DIRIDON STATION JOINT POLICY ADVISORY BOARD AGENDA

Transcription

1 DIRIDON STATION JOINT POLICY ADVISORY BOARD Friday, June 19, :00 PM San Jose City Hall Wing Room East Santa Clara Street San Jose, CA AGENDA CALL TO ORDER 1. ROLL CALL 2. PUBLIC PRESENTATIONS: This portion of the agenda is reserved for persons desiring to address the Committee on any matter not on the agenda. Speakers are limited to 2 minutes. The law does not permit Committee action or extended discussion on any item not on the agenda except under special circumstances. If Committee action is requested, the matter can be placed on the next agenda. All statements that require a response will be referred to staff for reply in writing. CONSENT AGENDA 3. ACTION ITEM -Approve the Regular Meeting Minutes of March 20, REGULAR AGENDA 4. INFORMATION ITEM -Receive an update on California High Speed Rail Common Level Boarding. (Verbal Report) (Tripousis) 5. INFORMATION ITEM -Receive an update on Boarding Scenarios in Europe and Asia. (Verbal Report) (Banko) 6. INFORMATION ITEM -Receive update on Level Boarding at Diridon Station. (Verbal Report) (Fromson) 3331 North First Street San Jose, CA Administration Customer Service

2 Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority Diridon Station Joint Policy Advisory Board June 19, INFORMATION ITEM -Discuss the Creation of Joint Powers Authority for Diridon Station. (Verbal Report) (Lawson) 8. ANNOUNCEMENTS 9. ADJOURN In accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, VTA will make reasonable arrangements to ensure meaningful access to its meetings for persons who have disabilities and for persons with limited English proficiency who need translation and interpretation services. Individuals requiring ADA accommodations should notify the Board Secretary s Office at least 48-hours prior to the meeting. Individuals requiring language assistance should notify the Board Secretary s Office at least 72-hours prior to the meeting. The Board Secretary may be contacted at (408) or board.secretary@vta.org or (408) (TTY only). VTA s home page is or visit us on (408) : 中文 / Español / 日本語 / 한국어 / tiếng Việt / Tagalog. All reports for items on the open meeting agenda are available for review in the Board Secretary s Office, 3331 North First Street, San Jose, California, (408) , the Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday prior to the meeting. This information is available on VTA s website at and also at the meeting. Page 2

3 3 DIRIDON STATION JOINT POLICY ADVISORY BOARD March 20, 2015 MINUTES CALL TO ORDER The Regular Meeting of the Diridon Station Joint Policy Advisory Board ( Committee ) was called to order at 3:06 p.m. by Chairperson Pro Tem Liccardo in Wing Room 120, San José City Hall, 200 East Santa Clara Street, San José, California. 1. ROLL CALL Attendee Name Title Status Tom Blalock Member Present Ash Kalra Member Absent Sam Liccardo Member Present Pierluigi Oliverio Member Present Cindy Chavez Member Absent Raul Peralez Member Present Jim Beall Ex-Officio Absent Rod Diridon, Sr. Ex-Officio Absent A quorum was present. 2. PUBLIC PRESENTATIONS There were no Public Presentations. CONSENT AGENDA 3. Regular Meeting Minutes of November 21, 2014 M/S/C (Blalock/Liccardo) to approve the Regular Meeting Minutes of November 21, Diridon Station Joint Policy Advisory Board Meeting Schedule M/S/C (Blalock/Liccardo) to approve the 2015 Diridon Station Joint Policy Advisory Board Meeting Schedule. NOTE: M/S/C MEANS MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED AND, UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED, THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY 3331 North First Street San Jose, CA Administration Customer Service

4 3 REGULAR AGENDA 5. Conduct Voting to Determine the Committee s Chairperson and Vice Chairperson for 2015 Chairperson Pro Tem Liccardo opened the floor for nominations for the 2015 Committee Chairperson and Vice Chairperson. Members of the Committee nominated Chairperson Liccardo as the Chairperson for Members of the Committee nominated Vice Chairperson Chavez as the Vice Chairperson for M/S/C (Oliverio/Blalock) to close nominations and elect Sam Liccardo as the Diridon Station Joint Policy Advisory Board Chairperson for M/S/C (Oliverio/Blalock) to close nominations and elect Cindy Chavez as the Diridon Station Joint Policy Advisory Board Vice Chairperson for California High Speed Rail Update Ben Tripousis, Northern Regional Director, California High Speed Rail Authority (CHSRA), provided a PowerPoint presentation entitled A Transformative Investment in California s Future, highlighting: 1) Cap & Trade: Game Changer; 2) Next Steps with Cap & Trade; 3) Northern California: Electrification & Connectivity; 4) Station Planning: Building upon the Diridon Station Area Plan; 5) Strategy Key Tasks; 6) Key Issue Place-Making; 7) Key Issue Parking; 8) Key Issue - Station Access: 9) Advancing the Economic Role of Stations; 10) Station Progression; 11) Intermodal HSR Station; and 12) HSR Station Build Out. Nuria I. Fernandez, General Manager, expressed encouragement with the layout that the high speed rail team has developed around the Diridon Station area. She noted an opportunity to create a destination place of activity, recreation and entertainment, and indicated this should be part of the discussion. Public Comment Roland Lebrun, Interested Citizen, noted his agreement with the General Manager s vision and comments, and expressed the importance of taking high speed rail to the airport. He referred to the City of San Jose s alignment and underground tunnel, the CHSRA no longer has exclusive authority to environmentally clear a high speed line as long as the speed remains below 125 miles per hour. On order of Chairperson Liccardo and there being no objection, the Committee received the California High Speed Rail Update. 7. High Speed Rail Stations Best Practices Presentation Eric Eidlin, Federal Transit Administration, provided a PowerPoint presentation entitled Beyond the Park-and-ride Lot, Lessons for California on High Speed Rail from France and Germany highlighting: 1) Overview; 2) Optimal Distance Ranges of Intercity Travel Modes; 3) San Francisco Ferry Building to Los Angeles Grand Central Market; 4) layout maps; 5) Station Design; 6) HSR Station vs. Airport; 7) Permeable Station Berlin Stadtbahn; 8) Station Design and Land Use; 9) Downtown Station/Mall-Hannover;

5 3 10) Hannover Main Station; 11) Downtown Station/Mall Leipzig; 12) Station/Mall - Paris St. Lazare; 13) Bridge Station: Proposal for Pleyel, Paris; 14) Station Area Land Use; 15) New Center City Lyon Part Dieu; 16) Lille Gare Lille Europe; 17) Lille Station Triangle ; 18) Space-Efficient Access Modes; 19) Munster Bike Station; 20) Innovations in Bicycle Technology; 21) Lyft Line; 22) Intermodal Connections; 23) Seamless Connections Erfurt; 24) Blended Stations; 25) Comparison Scale; 26) Concluding Thoughts The Importance of Vision; 27) SPL Euralille Governance; 28) Opportunities/Challenges for California; and 29) Challenges for San Jose. Public Comment Adina Levin, Friends of Caltrain, thanked Mr. Eidlin for his presentation and expressed support for the Diridon Station vision as a core area in San Jose. She noted the growth potential in terms of achieving the 30 second transfer time. On Order of Chairperson Liccardo and there being no objection, the Committee received the High Speed Rail Stations Best Practices Presentation. Chairperson Liccardo relinquished his seat to Member Blalock and left the meeting at 3:44 p.m. 8. Caltrain Modernization Update Casey Fromson, Caltrain Modernization Program, provided a PowerPoint presentation entitled Caltrain Modernization Program Update, highlighting: 1) Caltrain today; 2) 2014 Top Ridership Trains; 3) Bikes on Board; 4) Regional Transportation Needs; 5) Caltrain Modernization Program; 6) Advanced Signal System (2015); 7) Project Description; 8) Peninsula Corridor Electrification Project (2020); 9) PCEP Project Description; 10) Key Regional Benefits; 11) Key Milestones; 12) Updated Cost/Schedule; 13) Potential Funding Strategies; 14) Corridor Incremental Investments; and 15) Questions. Members of the Committee discussed potential funding strategies. On Order of Chairperson Pro Tem Blalock and there being no objection, the Committee received the Caltrain Modernization Update. 9. Envision Silicon Valley Update Scott Haywood, Policy and Community Relations Manager, provided a PowerPoint presentation entitled Envision Silicon Valley, highlighting: 1) Past Sales Tax Measures; 2) Envision Silicon Valley; 3) Ad-hoc Committee; 4) VTA s Advisory Committees; 5) Stakeholder Groups; 6) Goals of Envision Silicon Valley; and 7) Upcoming Milestones. Discussion ensued regarding Stakeholder Group Meetings. Ms. Fernandez indicated VTA can provide a complete listing of all the groups that are members of the working committees to identify if there is a particular group that needs to be engaged. Chairperson Pro Tem Blalock noted the importance of having strongly supported projects to help attract funding sources.

6 3 Public Comment Ms. Levin stated one of the ideas emerging from the Envision Silicon Valley process is a metric of close collaboration and shared goals between the City and VTA for transit ridership and transit mode share. On Order of Chairperson Pro Tem Blalock and there being no objection, the Committee received the Envision Silicon Valley Update. 10. Receive Legislative Update Aaron Quigley, Senior Policy Analyst, Government Affairs, provided the staff report, highlighting: 1) Senate Bill (SB) 9, (Beall), Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund: Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program; 2) Assembly Bill (AB) 6, (Wilk), Bonds: Transportation: School Facilities; and 3) AB 1138, (Patterson). High Speed Rail: Eminent Domain. On Order of Chairperson Pro Tem Blalock and there being no objection, the Committee received the Legislative Update. 11. ANNOUNCEMENTS Ms. Fernandez announced Stand Up For Transportation rally on April 9, 2015, an effort to call attention to the state of transportation in the nation and the need for improvements. Jim Lawson, Director of Government Affairs and Executive Policy Advisor announced the next Diridon Station JPAB meeting is scheduled for June 19, 2015, at 3:00 p.m. at Wing Room 120, San Jose City Hall, 200 East Santa Clara Street. 12. ADJOURN On order of Chairperson Pro Tem Blalock and there being no objection, the meeting was adjourned at 4:25 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Anita McGraw, Board Assistant VTA Office of the Board Secretary

7 Agenda Item #4 California High-Speed Rail Common Level Boarding and Tier III Trainsets Diridon Policy Advisory Board San Jose City Hall June 19,

8 Advantages of Common Level Boarding Improved operations at common stations (TTC, Millbrae, Diridon) Improved passenger circulation Improved safety Improved Reliability and Recovery Capabilities Significantly reduced infrastructure costs Improved system operations Accelerated schedule for Level Boarding at all stations 2

9 Goals for Commuter Trainset RFP Ensure that Caltrain Vehicle Procurement does not preclude future Common Level Boarding Options Ensure that capacity of an electrified Caltrain system is maximized Identify strategies that maintain or enhance Caltrain capacity during transition to high level boarding Develop transitional strategies for future integrated service 3

10 Request for Expressions of Interest In January 2015 a REOI was released to identify and receive feedback from firms interested in competing to design, build, and maintain the high-speed rail trainsets for use on the California High-Speed Rail System. The Authority s order will include a base order and options up to 95 trainsets. 4

11 Technical Requirements - Trainsets Single level EMU: Capable of operating in revenue service at speeds up to 354 km/h (220 mph), and Based on a service-proven trainset in use in commercial high speed passenger service at least 300 km/h (186 mph) for a minimum of five years. 5

12 Technical Requirements - Trainsets Width between 3.2 m (10.5 feet) to 3.4 m (11.17 feet) Maximum Length of 205 m (672.6 feet). Minimum of 450 passenger seats Provide level boarding with a platform height above top of rail of 1219 mm 1295 mm (48 inches 51 inches) 6

13 Submittal Information Nine Expressions of Interest (EOI) have been received thus far. EOIs will continue to be accepted through the RFP process. Submitting an EOI is not a requirement. Firms that do not submit an EOI may still submit a Proposal in response to the RFP. 7

14 The Procurement Process The REOI did not begin the procurement process. A Draft RFP was released for Industry Input and Comment The Authority will issue an RFP to begin the procurement process in the Fall of Firms that submitted EOIs were given credentials to ask questions and participate in one-on-ones during the RFP process. 8

15 Agenda Item #5 Trainset Boarding Scenarios In Europe and Asia 1

16 CHSRA TRAINSET PERFORMANCE CHARACTERISTICS 1. Maximize competition 2. Service-proven design 3. FRA Tier III compliant (crashworthiness, crew/passenger safety) 4. ADA compliant (high-platform level boarding, all coaches accessible) 5. Operating speed (354 km/h (220 mph), subjected to large gradients) 6. Single-level, wide body coach configuration 7. Minimize axle loads 2

17 EXISTING STANDARDS ADA United States» Americans with Disabilities Act 49CFR Parts 37 and 38 all cars for high-speed rail systems shall be designed for high-platform, level boarding Vertical gap between trainset floor and platform: ±15.9 mm (± )» Applicable to high-speed trainset stopping at both new and existing stations Horizontal gap: 76.2 mm ( 3 )» CHSRA trainset will be ADA-compliant and have level boarding. 3

18 EXISTING STANDARDS EUROPEAN PLATFORM HEIGHTS Europe» High-Speed Infrastructure Technical Specifications for Interoperability (TSI) Section : Nominal platform height above the running plane shall be either 550 mm (21.7 ) or 760 mm (29.9 ) Section 7.3: Exceptions to Great Britain, Ireland, Northern Ireland, Netherlands, and Sweden» GB (Cat. II and III): 865 mm (34.1 ) to 915 mm (36.0 )» Ireland/Northern Ireland: 915 mm (36.0 )» Netherlands (Cat. II and III): 840 mm (33.1 )» Sweden (Cat. II and III): nominal 580 mm (22.8 ) or 730 mm (28.7 ) 4

19 EXISTING STANDARDS ASIAN PLATFORM HEIGHTS Japan» MLIT s Technical Standard for Japanese Railway Article 36: The surface of the platform and the surface of the floor part of the rolling stock where passengers board and alight shall be as flat as possible.» Shinkansen platform height: 1250 mm (49.2 ) above top of rail. China» MOR s Code for Design of High-Speed Railway Section : Platform height: 1250 mm (49.2 ) above top of rail. 5

20 HSR TRAINSET FLOOR HEIGHTS There are no service-proven HS trainsets capable of operating at 354 km/h (220 mph) that can provide ADA-compliant level boarding at platforms built 635 or 762 mm (25 or 30 ) above top of rail. 7

21 LIFECYCLE FOR TRAINSET PROCUREMENT RFP issued Contract awarded to manufacturer Design completed Trainsets manufactured Testing, commissioning, training In-service

22 HIGH-SPEED TRAINSET FLOOR HEIGHTS Manufacturer Vehicle Floor Height in mm (inches) Continent/Country Alstom AGV 1160 (45.7) Europe (Italy) Alstom Duplex 306 (12.1) 1 Europe (France) Bombardier Zefiro (49.2) China Bombardier V300 Zefiro 1250 (49.2) Europe (Italy) Siemens Velaro CN 1260 (49.6) China Siemens Velaro D 1240 (48.8) Europe (Germany) Sumitomo N (51.2) 2 Japan Talgo (29.9) Europe (Spain) TBD TBD 1219 to 1295 (48 to 51) TBD US - CHSRA 1 The lower floor of the Duplex can be elevated to provide level boarding at a 550 mm (21.7 ) platform height 2 Same floor height for CRH380A 9

23 ALSTOM AGV Operated in Italy Vehicle floor height: 1160 mm (45.7 )» Platform height: 550 or 760 mm (21.7 or 29.9 ) Half width of trainset: 1500 mm (59.0 )» Platform offset from track centerline: mm (65.4 ) 10

24 ALSTOM EURODUPLEX (TGV 2N2) Operated in France Vehicle floor height: 306 mm (12.1 )» Platform height: 550 or 760 mm (21.7 or 29.9 ) Half width of trainset: 1450 mm (57.1 )» Platform offset from track centerline: 1650 to 1700 mm (65.0 to 66.9 ) 11

25 BOMBARDIER ZEFIRO 380 Operated in China Vehicle floor height: 1250 mm (49.2 )» Platform height: 1250 mm (49.2 ) Half width of trainset: 1680 mm (66.1 )» Platform offset from track centerline: 1750 mm (68.9 ) 12

26 BOMBARDIER V300 ZEFIRO To be operated in Italy in June 2015 Vehicle floor height: 1250 mm (49.2 )» Platform height: 550 or 760 mm (21.7 or 29.9 ) Half width of trainset: 1450 mm (57.1 )» Platform offset from track centerline: mm (65.4 ) 13

27 SIEMENS VELARO CN Operated in China Vehicle floor height: 1260 mm (49.6 )» Platform height: 1250 mm (49.2 ) Half width of trainset: 1640 mm (64.6 )» Platform offset from track centerline: 1750 mm (68.9 ) 14

28 SIEMENS VELARO D Operated in Germany Vehicle floor height: 1240 mm (48.8 )» Platform height: 760 mm (29.9 ) Half width of trainset: 1460 mm (57.5 )» Platform offset from track centerline: 1650 to 1700 mm (65.0 to 66.9 ) 15

29 SUMITOMO N700 SERIES SHINKANSEN Operated in Japan Vehicle floor height: 1300 mm (51.2 )» Platform height: 1250 mm (49.2 ) Half width of trainset: 1680 mm (66.1 ) 16

30 TALGO 350 Operated in Spain Vehicle floor height: 760 mm (29.9 )» Platform height: 550 or 760 mm (21.7 or 29.9 ) Half width of trainset: 1470 mm (57.9 )» Platform offset from track centerline: 1650 to 1700 mm (65.0 to 66.9 ) 17

31 TALGO 350 The Talgo 350 trainset can provide level boarding at platforms built 762 mm (30 ) above top of rail.» Maximum design speed of 354 km/h (220 mph)» Certified at 330 km/h (205 mph)» Operating speed is 300 km/h (186 mph) Does not meet the required operating speed of 354 km/h (220 mph) CHSR Trainset to be tested at 390 km/h (242 mph) 18

32 RSSB PLATFORM TRAIN INTERFACE STRATEGY In 2013, the Railroad Safety and Standards Board (RSSB) investigated PTI risk and develop a strategy that would:» Reduce safety risk» Optimize operational performance» Optimize availability of access RSSB Platform Train Interface (PTI) Strategy Report issued January 2015 Identified areas of design and operation that are not always compatible:» Platform clearances for passenger, freight, and other vehicles» Platform and passenger vehicle floor heights» Step and gap configurations for passengers with and without mobility issues and those using wheelchairs» Passenger train designs, including door configurations, train capacity, provision for luggage; and how these might affect overall performance 19

33 IMPORTANCE OF PASSENGER TRAIN INTERFACE (PTI) Optimizing the step and gap will:» Reduce dwell times» Optimize capacity» Improve passenger experience» Reduce anxiety» Increase accessibility» Overall encourage the use of the railway 20

34 QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS 21

35 Agenda Item #6 Caltrain Modernization EMU Procurement Boarding Height Diridon Joint Policy Advisory Board June 19, 2015

36 Context 2

37 Average Weekday Ridership Riders (Boardings) Since % increase 60,000 55,000 50,000 45,000 40,000 35,000 30,000 25,000 26,794 24,597 26,028 29,728 33,691 29,178 25,577 23,947 34,611 29,760 26,533 31,507 36,232 42,354 34,120 47,060 37,779 52,611 58,245 20,000 Year 3

38 Standees: 2015 Maximum Loads Northbound Depart SJ Percent of Seated Capacity (low season) Percent of Seated Capacity (high season) 7:03 AM 135% 158% 7:45 AM 128% 150% 8:03 AM 127% 149% 5:23 PM 122% 143% 6:57 AM 122% 142% 7:50 AM 117% 137% 6:45 AM 108% 126% 6:50 AM 106% 124% 4:39 PM 106% 124% 7:55 AM 103% 121% 8:40 AM 102% 119% 4:23 PM 96% 113% 4

39 Exceeding Capacity Today 5

40 Rider Average Trip Caltrain - Average trip length miles - Average trip time minutes Other Bay Area Transit Systems - BART 14 miles / 24 minutes - Muni 2.8 miles / variable - VTA light rail 5.7 miles / 23 minutes - ACE 48 miles / 60+ minutes 6

41 Regional Transportation Needs US 101 and Interstate 280 Congested Corridor supports growing economy - 14% CA GDP; 52% CA patents; 25% CA tax revenue Caltrain Commuter Coalition (formed 2014) - 75% Caltrain rider s commute to work; 60% choice riders 7

42 Need to Maximize Capacity Add cars to diesel trains now Caltrain Electrification (2020) - More trains / serve more riders - Increase station stops and/or reduced travel times Level boarding and longer trains 8

43 Key Regional Benefits Note: 2013 Bay Area Council Report, generates $2.5 billion economic activity and 9,600 jobs 9

44 PCEP Service Benefits Metric Today PCEP Trains / peak hour / direction Example Baby Bullet Train 5 6 Retain 5-6 stops 60 minutes 45 minutes Retain SF to SJ 60 minutes 6 stops 13 stops Example Redwood City Station Train stops / peak hour

45 Electrification Project 11

46 2020 Revenue Service Issue RFP DB (FEB) Award DB Contract (FALL) Environmental Clearance Design / Build / Test Service and Construction (5 years) 2020 Service Issue RFP EMU (JULY) Award EMU Contract (WINTER) Important milestones to meet 2020 service date 12

47 2 Key Contracts / Milestones Design Build Electrification Infrastructure RFQ Issued / 6 Teams Pre Qualified DB RFP Issued Contract Award (Fall 2015) Electric Multiple Units (96 cars) RFI Issued (2 4 builders interested) RFP to be issued July 2015 Contract Award (Winter 2015/2016) 13

48 EMU Original Plan / Modification Consideration 14

49 Information to Car Builders Summer 2014 Growing Demand - Weekday ridership today: 60, Weekday ridership future: 110,000+ Today mile trips - 96%-135% peak weekday (over capacity in low season) - 11% bikes on board Future - Share train slots (6 Caltrain / 4 HSR) per hour / direction 15

50 Request for Information Summer 2014 Attributes Industry Confirmation Maximize Capacity Bi-level (versus single level) Previously Made US Regulation Compliance Floor Threshold Service proven options Saves costs / time ADA Buy America FRA Waiver / Alternative Compliant Vehicles Criteria Meet Caltrain Technical / Quality Standards 2 double doors per car (low-level boarding) ~22 to ~25 most common Note: Anticipate adequate competition for the RFP 16

51 Recommended EMU ~50 ~ steps onboard Platform 8 Bi-level car 2 double doors (located: ~25 floor) Passengers step (1-2) from platform ADA passengers and bikes located ~25 level ADA use mini highs and wayside lifts 17

52 Similar to Today s Bombardier 18

53 Future Level Boarding (Beyond Electrification) Important to Caltrain Safety enhancements Operating efficiencies Passenger convenience ADA 19

54 Future Level Boarding continued (Beyond Electrification) Caltrain ~25 Dedicated Level Boarding all stations HSR ~50 Dedicated Level Boarding 2 3 stations - Transbay Terminal Center - Millbrae - San Jose Diridon Dedicated Platforms 20

55 Level Boarding Challenges Lengthy construction period with revenue service CPUC waiver needed for freight corridor Tenants with different boarding heights - Altamont Corridor Express - Capitol Corridor - Amtrak Station area impacts (e.g. ramps, circulation, etc.) 21

56 Request for EMU Modification 22

57 Request for EMU Modifications Stakeholder request for car modification Caltrain bi-level EMU ~25 boarding height HSR single level cars ~50 boarding height (different needs than Caltrain) Can Caltrain modify EMUs to not preclude ~50 boarding in the future? 23

58 Explore Modification Options 6-month effort (Dec 2014 to May 2015) Car builder interviews w/ HSR Technical analysis w/ HSR Caltrain operational assessment 24

59 Car Builder Interviews 7 Participated Proposed Modification Solutions Option A Cars with more doors (Seat loss per 6-car train) Option B Cars with traps (No seat loss, operational challenge) Redesign existing vehicles (not starting from scratch) Vehicle delivery (2020 revenue service) Competition adequate 25

60 Caltrain Operational Assessment 26

61 Analysis 2 Modification Options 2 Timeframes 2020 electrified service without HSR Future blended service with HSR Focus Areas Boarding for passengers with and without bikes, ADA Passenger circulation within the cars Operational changes 27

62 Terminology ~50 floor (mid area) upper area ~25 floor (lower area) Platform 8 Above Top of Rail (ATOR) Double Door Single Door Notes: Caltrain EMU Floor ATOR: (for this presentation ~25 ); HSR Train Floor ATOR: (for this presentation ~50 ) 28

63 2020 Evaluation Mixed EMU and Diesel Service (Using Existing Stations) 29

64 Modification A (2020) Cars with More Doors ~50 ~ steps 4 double doors (located: ~25 & ~50 ) ~50 double doors may not be feasible Passengers / bikes use ~25 doors (1-2 steps) ADA location TBD - Located at ~50 (use high doors: need high blocks / wayside lift) - Located at ~25 (use low doors: need mini high / wayside lift) Platform 8 30

65 Modification A (2020) continued Cars with More Doors High Block Wayside lift Mini High 31

66 Modification B (2020) Cars with Traps Trap: 3-5 steps ~50 Platform 8 Open Trap Close Trap Single Door w/ Trap 32

67 Modification B (2020) continued Cars with Traps 2 single doors w/ traps, 2 single doors no trap - All doors to ~50 floor Single door access (longer dwell) Passengers/bikes use doors w/ traps (3-5 steps) - Taller first step or step stool needed - Bikes located ~25 level (additional internal steps down) ADA location ~50 level - At stations high blocks / wayside lifts Automatic / manual traps 33

68 Future Blended System Evaluation Full Fleet EMU Service (HSR and Modified Level Boarding Stations) 34

69 Scenario 1: Shared Platform at HSR Stations Only 2-3 Stations: Caltrain / HSR Stations Common Platforms ~50 25 Stations: Caltrain Level Boarding ~25 35

70 Scenario 2: Shared Platforms at All Stations 28 Stations: Caltrain / HSR Stations Common Platforms ~50 36

71 Modification A (Future) Scenario 1: Shared at 2 3 Stations Platform 50 Platform 25 No steps (use at 2-3 stations) No steps (use at 25 stations) Scenario 2: Shared at All Stations Interior steps navigated by bikes; ADA internal lift needed Platform 50 No steps (use at 28 stations) Interior steps navigated by bikes; ADA internal lift may be needed 37

72 Modification A (Future Scenarios) Scenario 1: Shared at 2 3 Stations Continue using both doors Seats cannot be restored Interior lift needed Interior circulation challenges Scenario 2: Shared at All Stations Seal low doors and use high doors only Interior reconfiguration / restore seats Bike circulation and storage challenge Interior lift needed if ADA ~25 level Interior lift 38

73 Modification B (Future) Scenario1: Shared at 2 3 Stations Platform 50 Platform 25 No steps (use at 2-3 stations) Less steps (use at 25 stations) Interior steps navigated by bikes Scenario 2: Shared at All Stations Seal Traps No steps (use at 28 stations) No steps; use at 28 stations Platform 50 Interior steps navigated by bikes 39

74 Modification B (Future Scenarios) Scenario 1: Shared at 2-3 Stations Continue using traps (longer dwell) Interior circulation challenges Scenario 2: Shared at All Stations Seal traps Single door (dwell impacts) Bike circulation and storage challenge 40

75 Potential Path Forward 41

76 Framework HSR / Caltrain blended system partnership Blended system not yet defined - Community planning - Environmental evaluation Early investment program (defined / environmentally cleared) - CBOSS PTC (2015) - Electrification Project (2020) Need to make EMU design decision now to not preclude common platforms w/ HSR in future 42

77 Cars with More Doors Option Challenges Associated with More Doors - Seat loss / Passenger circulation inside car Short-term Solution (2020) - Design car with 2 sets of doors - Keep high doors sealed / use low doors - Car configured similar to original EMUs (mitigate challenges) - Request HSR to fund modification costs Future Blended System (TBD) - Evaluate use of high doors (~50 ) - Associated car interior reconfiguration 43

78 Future Blended Service Additional Work Needed Community Planning / Environmental Review Blended System Definition - Service Plan - System Upgrades - Infrastructure (passing tracks, maintenance facility) - HSR Stations / Caltrain Station Modifications 44

79 HSR Station Reevaluation Needed Diridon (Original Full-Build Plan) Bi-level station Dedicated HSR platforms aerial or below ground Caltrain platforms at ground level Diridon (Blended System) TBD 45

80 Next Steps 46

81 May July Activities Public Meetings Release Draft RFP to Car Builders June JPB - Update on proposed path forward - Seats/Standees/Bikes/Bathroom balance July JPB - Release EMU RFP - Regional funding plan update 47

82 Questions website:

83 7.1 Date: June 12, 2015 Current Meeting: June 19, 2015 Board Meeting: N/A BOARD MEMORANDUM TO: THROUGH: FROM: SUBJECT: Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority Diridon Station Joint Policy Advisory Board General Manager, Nuria I. Fernandez Director of Government Affairs, Jim Lawson Evaluate Converting the Diridon Station Policy Advisory Board into a Joint Powers Authority FOR INFORMATION ONLY BACKGROUND: The Diridon Station is vital transportation link for Northern California. The station currently serves Caltrain, Altamont Commuter Express, Capitol Corridor, Amtrak and VTA Light Rail. Future rail connections include the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District (BART) and California High Speed Rail. In addition there are bus connections with the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA), Santa Cruz Metro and Monterey Salinas Transit District. In order to provide a forum where all parties involved in the planning and operation of the station and the station area could consider matters impacting the station, a policy advisory board was formed. At the invitation of Sen. Jim Beall and former Mayor Chuck Reed, representatives from the City of San José, VTA, Caltrain, California High Speed Rail Authority (CHSRA), the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC), BART and the State of California formed the Diridon Station Joint Policy Advisory Board (JPAB). The first meeting of the JPAB was held on March 19, DISCUSSION: Since that time the JPAB has considered matters impacting the planning for the station and the station area. As the need to become more proactive in the development of this unique resource has become more obvious over the past few years, now would be an appropriate time for the JPAB to consider converting the policy board into a Joint Powers Authority (JPA). Definition: A Joint Powers Authority is a governmental entity created by two or more other governmental entities. Through the new agency, the creating entities exercise their powers jointly to achieve common purposes. The new entity is legally separate from the governments that form it North First Street San Jose, CA Administration Customer Service

84 7.1 Purpose of a Diridon Station JPA: The JPA would manage and monitor the planning and development of the station and could be authorized to submit such documents as an EIR/EIS, grant requests, contracts, bond issuance and other instruments to further the development of the station and its adjacent property. Because of the multiple jurisdictions involved, having one entity to deal with these complex issues could be helpful. For example, if it were determined advantageous to have a commercial retail developer involved in the construction of the station, the opportunity could be enhanced by having a JPA. In order to form a JPA the following areas should be understood and addressed: The Agreement: An agreement between the parties would need to define membership, responsibilities, purpose of the agreement, the powers to be exercised and the method by which the purpose will be accomplished and/or the powers exercised. This along with jurisdictional boundaries and a host of other details will need to be clearly defined. Legislation: While not always required for the formation of a JPA, this approach should be evaluated to see whether or not it might provide any advantage for pursuing the purpose of the organization. Management: Consideration is needed for the management and staffing of the JPA. The current JPAB is staffed mainly by VTA with significant support from Caltrain, CHSRA and City of San José. While sufficient for current needs, the increased responsibilities will require consideration. If it is the Committee s desire to pursue the creation of a JPA, staff will attempt to provide more detail on the necessary steps required to form a JPA at future meetings. Staff in consultation with the government entities involved will further attempt to define the purpose and powers of any contemplated JPA. This information will be brought before the Committee for full and open discussion including public input to determine the will of the Committee. Prepared By: Jim Lawson, Director of Goverment Affairs Memo No Page 2 of 2