4+ 4+
I-280 NB 11th Street to SR 87 1 to 4 4+ 4+
I-280 NB SR 87 to I-880 <1 1 to 4 1 to 4
I-280 NB I-880 to San Tomas 1 to 4 4+ 4+
I-280 NB San Tomas to Lawrence 1 to 4 1 to 4 1 to 4
I-280 NB Lawrence to SR 85 <1 1 to 4 1 to 4
I-280 NB SR 85 to Foothill 1 to 4 4+ 4+
I-280 NB Foothill to San Mateo County Line <1 1 to 4 1 to 4
I-680 SB Alameda County Line to Calaveras Rd <1 4+ 4+
I-680 SB Capitol Avenue to I-280 <1 1 to 4 <1
I-680 NB Capitol Expressway to Calaveras Road <1 1 to 4 1 to 4
I-680 NB Calaveras Road to Alameda County Line <1 4+ 1 to 4

TABLE D-8 AM Peak Average Travel Times by Mode

DRIVE ALONE SHARED RIDE
AUTO AUTO TRANSIT
NO NO NO
ORIGIN/DESTINATION PAIR PROJECT PROJECT PROJECT PROJECT PROJECT PROJECT
Los Gatos Residential Area to Lockheed in Sunnyvale 66 59 29 27 120 120
Morgan Hill Residential Area to Sun/RiverMark in
142 132 43 36 95 95
Santa Clara
Los Gatos Residential Area to Sun/RiverMark in
62 52 37 29 107 107
Santa Clara
Palo Alto Residential to Apple Computers in Cupertino 25 23 18 17 90 72
Evergreen Residential Area to Downtown San Jose 58 51 39 32 98 83
N. Milpitas to Cisco Site near Tasman/Zanker 38 31 32 25 54 46
N. Milpitas to Lockheed in Sunnyvale 66 53 32 24 115 82
Eastridge Mall to San Jose State University 53 45 38 30 52 39
Downtown San Jose to DeAnza College 53 46 23 18 97 58
Central Fremont to Downtown San Jose 71 57 27 26 85 42

VA L L E Y T R A N SP O RTAT I ON PLAN 2035 | 239

 TABLE D-9 PM Peak Average Travel Times by Mode
DRIVE ALONE SHARED RIDE
AUTO AUTO TRANSIT
NO NO NO
ORIGIN/DESTINATION PAIR PROJECT PROJECT PROJECT PROJECT PROJECT PROJECT
Lockheed in Sunnyvale to Los Gatos
85 63 35 27 120 120
Residential Area
Sun/RiverMark in Santa Clara to Morgan Hill
142 109 54 43 95 95
Residential Area
Sun/RiverMark in Santa Clara to Los Gatos
84 65 46 33 107 107
Residential Area
Apple Computers in Cupertino to Palo Alto
34 30 23 21 90 72
Residential Area
Downtown San Jose to Evergreen Residential Area 65 47 37 30 98 83
Cisco Site near Tasman/Zanker to N. Milpitas 44 35 32 29 54 46
Lockheed in Sunnyvale to N. Milpitas 82 60 36 27 115 82
San Jose State University to Eastridge Mall 56 42 35 29 52 39
DeAnza College to Downtown San Jose 56 44 22 15 97 58
Downtown San Jose to Central Fremont 87 63 29 28 85 42

Based on collective results of all system STUDY OF ALTERNATIVE

performance measurements (such as TRANSPORTATION AND LAND
USE SCENARIOS
congested miles of road, transit mode shares
As part of the future planning work and
and emissions) travel times are improved
to inform VTP updates, VTA is developing
in the Project scenario compared to the No
aspects of its Countywide/Bay Area Travel
Project scenario. But overall these numbers
Demand Model to facilitate better testing
indicate that we cannot build our way out of
of alternative land use and transportation
congested conditions. Instead, a balanced
scenarios. Subsequent to the adoption of
program of improvements beyond typical
VTP 2035, VTA planning will pursue testing
physical infrastructure—such as changes to
and analysis of alternative land use and
land use development policies and pricing
transportation scenarios.
policies that discourage reliance on single-

occupant vehicles—is needed to address These studies will test the various interactions
transportation issues in the coming years. of a range of variables such as roadway and

240 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 AP P ENDIX D

parking pricing, increased transit service, increase the performance and efficiency of the

changes in land use patterns, the cost of transportation system.

transportation modes, the effect of the quality

Results from these studies will be brought
of the pedestrian and built environments and
to the VTA committees and Board at various
perceived quality of service and passenger
stages for information and discussion. The
amenities. The ultimate purpose is to quantify
information will also be available to inform
how land use changes (such as development
city planning efforts such as General Plan
densification near transit stops, and pricing
updates.
policies such as toll and parking charges) can

VA L L E Y T R A N SP ORTAT I O N PLAN 2035 | 241

 Appendix E: Summary of VTA Guiding Policies

A wide range of VTA policies and docu- benefits and trade-offs of various transit

ments, coming from all VTA departments projects and service proposals prior to

and the Board of Directors, is used to guide selection of mode, service plan or funding

the development of the VTP. Those listed in decisions.

this appendix are intended to illustrate the

The Service Design Guidelines (SDG) are
breadth of policies that influenced the devel-
designed for use in conjunction with the
opment of VTP 2035 and do not represent an
TSP evaluation and recommendation pro-
exhaustive list.
cess. The SDG are comprised of two parts:

Service Performance Standards and Design

TRANSIT SUSTAINABILITY
POLICY/SERVICE DESIGN Guidelines. They provide a framework to
GUIDELINES evaluate, design, implement and monitor
The Transit Sustainability Policy (TSP), transit services in the region. In accordance
adopted February 2007, is a ridership-based with the TSP, all transit projects are subject to
policy that provides a framework for the an evaluation of the effects the proposed
efficient and effective expenditure of transit capital project or service improvement will
funds and for realizing the highest return have on transit ridership and operating
on investment in terms of public good and efficiency. The results will determine if the
ridership productivity. It provides the Board project meets the ridership criteria estab-
of Directors with a common decision-making lished for the proposed mode, if the proposed
process by providing the most complete mode is the most feasible and appropriate for
information available regarding options, cost, the market and operational environment, and

242 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 AP P ENDIX E

if the proposed mode is the most cost-effective articulates VTA’s vision for how communities
option. The evaluation may also result in a and a multimodal transportation system can
recommendation to develop a Project Phasing grow together, their respective roles and how
Plan along with an Improvement Plan. The the actions of each can be mutually supportive
phasing plan would implement a particu- and beneficial. Appendix B provides more
lar service level or mode with the intent of background on the CDT Program.
increasing service or changing the mode, as
The CDT Manual is available upon request.
conditions develop to support the service.

The TSP/SDG is available upon request. PEDESTRIAN TECHNICAL

GUIDELINES

COMMUNITY DESIGN AND The Pedestrian Technical Guidelines (PTG) is

TRANSPORTATION MANUAL a companion document to the CDT Manual.
OF BEST PRACTICES It is designed as a guide for the planning and
FOR INTEGRATING
design of pedestrian facilities and environ-
TRANSPORTATION AND
LAND USE ments and as technical resource to those

The Community Design and Transportation responsible for designing community infra-

Manual of Best Practices for Integrating structure and who are interested in improv-

Transportation and Land Use is a key prod- ing the pedestrian environment. The PTG

uct of the CDT program and was developed provides planning, design and policy guidance

to support the implementation of VTA’s land for VTA planning and capital projects.

use objective and goals. It documents proven

The PTG is available upon request.
and innovative best practices in urban design

and transportation planning that support 2008 COUNTYWIDE

and enhance both VTA’s and its Member BICYCLE PLAN
Agencies’ investments in the community. It The Countywide Bike Plan (CBP) provides

provides planning and design guidance for a policy basis for developing an integrated

how to develop in the cores, corridors and countywide network of bicycle routes and cor-

station areas. It also provides policy guidance ridors. The CBP is developed in conjunction

and outlines steps that communities and with VTA Member Agencies and the Bicycle

local governments can take to identify and and Pedestrian Advisory Committee (BPAC).

overcome barriers to developing more livable The plan indentifies the bicycle network and

and sustainable communities. Moreover, it the projects and capital needed to develop and

VA L L E Y T R A N SP ORTAT I O N PLAN 2035 | 243

 maintain the network. The CBP also provides period. It also provides a blueprint for VTA’s
policies related to developing and maintaining Transit Capital Improvement Program (CIP)
the bike network and provides the planning development over the 10-year period.
and policy framework for developing the
The SRTP is available upon request.
Bicycle Expenditure Plan (BEP).

The 2008 Countywide Bike Plan is available CONGESTION MANAGEMENT

PROGRAM
upon request.
As the Congestion Management Agency for

BICYCLE TECHNICAL Santa Clara County, VTA is responsible for

GUIDELINES implementing the Congestion Management

The Bicycle Technical Guidelines (BTG) is Program (CMP) for Santa Clara County. State

a companion document to the CBP and the statute requires that a congestion manage-

CDT Manual. It is designed as a guide for the ment program be developed, adopted and

planning and design of bicycle facilities and updated biennially for every county that

as technical resource to those responsible for includes an urbanized area and that it shall

designing, engineering and building bicycle include every city and the county government

facilities. The BTG provides planning, design within that county. Since the CMP became

and policy guidance for VTA planning and effective with the passage of Proposition 111

capital projects. in 1990, it has forged new ground in link-

ing transportation, land use and air quality

The BTG is available upon request.
decisions for one of the most important urban

SHORT-RANGE areas in the country. The CMP addresses the

TRANSPORTATION PLAN impact of local growth on the regional trans-
The Short-Range Transit Plan (SRTP) is the portation system. The statutory elements of
master plan for the programming of transit the CMP include highway and roadway system
service and operations and outlines future monitoring, multi-modal system performance
transit system development and the capital analysis, a transportation demand manage-
projects that are necessary for this develop- ment program, the land use analysis program
ment. The plan describes VTA’s existing and local conformance for all the county’s
transit system, documents the ongoing transit jurisdictions. In addition, the CMP requires
development and planning process, and out- the development of a Capital Improvement
lines what is anticipated for VTA for a 10-year Program (CIP) element which considers both

244 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 AP P ENDIX E

roadway and transit improvements and pro- POLICY GUIDANCE FOR

vides a basis for securing funding through the MEASURE A REVENUE AND
EXPENDITURE PLAN
State’s Transportation Improvement Program
(ADOPTED 06/05/08)
(TIP).
• Maintain financial integrity of organization
The CMP is available upon request.
• Increase transit usage

VTA BIENNIAL BUDGET • Achieve environmental improvements

VTA policy calls for the development of a bien- • Support transit-oriented land use
nial (two-year) budget. This process allows • Support countywide economic development
VTA to build a more stable near-term finan-
• Strengthen complementary partnerships
cial foundation and to monitor longer-term
• Take advantage of leveraged and new fund
financial trends and take corrective actions as
sources
necessary throughout this two-year cycle. The
• Model various financial conditions
budget encompasses all of the activities under
• Achieve a balanced transportation plan
the jurisdiction of the VTA Board, including

Transit Enterprise Operations and Capital, • Implement the intent of Measure A

the Measures A and B Capital programs, the

The full text of Policy Guidance for
Congestion Management Program and related
Measure A Revenue and Expenditure Plan is
VTP projects and programs.
available upon request.

The VTA Budget is available upon request.

VA L L E Y T R A N SP O RTAT I ON PLAN 2035 | 245

 Appendix F: Glossary of Terms

AB-32—Assembly Bill 32 The Global ABC—Across Barrier Connections

Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (Assembly

Access-by-Proximity A key concept of the
Bill 32) caps California’s greenhouse gas
CDT Program. Focuses on clustering comple-
(GHG) emissions at the 1990 level by 2020.
mentary land uses and well-designed compact
Meeting this target represents an 11 percent
development to combine, reduce or eliminate
reduction from current levels and requires
trips, reduce automobile trips and to help
about a 29 percent cut in emissions below
achieve the kind of critical mass that makes
projected 2020 levels. AB 32 directed the
vibrant public life possible.
California Air Resources Board (ARB) to

adopt a GHG emissions cap on all major ACCMA—Alameda County Congestion

sources to reduce Statewide emissions to 1990 Management Agency The agency responsible

levels by 2020. for transportation planning and programming of

transportation funds in Alameda County.

ABAG—Association of Bay Area

Governments A regional agency responsible ACE—Altamont Commuter Express A

for regional planning (excluding transporta- commuter rail service that runs between the

tion). ABAG publishes forecasts of projected City of Stockton in San Joaquin County and

growth for the region. the City of San Jose in Santa Clara County.

The service is a partnership involving VTA,

Access The facilities and services that make
the San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission
it possible to get to any destination, measured
and the Alameda County Congestion
by the availability of physical connections
Management Agency.
(roads, sidewalks, etc.), travel options, ease of

movement and nearness of destinations.

246 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 AP P ENDIX F

ACTIA—Alameda County Transportation management, CCTVs, arterial management

Improvement Authority A special govern- and/or incident management.

ment agency authorized by State law and

Auxiliary Lanes A lane from one on-ramp
created by the voters of Alameda County to
to the next off-ramp to allow vehicles coming
collect a half-cent sales tax and use the money
on the freeway or getting off the freeway to
for a specific list of transportation projects
have more time to merge with the through
and programs in Alameda County.
lanes. These lanes are often installed for safety

ADA—Americans with Disabilities Act purposes (reduce merging accidents).

On July 26, 1990, ADA was signed into law,

AVL—Automated Vehicle Location AVL
requiring public transit systems to make
is the use of electronic technologies to allow
their services fully accessible to persons with
fleet managers to know where vehicles are
disabilities as well as to underwrite a parallel
located at a given time. Several different types
network of paratransit service for those who
of AVL technologies exist. The Department of
are unable to use the regular transit system.
Defense’s Global Positioning System (GPS)
In addition, VTA must meet the new ADA
is the basis for several recent transit industry
accessibility design guidelines for all newly
AVL projects. In addition to its primary use by
constructed transit facilities such as light rail
transit dispatchers and supervisors, AVL can
stations, bus stops and transit centers. All pro-
be linked into other systems and used to pro-
curement of bus and rail vehicles must also
vide real-time arrival information for transit
meet the ADA accessibility design guidelines.
customers, to support paratransit services and

A & F—Administration and Finance for a variety of other applications.

Committee A standing committee of the VTA

BAAQMD—Bay Area Air Quality
that reviews policy recommendations pertain-
Management District The regional agency
ing to the general administration of VTA.
created by the State legislature for the Bay

APS—Alternative Planning Strategies Area air basin (Alameda, Contra Costa, half

of Solano, half of Sonoma, Marin, Napa, San

APTA—American Public Transportation
Francisco, San Mateo and Santa Clara coun-
Agency
ties) that develops, in conjunction with MTC
ATMS—Advanced Traffic Management and ABAG, the air quality plan for the region.
System ATMS is a category of intelligent BAAQMD has an active role in approving the
transportation systems that focuses on the TCM plan for the region, as well as in control-
management of traffic. It typically includes ling stationary and indirect sources of air
ramp metering, traffic management centers pollution.
(TMCs), HOV lanes, integrated corridor

VA L L E Y T R A N SP ORTAT I O N PLAN 2035 | 247

 BPAC—Bicycle/Pedestrian Advisory Braided Ramp Type of freeway on-/

Committee An advisory committee to the off-ramp that consists of grade separated

VTA that is responsible for overseeing the work ramp(s) that keep two major traffic move-

of the VTA staff associated with bicycle and ments from crossing one another.

pedestrian plans, guidelines and programs.

BRT—Bus Rapid Transit BRT combines

BART—Bay Area Rapid Transit The San the quality of rail transit and the flexibility

Francisco Bay Area Rapid Bart Transit District of buses. It can operate on exclusive transit-

(BART) provides heavy passenger rail service ways, HOV lanes, expressways, or ordinary

in Alameda, Contra Costa, San Mateo and streets. A BRT system combines intelligent

San Francisco counties, between the cities of transportation systems technology, priority

Fremont, Pleasanton, Richmond, Pittsburg for transit, cleaner and quieter vehicles, rapid

and San Francisco. and convenient fare collection and integration

with land use policy.

BEP—Bicycle Expenditure Plan The

ten-year funding program dedicated for the BSP—Bus Signal Priority

implementation of bicycle projects in Tier 1

BTG—Bicycle Technical Guidelines
of the Santa Clara Countywide Plan (Bicycle

Element of VTP 2030). It includes funding CAC—Citizens Advisory Committee A

from various local, State and Federal sources. committee to the VTA Board of Directors that

Projects in the Bicycle Expenditure Program advises on issues of interest to the committee

are required to provide a minimum 20 per- members and the communities they rep-

cent local match. resent and will serve as the oversight body

for the 2000 Measure A Transit Sales Tax

Bicycle Technical Guidelines VTA docu-
Program.
ment that provides a uniform set of optimum

standards for the planning, design and construc- Caltrain/Peninsula Corridor Joint

tion of bicycle projects in Santa Clara County. Powers Board Commuter rail service

running between Gilroy and San Francisco

BOD—Board of Directors The VTA Board
through San Jose. The Peninsula Corridor
of Directors is composed of 12 elected officials
Joint Powers Board (JPB), made up of repre-
appointed by the member cities and County of
sentatives from the counties of San Francisco,
Santa Clara. The members of this partnership
San Mateo and Santa Clara, oversees this
work together to address the transportation
commuter rail service.
needs of Santa Clara County.

248 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 AP P ENDIX F

Caltrans—California Department of CCTV—Closed-Circuit Television This ITS

Transportation The responsible owner/ component is used for traffic surveillance,

operator of the State highway system. Caltrans where the signal is transmitted by wire. A

is responsible for the safe operation and main- CCTV system usually communicates with a

tenance of roadways. centralized facility such as a TMC or OCC.

Capacity The maximum rate of flow that CDP—Countywide Deficiency Plan A

can be accommodated on a facility segment document that will address deficiencies on

under prevailing conditions. Rate of flow is Santa Clara County’s freeways and express-

the number of vehicles passing a point on a ways and include a set of improvements, pro-

facility during some period of time, expressed grams and actions that are designated to both

in vehicles per hour or persons per hour. improve service on the overall transportation

system and cause a significant improvement

Capitol Corridor Intercity Rail Service
in air quality.
A 150-mile intercity rail service along the

Union Pacific ROW Capitol Corridor, which CDT Program See Community Design and

runs between San Jose and Auburn, through Transportation Program.

Oakland and Sacramento.

CELR—Capitol Expressway Light Rail

CBO—Community Based Organization

CEQA—California Environmental

CARB—California Air Resources Board Quality Act The basic goal of CEQA is to

develop and maintain a high-quality environ-

Carpooling An arrangement in which com-
ment now and in the future, while the specific
muters share driving and the cost of commut-
goals of CEQA are for California’s public
ing. A carpool is formed with a minimum of
agencies to 1) identify the significant environ-
two people who commute on a regular basis.
mental effects of their actions; and either 2)
The members generally share common resi-
avoid those significant environmental effects
dential and employment locations as well as
where feasible or 3) mitigate those significant
common commuting patterns and schedules.
environmental effects where feasible.
CBTP—Community-Based
CFL—Compact Fluorescent Lighting
Transportation Plan
Choice A key concept of the CDT Program
CCBC—Cross-County Bicycle Corridors
Focuses on the notion that one-size-does-not-
CCEPS—Comprehensive County fit-all. A transportation system that is domi-
Expressway Planning Study nated by a single mode fosters development

VA L L E Y T R A N SP O RTAT I ON PLAN 2035 | 249

 patterns and policies that encourage sprawl, CMAQ—Congestion Mitigation and
decentralization and separation of uses. Air Quality Improvement Program
Choice seeks to expand the range of options A Federal funding program established by
about what kind of home to live in, where that ISTEA and continued in TEA-21 specifically
home is located, the character of the commu- for projects and programs that will contrib-
nity and the means of getting around. ute to the attainment of a national ambient

air quality standard. The funds are avail-

CIP—Capital Improvement Program A
able to non-attainment areas for ozone and
multiyear program of projects to maintain
carbon monoxide based on population and
or improve the traffic level-of-service and
the degree of severity of pollution. Eligible
transit performance standards developed by
projects will be defined by the approved
the CMP and to mitigate regional transpor-
State Implementation Program (SIP) and the
tation impacts identified by the CMP Land
State’s air quality plan.
Use Analysis Program, which conforms to

State and Federal air quality requirements. CMIA—Corridor Mobility Improvement

It is updated every other year as part of the Account A State Highway funding program
Congestion Management Program update. for projects on the California State Highway
The CIP is a ten-year program. System that: reduce travel time or delay,

improves connectivity of the State Highway

Clean Air Act The Federal law that requires
System between rural, suburban and urban
urban areas with high pollution to modify
areas, or improves the operation and safety of
transportation policies in order to reduce
a highway or road segment; improve access
emissions. This law makes air quality a pri-
to jobs, housing, markets and commerce; and
mary concern in transportation decisions.
begin construction before December 2012.
CMA—Congestion Management
CMP—Congestion Management
Agency The CMA is a countywide organization
Program A comprehensive program
responsible for preparing and implementing
designed to reduce traffic congestion, to
the county’s CMP (see definition below). CMAs
enhance the effectiveness of land use deci-
came into existence as a result of State legisla-
sions and to improve air quality. The program
tion and voter approval of Proposition 111 in
must comply with CMP State statutes and
1990 (later legislation removed the statutory
with State and Federal Clean Air Acts. Unless
requirements of Proposition 111, making CMAs
otherwise specified, CMP means Santa Clara
optional). In Santa Clara County, VTA is the
County’s Congestion Management Program.
designated CMA.

250 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 AP P ENDIX F

CMP Roadway Network A network of Commute A home-to-work or work-to-home

roadways within a CMA that are of regional trip.

significance. The CMP roadway network in

Complete Streets Program The concept
Santa Clara County consists of freeways,
that all public roadways should be designed
expressways, urban arterials (six-lane facili-
and built for safe travel by all potential
ties or non-residential arterials with average
roadway users. Roads should also not create
daily traffic (ADT) of 30,000 vehicles per day)
barriers for any roadway users; bicyclists and
and rural highways.
pedestrians in particular are harmed when

CMPP—Congestion Management crossings of freeways, waterways and rail lines

Program and Planning Committee A are not safe and/or frequent and when road-

standing committee of the VTA that reviews way intersections aren’t designed to include

policy recommendations pertaining to the other modes.

Congestion Management Program and

Comprehensive Operations Analysis
Countywide Transportation Plan.
(COA) An in-depth effort to analyze VTA’s

COA—Comprehensive Operations existing transit services, identify underserved

Analysis markets and ultimately produce a new

structure for bus services. A key component of

Community Design and Transportation
the COA effort was the development of policy
(CDT) Program A partnership between the
standards to continually evaluate and monitor
VTA and the 15 cities/towns and the county
the performance of the bus system against
to develop and promote strategies for improv-
Board-adopted measures of productivity.
ing transportation systems and community

livability. This involves creating areas with Concentrated Development Usually

high-quality planning and design that support synonymous with higher-density develop-

walking, biking and local auto trips. It also ment than is the average for the area. Among

promotes concentrated development, good land use planners, concentrated development

access to transit services, multimodal street implies a minimum of multistory, attached

design and efficient use of land. The CDT residential condominiums or apartments,

program is VTA’s primary program for inte- mid- to high-rise office or retail, or some

grating transportation and land use and has mix of these land uses. Usually, concentrated

been adopted by each of the 16 city, town and development connotes an urban setting

county governments in Santa Clara County. located around some type of transit

VA L L E Y T R A N SP ORTAT I O N PLAN 2035 | 251

 station, downtown commercial center, or Corridors Linear areas, typically centered on
other attraction or amenity. Concentrated a single street, that function as the spine of
development generally contrasts with the surrounding community.
“clustered” development, which may describe
Countywide Bicycle Plan A document that
a grouping of detached residential units in
includes policies and implementing actions
a rural or suburban setting and intended to
designed to improve bicycle facilities and
preserve open space in a large parcel.
inter-agency coordination and which will
Congestion The condition of any transporta- promote bicycling and bicycle safety in Santa
tion facility in which the use of the facility is Clara County.
so great that there are delays for the users of
CPB—Countywide Bicycle Plan
that facility. Usually this happens when traffic

approaches or exceeds facility capacity. Cross-County Bicycle Corridor A system of

24 on-street bicycle routes and 17 trail networks.

Connectivity Generally defines how well a
They are to be the most direct and convenient
street network allows pedestrians, bicyclists
routes for bike trips to local and regional desti-
and non-auto modes to travel in a straight
nations across city or county boundaries.
line (i.e., shortest path) between two points.

Improvement to connectivity, such as extend- CSS—Commute Services Study A VTA

ing dead-end streets or continuing arterials study document updated every two to three

under freeways, encourages walking and years to ensure commute services are respon-

bicycling. Planners would contend that a sive to changing commute patterns in Santa

perfect grid or radial street pattern maximizes Clara County. The study is an analysis of

connectivity while cul-de-sacs, at-grade commute trips, to assess the viability of exist-

freeways, rail tracks and other impediments ing commute bus services and to identify new

or intimidating structures diminish connectiv- commute bus service concepts and routes.

ity. For auto travel, connectivity may apply CTA—Committee for Transit
to extending arterial roadways that will allow Accessibility A committee to the VTA Board
autos to avoid using congested freeway seg- of Directors that advises on bus and rail acces-
ments to make short trips. sibility issues, paratransit services and issues

Cores District areas that include many streets related to the Americans with Disability Act

and blocks characterized by concentrated (ADA).

development features. CTC—California Transportation

Commission A State agency that sets State

252 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 AP P ENDIX F

spending priorities for highway and transit et seq. specifies that development fees shall

and allocates funding. Members are appointed not exceed the estimated reasonable cost

by the governor. of providing the service for which the fee is

charged. To lawfully impose a development

CVO—Commercial Vehicle Operations
fee, the public agency must verify its method
Use of ITS technologies to improve travel time
of calculation and document proper restric-
and reliability for freight traffic and reduce
tions on use of the fund.
the cost of shipping goods. CVO applications

include satellite tracking of truck traffic, auto- Economic Health A term used to describe

mated weigh-in-motion scales and automatic the fundamental and long-term strength of

vehicle identification systems. the economy. The most common measures of

a region’s economic health include unemploy-

Deficiency Deficiencies occur where the
ment rate, business output, personal income,
transportation facilities provided do not
the sales growth of indigenous business and
conform to the standards that the area has
the attraction of new business to the area.
adopted as minimally acceptable. A deficient
Short-term indicators of economic health may
roadway in Santa Clara County is one with a
include congestion, historically high cost of
Level of Service (LOS) of F.
housing, parking shortages, low commercial
Delay A measure of the amount of time spent and retail vacancy rates and a high cost of
during a trip due to congestion. It is mea- living. Long-term, however, these indica-
sured as the difference in travel time between tors could presage economic decline if not
congested and free-flow conditions. addressed. It may also include long-term indi-

Developer Exaction A contribution or pay- cators that measure a region relative to the

ment required as an authorized precondition State or nation in regard to wages, construc-

for receiving a development permit; usually tion of high-end housing, demand for skilled

refers to mandatory dedication (or fee in lieu labor, diversity of the industrial mix, and/

of dedication) requirements found in many or the share of economic activity related to

subdivision regulations. new or robust industry sectors (e.g., biotech,

telecommunications, etc.).
Development Impact Fees A fee, also

called a development fee, levied on the devel- Eco Pass Partnership between Santa Clara

oper of a project by a city, county or other Valley employers and the VTA. Eco Pass is a

public agency as compensation for otherwise transit card with unlimited use of VTA bus and

unmitigated impacts the project will produce. light rail services. Employers purchase annual

California Government Code Section 66000 Eco Pass stickers for full-time employees at a

VA L L E Y T R A N SP O RTAT I ON PLAN 2035 | 253

 given site, at one low cost. Pricing levels are Program. FHWA’s role in the Federal-Aid

based on proximity to VTA transit services and Highway Program is to oversee Federal funds

the number of employees. used for constructing and maintaining the

National Highway System. Under the Federal

EIR/EIS—Environmental Impact Report/
Lands Highway Program, FHWA provides
Environmental Impact Statement. A
highway design and construction services for
study which analyzes various alternatives for
various Federal land-management agencies.
environmental impacts, identifies possible

mitigations to reduce impacts and obtains Final Engineering Finalizes design draw-

legally mandated State and/or Federal envi- ings and produces construction documents for

ronmental clearance for a chosen preferred the preferred alternative.

alternative.
Fixed-Route Transit Transit service

Electrification To equip rail or bus transit provided on a repetitive, fixed-schedule basis

systems for use of electric power. along a specific route, with vehicles stopping

to pick up passengers at and deliver passen-

EPA—Environmental Protection Agency
gers to specific locations.
Evaluation Criteria factors that help to
Flexible Work Hours This is a form of
distinguish the relative value of alternative
alternative work schedule. It is a policy
actions.
that gives employees the option of varying
Express Lanes High-occupancy toll lanes their start and end times each workday. The
that combine the characteristics of HOV lanes intent is to allow employees more flexibility
and toll roads by allowing carpools, vanpools to adjust work hours to meet individual
and buses free access, while charging for needs and provide incentive to use commute
single occupant vehicle (SOV) or drive alone alternatives.
use.
Flyover Ramp A ramp connecting two
FHWA—Federal Highway roadway facilities that provides a direct con-
Administration A division of the United nection to avoid congestion, merging and/or
States Department of Transportation that an intersection.
specializes in highway transportation. The
FPI—Freeway Performance Initiative
agency’s major activities are grouped into
An effort developed by MTC to improve the
two “programs,” the Federal-Aid Highway
circulation on the Bay Area’s freeway system.
Program and the Federal Lands Highway
The purpose of the FPI is to develop a com-

254 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 AP P ENDIX F

prehensive strategic plan to guide the next passage of a roadway or bicycle or pedestrian

generation of freeway investment. facility under or over a rail line.

FTA—Federal Transit Administration HOT—High Occupancy Toll

A component of the U.S. Department of

HOV Lanes—High-Occupancy Vehicle
Transportation, delegated by the Secretary
Lanes Lanes on heavily congested roadways
of Transportation to administer the Federal
that are used exclusively by carpools, van-
transit program under the Urban Mass
pools, buses or any vehicle that transports
Transportation Act of 1964, as amended, and
multiple passengers.
various other statutes.
HSR—High Speed Rail
FTIP—Federal Transportation

Improvement Program All Federally IIP—Interregional Improvement

funded projects are required to be included in Program A State funding program created

the FTIP. The FTIP is a document that includes by SB-45. IIP funds may be programmed to

key information regarding all Federally funded projects outside of the urbanized areas and/or

and “regionally significant” projects. This interregional projects. All IIP funds are pro-

document is used as a common reference point grammed by Caltrans, via the Interregional

for review and approval of processes (such Transportation Improvement Plan (ITIP)

as funding, air quality conformity, etc.) by process, with final approval by CTC.

various State and Federal agencies. The FTIP is Intensification For residential uses, the
actually a composition of select projects from increase in the actual number or the range
State, regional and local sources. Each “level” of dwelling units per net or gross acre. For
also has its own transportation improvement nonresidential uses, an increase in the actual
program (TIP). Therefore, in order for a project or the maximum permitted floor area
to be included in the FTIP, it must first be ratios (FARs).
included in a local TIP, then in the RTIP, then
Interconnection A key concept of the CDT
in the STIP. Each TIP will require a review and
Program. Focuses on interconnecting streets,
approval process by the agency responsible for
pedestrian and bicycle networks, transit
administering the TIP.
modes, buildings and developments to get
GP—General Plan more from transportation resources and

Grade Separation A grade separation is a urban infrastructure and to form coherent

structure necessary to provide for either the districts and more livable places.

VA L L E Y T R A N SP ORTAT I O N PLAN 2035 | 255

 Intermodal The term “mode” refers to and ITS—Intelligent Transportation Systems

distinguishes the various forms of trans- Technologies that improve the management

portation, such as automobile, transit, ship, and efficiency of our transportation system,

bicycling and walking. Intermodal refers such as electronic fare payment systems, ramp

specifically to the connections between modes. metering, timed traffic signals and on-board

navigation systems.
Inter-Agency Indicates cooperation between

or among two or more discrete agencies. Jobs/Housing Balance; Jobs/Housing

Ratio The availability of housing for employ-

Inter-County Existing or occurring between
ees in a particular area. The jobs/housing
two or more counties.
ratio divides the number of jobs in an area by
Inter-Jurisdictional Existing or occurring the number of employed residents. A ratio of
between two or more jurisdictions. 1.0 indicates a balance. A ratio greater than

Intra-County Existing or occurring within 1.0 indicates a net in-commute; less than 1.0

the county boundaries. indicates a net out-commute.

ISR—Information Service Representative Joint Development Program A program

adopted by the VTA Board in 2005. It is

ISTEA—Intermodal Surface
designed to secure the most appropriate
Transportation Efficiency Act Federal
private and public sector development of
legislation passed in 1991 and expired in 1997
VTA-owned property at and adjacent to
which restructured much of the basis for fund-
transit stations and corridors.
ing highway projections and made some of

these funds available to urban areas for transit JPB—Joint Powers Board

projects. A key ISTEA component is increased LAN—Local Area Network A computer

flexibility in the programming of projects. network that spans a relatively small area.

ITE—Institute of Traffic Engineers Most LANs are confined to a single building or

group of buildings. However, one LAN can be

ITIP—Interregional Transportation
connected to other LANs over any distance via
Improvement Program The ITIP is a
telephone lines and radio waves.
four-year planning and expenditure pro-

gram adopted by the CTC and updated in Land Use Activities and structures on the

even numbered years. The ITIP covers rural land, such as housing, shopping centers,

highway and key interregional improvements, farms and office buildings.

including intercity rail.

256 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 AP P ENDIX F

LED—Light Emitting Diode representing ideal conditions—or no conges-

tion—and LOS F representing poor condi-

LEED—Leadership in Energy and
tions or congested flow. The VTA Congestion
Environmental Design
Management Program has a standard of LOS
Livability While this term may encompass as E; roadways at LOS F are considered deficient.
many different meanings as there are workers
LRT—Light Rail Transit LRT operates on
and residents in Santa Clara County, it is used
an electrical system powered from an over-
in the VTP 2035 as a more broadly defined
head wire on a dedicated track. The system
synonym for “quality of life” to describe the
is capable of operating at high speeds in
plan’s support for four types of transporta-
dedicated rights of way and at lower speeds on
tion investments and services: relief from
arterial streets and downtown environments.
congestion, better facilities and services

for non-work and off-peak trips, attractive LSCR—Local Streets and County Roads

travel choices and services for a diverse and

Measure A (1996) A Santa Clara County
changing population. Livability describes a
advisory ballot measure passed in 1996
resident’s satisfaction with the transportation
that identified a specific program of priority
system in such terms as its ease of use, conve-
transportation improvement projects in Santa
nience, reliability, cost, range of travel choices
Clara County to be undertaken as funding
and interference in non–transportation-
became available.
related activities.
Measure A (2000) A 2000 ballot measure
Long-Range Plan A transportation plan
in Santa Clara County that provides a 1/2
covering a time span of 20 or more years.
cent sales tax for 30 years, beginning in April
While the VTP 2035 is a living document that
2006. The proceeds would be used to fund
will be updated every two to five years, the
several transit projects throughout the county.
plan’s methodologies are intended to create
The Measure passed in November 2000.
performance-based processes that will be used

to select projects and design programs over Measure B (1996) A 1996 ballot measure in

the plan’s 20-year horizon. Santa Clara County that raised the local sales

tax by 1/2 cent for a nine-year period, with

LOS—Level-of-Service LOS measures the
the proceeds being deposited into the county’s
interrelationship between travel demand (vol-
General Fund.
ume) and supply (capacity) of the transporta-

tion system. LOS is a quantitative measure Member Agencies Local jurisdictions that

categorized into six levels, A through F, with A are signatories to the CMA’s Joint Powers

VA L L E Y T R A N SP O RTAT I ON PLAN 2035 | 257

 Agreement. This includes all cities and towns measured as the proportion of people making

within the county, Santa Clara County and the a trip using a given mode.

Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority.

MPO—Metropolitan Planning

MIS—Major Investment Study A study Organization A Federally required trans-

required for major Federally funded transpor- portation planning body responsible for the

tation projects (highway and transit) before a Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) and the

project can be included in the RTP. The study Transportation Improvement Program (TIP)

must include all reasonable alternatives to in its region; the governor designates an MPO

address defined transportation problems and in every urbanized area with a population of

the study process must include all affected over 50,000.

agencies, local governments, MTC and the

MOU—Memorandum of Understanding
public.
MTC—Metropolitan Transportation
Mitigation An action to reduce or eliminate
Commission The metropolitan planning
the impacts of another action.
organization (MPO) for the nine-county San

Mixed Use Refers to a variety of land uses Francisco Bay Area.

and activities with a mixture of different types

Multimodal Of or relating to more than one
of development, in contrast to separating
mode of transportation.
uses, such as job sites, retail and housing;

multiple land uses in the same structure or NBSSR—Noise Barrier Summary Scope

same general area of a community; used to Report

describe buildings with different types of use NOP—Notice of Preparation

on different floors, particularly commercial
OCC—Operations Control Center
uses (such as shops or banks) on the ground
Centralized location where transportation
floor with flats above.
operations (traffic and/or transit) are moni-
Mobility The movement of people or goods tored and conducted.
throughout our communities and across the
PA/ED—Project Approval/Environmental
region. Mobility is measured in terms of travel
Document
time, comfort, convenience, safety and cost.
PAB—Policy Advisory Board An advisory
Modal Split or Mode Share Modal split
group that ensures that the local jurisdic-
measures the extent to which travelers use the
tions most affected by major transportation
various available transportation modes. It is

258 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 AP P ENDIX F

improvement projects are involved in guiding uniqueness and identity and make places

the planning, design and construction of these attractive, comfortable and memorable.

projects.
PMP—Pavement Management

PAC—Policy Advisory Committee A Program Funding program intended

committee to the VTA Board of Directors that to repair or replace the existing roadway

advises on issues related to the development pavement. Funds are distributed using a

of VTA’s policies. population-based and lane mile formula.

The cities and county must use a Pavement

Paratransit Paratransit services are special-
Management System certified by the MTC to
ized systems of transportation operated for
identify and prioritize pavement needs.
people who are unable to use conventional

fixed-route transit. Paratransit services pro- Preliminary Engineering A study that

vide trips between a rider’s origin and destina- identifies alternatives for attaining a speci-

tion, usually door-to-door. ADA requires that fied goal. For each alternative, the document

the service be comparable to the fixed-route describes benefits and contains engineering

service available. drawings with enough detail to perform

environmental analysis and gauge construc-

PDA—Priority Development Area
tion feasibility.
Peak Hour The peak hour of traffic volumes
PR—Project Report Refers to the report
in an area.
used by Caltrans to recommend approval of
Peak Spreading A lengthening of the peak a project. The term “Draft Project Report”
period of traffic congestion, usually accompa- (Draft PR) refers to a draft version of this
nied by a flattening of the peak. report that must be prepared for projects with

Performance Measure A means to mea- environmental documents.

sure whether an objective has been achieved PSR—Project Study Report A PSR is an
or whether investments or strategies improve engineering report, the purpose of which is to
over time or across alternatives. document agreement on the scope, schedule

Person Trip A trip made by one person and estimated cost of a project so that the

irrespective of mode. project can be included in a future State

Transportation Improvement Program (STIP).

Place-Making A key concept of the CDT
Chapter 878 of the Statutes of 1987 requires
Program. Focuses on the human-scale ele-
that any capacity-increasing project on the
ments of the built environment that create
State highway system, prior to programming

VA L L E Y T R A N SP ORTAT I O N PLAN 2035 | 259

 in the STIP, have a completed PSR. The PSR area as of a base year. As property values

must include a detailed description of the appreciate over the life of the redevelopment

project scope and estimated costs. The intent area (usually about 20 years), the same pro-

of this legislation was to improve the accuracy portion of the increment of tax revenues above

of the schedule and costs shown in the STIP the base year value is paid into the redevel-

and thus improve the overall accuracy of the opment agency special fund and used for

estimates of STIP delivery and costs. designated projects. In theory, these specific

projects help the area’s property to increase

PTA—Public Transportation Account
in value beyond the appreciation rate of what
These revenues are derived from the sales
would have occurred without these projects.
tax on gasoline and diesel fuel. Under the
Proposition 13 restricts the appreciation of
provisions of SB-45, 50 percent of PTA rev-
property values to 2 percent per year (or less if
enues are distributed to the State Assistance
the market appreciates at a lower rate). Other
Program (STA) with the other 50 percent used
agencies that normally receive property taxes
for funding planning activities of Caltrans,
may negotiate “pass-through” agreements
the CTC, intercity rail purposes and for the
with the redevelopment agency to avoid losing
operations of the new California High-Speed
their share of the increment to the agency. Tax
Rail Authority. Part of the revenues are for
increments are bondable revenue streams that
uses formerly covered by the Transit Capital
have leveraged large amounts of local bonds
Improvement (TCI) Program (TCI has been
for all types of public improvements.
eliminated as a separate program and folded

into the PTA), which include transit vehicle Right-of-Way A strip of land occupied or

purchases. intended to be occupied by certain transporta-

tion and public use facilities, such as road-

PTAP—Paratransit Technical Assistance
ways, railroads and utility lines.
Program A regional effort to focus training

in the areas of paratransit operations. RIP—Regional Improvement Program

PTG—Pedestrian Technical Guidelines RM2—Regional Measure 2

Redevelopment Tax Increment This Roadway Pricing “Road pricing” is an

source of local revenues comes from property umbrella phrase that covers all charges

taxes within a defined redevelopment area. imposed on those who use roadways. The

The county assessor freezes the assessed value term includes such traditional revenue

of all real property within the redevelopment sources as fuel taxes and license fees as well as

260 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 AP P ENDIX F

charges that vary with time of day, the specific dination of facilities that cross jurisdictional

road used and vehicle size and weight. boundaries.

RTC—Regional Transportation Card SAFETEA-LU—Safe, Accountable,

Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity

RTI—Real-Time Transit Information
Act: A Legacy for Users SAFETEA-LU
RTIP—Regional Transportation represents the largest surface transporta-
Improvement Program A list of proposed tion investment in the nation’s history.
transportation projects submitted to the SAFETEA-LU builds on the Intermodal
CTC by the regional transportation planning Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991
agency (for the Bay Area—MTC), as a request (ISTEA) and the Transportation Equity Act
for State funding. The individual projects for the 21st Century (TEA-21). SAFETEA-LU
are first proposed by local jurisdictions, then addresses the many challenges facing our
submitted by the CMA to the regional agency transportation system today—challenges
and then submitted by the regional agency for such as improving safety, reducing traffic
submission to the CTC. The RTIP has a four- congestion, improving efficiency in freight
year planning horizon and is updated every movement, increasing intermodal connectiv-
two years. ity and protecting the environment—as well as

RTP—Regional Transportation Plan laying the groundwork for addressing future

A multimodal blueprint to guide the region’s challenges.

transportation development for a 20-year SB-375—Senate Bill 375 A very important

period. Updated every two to three years, it yet fairly modest measure, because it requires
is based on projections of growth and travel the 18 metropolitan planning organizations
demand coupled with financial assumptions. across the State of California to show that
Required by State and Federal law. their future planning scenarios will result

RTPA—Regional Transportation in a reduction in carbon. The requirement

Planning Agency will engage regions in a process similar to a

process pioneered in Sacramento, known as

Santa Clara Countywide Bicycle Plan
“the blueprint,” which essentially says that
Plan developed by the VTA to guide the
there needs to be a plan as a region, not just
development of bicycle facilities in order
as individual cities and counties. The bill
to promote safe and convenient bicycling
provides incentives for regions to consider the
throughout the county. It also provides coor-
impact of land use on climate change. Under

VA L L E Y T R A N SP O RTAT I ON PLAN 2035 | 261

 the provisions of the bill, regions must engage enhancements, which include rehabilitation,

in a process to develop scenarios that show connections to parks, signage, pedestrian and

a contribution to climate change and if they bicycle access and enhanced access for those

do so but are unable to actually achieve the persons with disabilities, and one percent

goal, the State is going to require the region to must be spent on security.

submit reports demonstrating the strategies

Section 5309 This includes both discre-
they may need to meet the goals.
tionary and formula transit capital funds

SB-45—Senate Bill 45 Governor Wilson provided through the FTA. New rail starts and

signed SB-45 into law at the end of the 1997 extensions are funded through this program,

legislative session. This legislation consoli- which operates through earmarking at the

dated several State transportation funding congressional level. Other categories are fixed

programs into three funding programs and guideway modernization (formula-based) and

devolved State transportation programming bus and bus facilities (discretionary).

responsibility to the county and MPO level.

Section 5311 FTA funds available for rural/
Funds consolidated by SB-45 include the
intercity bus projects including purchases of
Flexible Congestion Relief (FCR), Transit
buses and related equipment and bus opera-
Capital Improvement (TCI), Transportation
tions in rural areas.
Systems Management (TSM) and Regional

Traffic Signalization and Operations Program SHA—State Highway Account

(RTSOP) funds25. SHOPP—State Highway Operations

SCS—Sustainable Communities and Protection Plan A program created by

Strategies State legislation that includes State highway

safety and rehabilitation projects, seismic
SDG—Service Design Guidelines
retrofit projects, landscaping, some opera-
Section 5307 Funds provided through FTA tional improvements and bridge replacement.
through a complex formula. These funds SHOPP is a four-year program of projects
are not available for operating assistance adopted separately from the STIP cycle. Both
in Urbanized Areas (UZAs) with a popula- new (Prop. 111) and old State gas tax revenues
tion over 200,000; however, they can be and Federal funds are the basis for funding
used for preventive maintenance purposes. this program. The legislature and governor
Additionally, in UZAs with populations have made seismic retrofit the State’s highest
greater than 200,000, one percent of the priority and in practice have used other STIP
UZA formula funds are to be spent on transit monies for these projects.

262 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 AP P ENDIX F

SJC—Mineta San Jose International by two formulas: 1) 50 percent of funds are

Airport (sometimes referred to as SJIA). The distributed according to population and 2)

airport serving the Santa Clara Valley area. 50 percent are distributed on a basis propor-

It is a self-supporting enterprise, owned and tional to operator revenues in the region for

operated by the City of San Jose. the prior year. The Bay Area region usually

receives about 38 percent of State STA funds.

SLPP—State Local Partnership Program

A State matching program for entities that Station Areas Locations immediately proxi-

enact local transportation taxes and uniform mate to rapid transit stations that already serve

developer fees. or will serve as central elements in a transit-

oriented development (TOD).

Smart Corridor A Smart Corridor is one

where various public agencies’ traffic man- STIP—State Transportation

agement activities are coordinated to more Improvement Program The STIP is

effectively manage traffic in that corridor. a multi-year planning and expenditure

These are typically achieved using advanced plan adopted by the CTC for the State

technologies or ITS, while partnerships Transportation System and is updated in

between jurisdictions are necessary to develop even-numbered years. The STIP is composed

procedures and measures for coordination. of the approved RTIPs and the Caltrans ITIP.

The 2000 STIP is a four-year program. New

SOV—Single Occupant Vehicles
State legislation passed in 2000 will extend
SR—State Route the STIP timeframe to a five-year program.

SRTP—Short Range Transit Plan This STP—Surface Transportation Program

documents the VTA’s on-going transit A flexible funding program established by
development and planning process for a ten- ISTEA. Many mass transit and highway
year planning horizon. It is used to support projects are eligible for funding under this
projects in the RTP and VTP. program. Ten percent of the projects in this

STA—State Transit Assistance Provides program must be transportation enhance-

funding for mass transit, transit coordination ment projects and ten percent must be safety

projection and transportation planning. Half projects.

of the revenues budgeted for the PTA are SVBC—Silicon Valley Bike Coalition
appropriated to STA. STA apportionments
SVITS—Silicon Valley ITS Program
to regional transportation planning agencies
Expanded partnership formed to implement
(MTC in the Bay Area region) are determined

VA L L E Y T R A N SP O RTAT I ON PLAN 2035 | 263

 the Silicon Valley Smart Corridor project to TCRP—California Governor’s 2000
work toward implementing three additional Traffic Congestion Relief Program A pro-
ITS projects in VTP 2030 Santa Clara and gram established in 2000 to provide $2 billion
southern Alameda County. The original Smart in funding for traffic relief and local street
Corridor was focused on the I-880 and SR 17 and road maintenance projects throughout
corridor. California.

SVRT—Silicon Valley Rapid Transit The TCRP (alternate definition)—

BART to Santa Clara County project. Transportation Cooperative Research

Program
SWOT Analysis A strategic planning

method used to evaluate the Strengths, TDA—Transportation Development

Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats Account Created in 1972, this account
involved in a project or in a business venture. receives 1/2 cent of the 6-cent Statewide sales
It involves specifying the objective of the busi- tax. The 1/2 cent is apportioned to the county
ness venture or project and identifying the of origin according to the amount of sales
internal and external factors that are favorable tax generated by that county and allocated
and unfavorable to achieving that objective. by MTC to the county’s eligible applicants.

In Santa Clara County, the transit agency

TAC—Technical Advisory Committee
is the only eligible applicant for Article 4
An advisory committee to the VTA that is
allocations. In addition to Article 4, alloca-
responsible for overseeing the technical work
tions from TDA are also made under Article
of the VTA staff and developing recommenda-
4.5 for community and paratransit services.
tions to the Board of Directors on projects and
This provision allows MTC to allocate up to
programs.
five percent of the total TDA allocation for
TCM—Transportation Control Measure Santa Clara County for these types of services,
A measure intended to reduce pollutant emis- which the Santa Clara Valley Transportation
sions from motor vehicles. Examples of TCMs Authority claims for ADA paratransit services.
include programs to encourage ridesharing Additionally, Article 3 funds (four percent of
or public transit usage, city or county trip the total) are allocated annually for bicycle/
reduction ordinances and the use of cleaner- pedestrian projects, which are nominated by
burning fuels in motor vehicles. MTC has the VTA.
adopted specific TCMs, in compliance with the
TDM—Transportation Demand
Federal and State Clean Air Acts.
Management The purpose of TDM is to

264 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 AP P ENDIX F

increase the efficiency of existing roadway year period 1997/98 to 2002/03 and extends
systems by reducing the demand for vehicular and expands many of the funding programs
travel. TDM strategies and initiatives are developed under ISTEA.
multimodal and aimed at reducing peak-hour
TEAQ—Transportation Energy and
travel demands. Example TDM strategies
Air Quality A new program in VTP 2035
include carpooling or vanpooling, flexible
through private and public partnerships that
work hours, telecommuting, parking controls
aims to conserve natural resources, reduce
and use of alternative transportation modes
greenhouse gases, prevent pollution and use
such as transit.
renewable energy and materials.

TE—Transportation Enhancements
Telecommuting A system of working at
Program VTA established the TE with the
home or at an off-site workstation with com-
Santa Clara TEA funds. Approximately 37
puter facilities that link to the worksite.
percent of the TEA funds from TEA-21 will be

dedicated to Countywide Bicycle Expenditure TFCA—Transportation Fund for Clean

Program projects and the remainder will Air TFCA funds are generated by a $4.00

be available for projects in all TEA funding surcharge on vehicle registrations. The funds

categories. generated by the fee are used to implement

projects and programs to reduce air pollution

TEA—Transportation Enhancement
from motor vehicles. Health and Safety Code
Activities ISTEA provided for a ten percent
Section 44241 limits expenditure of these
set-aside of each State’s STP allocation to
funds to specified eligible transportation
be used for TEA projects above and beyond
control measures (TCMs) that are included
normal capital improvements. Enhancement
in BAAQMD’s 1991 Clean Air Plan, developed
funds must be used for elements of a project
and adopted pursuant to the requirements
that have a direct relationship to the inter-
of the California Clean Air Act of 1988.
modal transportation system and fit one or
BAAQMD manages 60 percent of the funds
more of 12 activities categories described in
via a regional discretionary program. The
TEA-21.
remaining 40 percent are returned to each

TEA-21—Transportation Equity Act for county based on annual vehicle registrations.

the 21st Century TEA-21 is the successor

TIP—Transportation Improvement
legislation to ISTEA. Congress enacted TEA-
Program A Federally required document
21 in mid-1997. The legislation covers the six-
produced by a regional transportation plan-

VA L L E Y T R A N SP ORTAT I O N PLAN 2035 | 265

 ning agency (MTC in the Bay Area) that states improve and monitor traffic operations for an

investment priorities for transit and transit- area. Components typically include surveil-

related improvements, mass transit guide- lance (loop detectors, CCTV, etc.), monitoring

ways, general aviation and highways. The TIP equipment, highway advisory radio, change-

is the MTC’s principal means of implementing able message signs (CMS) and ramp metering.

long-term planning objectives through specific

TP & O—Transit Planning and
projects.
Operations Committee A standing com-

TLC—Transportation Livable mittee of the VTA that reviews policy recom-

Communities Program MTC created a new mendations pertaining to transit planning, its

regional discretionary funding program called projects and operations.

TLC with some of the TEA funds. Sponsors of

Transient Occupancy Taxes These taxes
projects must apply directly to MTC for these
are also known as hotel taxes and are charged
funds. Funds are to be used for cities to help
for any overnight stay at a commercial lodg-
them develop transportation-related projects
ing. They typically run between 8 and 15
aimed at improving quality of life.
percent but may be higher. Some proportion

TMC—Traffic Management Center TMCs of the transient occupancy tax revenues is

help in the real-time management of traffic, sometimes dedicated for convention and visi-

including monitoring and controlling roadway tor promotions or special projects. The bal-

access, responding to and managing incidents, ance is usually paid into the county’s General

rerouting traffic, and communicating and Fund. The revenue stream from these taxes is

coordinating with the public and the media. bondable and has often been used to subsidize

They perform these functions with advanced the construction of convention centers and

ITS technology such as sophisticated sensors; downtown improvements.

data fusion, information processing and com-

Transit Passenger service provided to the
munications equipment; and technology to
public along established routes. Paratransit is
automate routine decision-making and other
a variety of smaller, often flexibly scheduled
activities.
and routed transit services serving the needs

TOC—Traffic Operations Center of persons that standard transit would serve

with difficulty or not at all.

TOD—Transit-Oriented Development

Transit-Oriented Development Transit-

TOS—Traffic Operations System A sys-
oriented development (TOD) is characterized
tem made up of various ITS components that

266 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

 AP P ENDIX F

by a compact layout that encourages use of historic focus of transit investment for Santa

public transit service and walking or bicy- Clara County from providing transit service to

cling instead of automobile use for many trip all parts of the county regardless of demand

purposes. Typically, it places higher-density to a market-based network intended to attract

development within an easy walking distance the greatest number of riders.

of 1/4 to 1/2 mile of a public transit station or

Universe of Projects The compilation of
stop and is accessible by all other modes. It
projects in the VTP 2030 which were pro-
is compact, typically mixed-use, pedestrian-
posed by interested agencies and the general
friendly and has a transit stop or station as an
public. The projects proposed by individual
activity center.
cities and the county required city council or

TransLink The Bay Area’s regional electronic board approval prior to submittal to the VTA

fare payment collection system. for inclusion in the plan.

TravInfo The Bay Area’s advanced traveler Urban Design The attempt to give form, in

information system. terms of both beauty and function, to selected

urban areas or to whole cities. Urban design is

TSD—Transit Special District
concerned with the location, mass and design
TSOM—Transportation Systems of various urban components and combines
Operations and Management The use elements of urban planning, architecture and
of low-cost capital and operational improve- landscape architecture.
ments to increase the efficiency of road trans-
UA (or UZA)—Urbanized Area An area
portation and transit services. Sometimes
defined by the United States Census Bureau
the term is also applied to techniques used to
that includes one or more incorporated cities,
reduce the demand for travel in an area. Other
villages and towns (or “central place”) and
TSOM measures are engineering-oriented,
the adjacent densely settled surrounding
such as timing traffic signals to smooth the
territories (or “urban fringe”) that together
flow of traffic and ramp metering, which regu-
have a minimum of 50,000 persons. The
lates the entrance of vehicles onto a freeway,
urban fringe generally consists of contiguous
thus increasing the efficiency of the freeway.
territory having a density of at least 1,000 per-
TSP—Transit Sustainability Policy sons per square mile. UZAs do not conform to
A policy framework for evaluating new and congressional districts or any other political
existing transit services. The TSP shifts the boundaries, but are set by the Census Bureau

VA L L E Y T R A N SP O RTAT I ON PLAN 2035 | 267

 on demographics, numbers and definitions. an independent special district responsible
Non-urbanized areas are demographically for bus and light rail operations, congestion
rural in population. management, specific highway improvement

projects and countywide transportation plan-

USC—United States Code
ning. As such, VTA is both a transit provider
VA/E—Value Analysis/Engineering and a multimodal transportation planning

Vanpooling Commuting in a 7- to 15- organization involved with transit, highways

passenger van, with driving undertaken and roadways, bikeways, pedestrian facilities

by commuters. Some portion of the van’s and land use.

ownership and operating cost is usually paid VTP—Santa Clara Valley

by the riders on a monthly basis. The van Transportation Plan A 25-year plan
may be privately owned, employer-sponsored developed by VTA which provides policies
with the company owning and maintaining and programs for transportation in the Santa
the vehicle, or it may be provided through a Clara Valley including roadways, transit, ITS,
private company that leases vehicles. bicycle, pedestrian facilities and land use.

VHT/P-T—Vehicle Hours of Travel The VTP is updated every three to four years

per Person Trip A measure of the average to coincide with the update of the Regional

amount of time travelers spend getting to Transportation Plan (RTP).

their destination. WAN—Wide Area Network

Vision A brief description of what we want ZEB—Zero Emission Bus The VTA’s plan to
the region to be for the next generation. purchase and deploy a zero emission bus fleet.

VMT—Vehicle Miles of Travel A standard ZEB is defined as an urban bus certified to

area-wide measure of travel activity, calcu- zero exhaust emission of any pollutant under

lated by multiplying average trip length by the any and all conditions and operations. This

total number of trips. includes hydrogen-powered fuel cell buses,

electric trolley buses and battery electric

VTA—Santa Clara Valley
buses.
Transportation Authority The Santa Clara

Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) is

268 | VALLEY TRANS PO RTAT IO N AU T H O RIT Y

3331 North First Street
San Jose, California 95134-1927

408.321.3000
TDD only 408.321.2330

www.vta.org