We're at the end of another year. I had hoped to do more frequent updates, but this little thing called life got in the way. Perhaps I'll find more time next year. But for now, let's look at the last four months of updates:
Updates were made to the following highways, based on my reading of the papers (which are posted to the roadgeeking category at the "Observations Along The Road" and to the California Highways Facebook group) as well as any backed up email changes. I also reviewed the the AAroads forum. I've given up on misc.transport.road. This resulted in changes on the following routes, with credit as indicated [my research(1), contributions of information or leads (via direct mail) from Laurie Martin Perlowin Avocado(2), Concrete Bob at AAroads(3), Emory at AAroads(4), Andy Fields(5), Jander at AAroads(6), Jonathan Ledbetter(7), Nexus73 at AAroads(8), Joe Rouse(9), Arturo Salazar(10), Chris Sampang(11), Oscar Voss(12): Postmile Numbering(7), Route 1(1), Route 4(1,12), I-5(1,5), Route 11(1,5), Route 12(5), I-15(1), Route 17(1), Route 23(1), Route 29(1), Route 37(1), US 40(5), Route 47(1), US 50(11), Route 51(1,11), Route 55(1), Route 57(1), Route 58(8,11,3), Route 60(1,8), Route 65(5), Route 66(1), Route 74(1), I-80(1,11), Route 82(1), Route 85(1), Route 91(1), Route 92(1), Route 94(5), US 97(7), US 101(1,5), Route 103(1), I-105(2), I-110(1,2,10), Route 125(5), Route 134(1,4), Route 148(5), I-215(1), Route 227(1), US 395(7), I-405(1), I-580(1), I-605(10), I-680(1), I-710(1,9,10), I-805(1), I-880(6), Route 905(5), I-980(1).
Reviewed the Pending Legislation page, based on the new California Legislature site. As usual, I recommend to every Californian that they visit the legislative website regularly and see what their legis-critters are doing. Noted the passage of the following bills and resolutions (for some of these, I've highlighted key phrases in red):
This bill, if the commission and the department develop a project to open the third lane on the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge (I-580) to automobile traffic on the eastbound level and to bicycle traffic on the westbound level, would authorize the lead agency to complete the design work for the project simultaneously with the environmental review conducted pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act.
This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
10/01/15 Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 393, Statutes of 2015.
Existing law authorizes a regional transportation agency, as defined, in cooperation with the department to apply to the California Transportation Commission to develop and operate high-occupancy toll (HOT) lanes, including administration and operation of a value-pricing program and exclusive or preferential lane facilities for public transit, consistent with established standards, requirements, and limitations that apply to specified facilities. Existing law requires the commission to conduct at least one public hearing in northern California and one in southern California for each eligible application submitted by the regional transportation agency. Existing law limits the number of approved facilities to not more than 4, 2 in northern California and 2 in southern California, and provides that no applications may be approved on or after January 1, 2012.
This bill would authorize a regional transportation agency or the department to apply to the commission to develop HOT lanes and other toll facilities, as specified, and would delete the January 1, 2012, deadline for HOT lane applications and remove the existing limitation on the number of facilities that may be approved. The bill would include the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority within the definition of regional transportation authority for these purposes. The bill would delete the requirement that the facilities be consistent with the established standards, requirements, and limitations that apply to specified facilities and would instead require the commission to establish eligibility criteria set forth in guidelines for the development and operation of the facilities approved by the commission on or after January 1, 2016, subject to specified minimum requirements. The bill would provide for the review and approval by the commission of each proposed toll facility pursuant to those eligibility criteria. The bill would authorize a regional transportation agency or the state, as applicable, to issue bonds, refunding bonds, or bond anticipation notes backed by revenues generated from the facilities. The bill would delete the requirement that the commission conduct at least one public hearing in northern California and one in southern California for each eligible application and would instead require the commission to conduct at least one public hearing at or near the proposed toll facility. The bill would require a regional transportation agency that applies to the commission to reimburse the commission for all of the commission’s costs and expenses incurred in processing the application and to enter into specified agreements with the department and the Department of the California Highway Patrol. Before submitting an application to the commission, the bill would require a regional transportation agency to consult with every local transportation authority and every congestion management agency whose jurisdiction includes the facility that the regional transportation agency proposes to develop and operate pursuant to the above-described provisions. The bill would require the regional transportation agency to give a local transportation authority or congestion management agency, as specified, the option of entering into agreements, as needed, for project development, engineering, financial studies, and environmental documentation for each construction project or segment, and would authorize the local transportation authority or congestion management agency to be the lead agency for those construction projects or segments. The bill would provide that these provisions do not authorize or prohibit the conversion of any existing nontoll or nonuser-fee lanes into tolled or user-fee lanes, except that a high-occupancy vehicle lane may be converted into a HOT lane pursuant to its provisions.
This bill would create the Highway Toll Account in the State Transportation Fund for the management of funds received by the Department of Transportation for toll facilities operated by the department under the bill. The bill would continuously appropriate to the department the portion of revenues designated and necessary for the payment of debt service for those facilities.
This bill would become operative only if AB 914 is enacted and takes effect on or before January 1, 2016.
10/09/15 Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 687, Statutes of 2015.
This bill would prohibit, commencing July 1, 2016, any high-occupancy vehicle lane from being established on specified portions of state highway routes (Route 134 between Route 170 and I-210, and I-210 between Route 134 and Route 57) in the County of Los Angeles, unless that lane is established as a high-occupancy vehicle lane only during the hours of heavy commuter traffic, as determined by the department. The bill would require any existing high-occupancy vehicle lane established on the specified portions of these routes to be modified to conform with those requirements. The bill would authorize the department, on or after May 1, 2017, to reinstate 24-hour high-occupancy vehicle lanes on the specified portions of these routes if the department makes a specified determination and would require the department to report to the Legislature on the impact on traffic of limiting the use of high-occupancy lanes only during the hours of heavy commuter traffic, as provided in the bill.
09/28/15 Vetoed by Governor. Veto message: The bill limits the 24/7 carpool lane controls on specified segments of the 134 and 210 freeways in Los Angeles to the hours of heavy commuter traffic. I vetoed a nearly identical bill last session. I continue to believe that carpool lanes are especially important in Los Angeles County to reduce pollution and maximize the use of freeways. Therefore, we should continue to retain the current 24/7 carpool lane control.
This bill would authorize the commission to relinquish to the County of Riverside that portion of State Highway Route 74 located in the unincorporated area east of the City of Lake Elsinore and west of the City of Perris under specified conditions.
10/07/15 Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 553, Statutes of 2015.
This bill would require the department, by June 30, 2016, to update its internal policies to allow displays of safety, transportation-related, and voting-related messages on changeable message signs, as defined, subject to approval by the United States Department of Transportation, as provided.
[Note: The types of messages permitted are: (1) Safety messages. (2) Transportation-related messages. (3) Reminders to register to vote, as requested by the Secretary of State, not more than two days prior to, and on the last day to, register to vote in a particular statewide general election, statewide primary election, or statewide special election conducted pursuant to the Elections Code. (4) Reminders to vote, as requested by the Secretary of State, as elections approach, not more than two days prior to, and on election day of, a particular statewide general election, statewide primary election, or statewide special election conducted pursuant to the Elections Code. Also permitted are messages required per the requirements of the Emergency Alert System, the Amber Plan under Section 8594 of the Government Code, or the Blue Alert System under Section 8594.5 of the Government Code. US DOT has to approve other displays. Unclear what that means for drought warnings.]
10/09/15 Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 693, Statutes of 2015.
Existing law authorizes the commission to relinquish to the County of Sacramento the portion of Route 16 that is located within the unincorporated area of the county, east of the City of Sacramento boundary and west of Watt Avenue, under certain conditions.
This bill would revise this authorization to apply to a specified portion of Route 16 that is located within the unincorporated area of the county, between the general easterly city limits of the City of Sacramento and near Grant Line Road, and would impose additional conditions on the relinquishment. The bill would state the intent of the Legislature in this regard.
This bill would also authorize the commission to relinquish to the City of Rancho Cordova a specified portion of Route 16, under certain conditions.
10/08/15 Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 630, Statutes of 2015.
This bill would authorize the commission to relinquish a specified portion of Route 1 (between the southern limit of Santa Monica and Route 105) and Route 187 (between the route’s western terminus at Lincoln Boulevard (approximately postmile 3.5) and its eastern terminus at Cadillac Avenue near Route 10 (approximately postmile 8.9)) to the City of Los Angeles under certain conditions. The bill would delete the conditions relating to the construction of Route 187.
10/07/15 Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 561, Statutes of 2015.
This bill would authorize the San Bernardino County Transportation Commission to conduct, administer, and operate a value-pricing program that includes HOT lanes and other toll facilities on I-10 and I-15 in the County of San Bernardino and, with the agreement of affected transportation agencies, specified extensions and connections into the Counties of Los Angeles and Riverside. The bill would require the toll revenues to be spent for specified transportation purposes and would authorize the commission to issue revenue bonds payable from toll revenues. The bill would require the commission to report to the Legislative Analyst on specified matters within 3 years of commencement of revenue collection from the value-pricing program. The bill would enact other related provisions.
This bill would become operative only if AB 194 is also enacted and becomes operative on or before January 1, 2016.
10/09/15 Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 702, Statutes of 2015.
This bill would include State Highway Route 43 as an eligible interregional and intercounty route.
10/09/15 Vetoed by Governor. Veto message: This bill adds Route 43 to the list of interregional routes, thereby making it eligible to compete for state interregional funds to cover the costs of capital improvement projects. However, Caltrans has determined that Route 43 is not an interregional route eligible for this funding. Therefore, I cannot sign this bill. A better alternative to funding improvements to Route 43 is to enact a long-term, sustainable transportation funding solution in the current special session.
This bill would authorize the commission to relinquish specified portions of Route 164 to the County of Los Angeles and to the City of South El Monte, under specified conditions.
10/07/15 Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 575, Statutes of 2015.
(11) Existing law prohibits a person operating a motor vehicle or a bicycle from wearing a headset covering both ears, or from wearing earplugs in both ears, subject to certain exceptions.
This bill would also prohibit wearing earphones covering, resting on, or inserted in, both ears. Because a violation of these provisions would be a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program.
(17) Existing law provides for the California Transportation Commission, except as otherwise provided by law, to adopt the location for a state highway on routes authorized by law. Existing law generally describes the various authorized routes in the state highway system, including Route 170 in the County of Los Angeles. Existing law also includes various state highway routes in the California freeway and expressway system.
This bill would revise the description of Route 170 to delete the unconstructed portion of this route between Los Angeles International Airport and Route 90 from both the state highway system and the California freeway and expressway system.
(18) Existing law gives the Department of Transportation full possession and control of all state highways. Existing law describes the authorized routes in the state highway system and establishes a process for adoption of a highway on an authorized route by the California Transportation Commission. Existing law authorizes the commission to relinquish certain state highway segments to local agencies. Existing law, with respect to certain relinquished former portions of Route 92, Route 185, and Route 238 in the City of Hayward, requires the city to maintain within its jurisdiction signs directing motorists to the continuation of those routes or to the state highway system, as applicable, and also requires the city to ensure the continuity of traffic flow, including any traffic signal progression.
This bill would revise the route description for Route 92, and delete the requirement for the City of Hayward to ensure the continuity of traffic flow, including any traffic signal progression, on relinquished former portions of Route 92, Route 185, and Route 238 within the city. The bill would also authorize the California Transportation Commission to relinquish to the city all or any portion of these routes within the city under certain terms and conditions, including a requirement for the city to maintain within its jurisdiction signs directing motorists to the continuation of each route or to the state highway system, as applicable.
(20) Existing law requires the driver of every motor vehicle who is involved in an accident that results in damage to the property of any one person in excess of $750, or in bodily injury, or in the death of a person, to report the accident to the Department of Motor Vehicles within 10 days after the accident, as specified. Under existing law that threshold amount of damages also serves as a condition, among others, for (A) the suspension of a judgment debtor’s driving privileges, as an aid in the enforcement of small claims or civil money judgments arising out of those accidents; and (B) the suspension or revocation of specified endorsements or certificates.
This bill, commencing January 1, 2017, would increase
the minimum property damage that is required to be reported to
$1,000. The bill would make conforming changes to those
related provisions described above.
10/02/15 Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter
451, Statutes of 2015.
This bill would, on and after January 1, 2017, prohibit the use of an elected leader or senior military officer of the Confederate States of America to name state or local property. The bill would require a name associated with the Confederate States of America used to name state or local property prior to January 1, 2017, to be changed and any sign associated with the name to be removed. The bill would prohibit its provisions from being construed to require the renaming of a city, county, or other political jurisdiction that was named after an elected leader or senior military officer of the Confederate States of America prior to January 1, 2016, or to be construed to require the renaming of any school, building, park, roadway, or other property that incorporates the name of the city, county, or political jurisdiction in which it is situated. By increasing the duties of local officials, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would also make a statement of legislative findings and a conforming change.
(2) The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.
This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates
determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state,
reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to these
statutory provisions.
10/11/15
Vetoed by the Governor. Veto Message: This bill
would prohibit the naming of any school, park, building or other
public property after certain persons associated with the Confederate
States of America. Recently we saw a national movement to remove the
confederate flag from State Capitols in the South - a long overdue
action. This bill, however, strikes me as different and an issue
quintessentially for local decision makers. As far as we know, only
two schools, and a street in Stockton would be affected by this law.
Existing local processes provide for the naming or re-naming of public
facilities, and in several cases local residents have voiced their
opposition and have succeeded in re-naming schools and other public
property. Local governments are laboratories of democracy which, under
most circumstances, are quite capable of deciding for themselves which
of their buildings and parks should be named, and after whom.
I checked the CTC Liaison page for the results of the CTC meetings from mid-September 2015 to the end of the year. This included the October and December meetings. Given the large number of items this period, I'm focusing more on the new items or significant changes, as opposed to funding amendments or implementing agency amendments. The following items were of interest (note: ° indicates items that were below the level of detail for updating the specific route pages) :
(Oct) (1) Request to: (a) Add 58 new projects into the 2014 SHOPP; (b)
Revise 58 projects currently programmed in the 2014 SHOPP; (c) Develop 9
Long Lead projects. Most of these were repairs, drought conservation
works, roadway rehabilitation, ADA curb construction, and so forth. The
following specific items were of interest: . [Approved]
(Dec) (1) Request to: (a) Add 43 new projects into the 2014 SHOPP. (b)
Revise 28 projects currently programmed in the 2014 SHOPP. (c) Develop 1
Long Lead project. Most of these were damage repairs, drought
conservation, facility repairs, mudslide repairs (such as the ones on I-5
(.5M) and Route 58 (2M)), repairs from wildfires, rumble strip
installation (Route 32, Route 20, Route 174, various locations) The
following specific items were of interest: . [Pending]
None
None
None
(Oct) (1) Approval of Projects for Future Consideration of Funding and
Route Adoption: [Approved.]
(Oct) (2) Approval of Project for Future Consideration of Funding:
04-SCl-680, PM 6.5/9.9, 04-Ala-680, PM 0.0/12.4 I-680 Northbound
HOV/Express Lane Project. Construct express lane facility on I-680 in
Santa Clara and Alameda Counties. (FEIR) (PPNOs 0177 and 0587E)
(TCRP/SHOPP) [Approved.]
(Oct) (3) Approval of Project for Future Consideration of Funding:
06-Ker-58, PM R143.5/R143.9, 08-SBd-58, PM 0.0/12.9 Route 58 Kramer
Junction Expressway Project. Widen and realign a portion of Route 58 in
Kern and San Bernardino Counties and construct new interchange with US 395. (FEIR) (PPNO 0215C) (STIP) [Approved.]
(Oct) (6) Approval of Project for Future Consideration of Funding and for
a New Public Road Connection: 04-Sol-80, PM 10.8/17.0, 04-Sol-680, PM
10.0/13.1, 04-Sol-12, PM 1.7/L2.8, 04-Sol-12, PM L1.8/4.8 I-80/I-680/Route 12 Interchange Project. Construct interchange improvements and relocate
the west bound truck scales on I-80 in Solano County. (FEIR) (PPNO 5301Q)
(STIP/TCIF) [Approved.]
(Dec) (1) Approval of Project for Future Consideration of Funding:
06-Mad-99, PM R7.5/15.1 Madera Route 99 Widening Project. (MND) (PPNO
5335) (STIP) [Approved]
(Oct) Route Adoption as a Controlled Access Highway: 08-SBd-58-PM
R0.0/R9.0 Route 58 From the Kern/San Bernardino county line to 3.7 miles
east of US 395. [Approved.]
(Oct) New Public Road Connection: 04-Sol-680-PM R11.1 - New Public Road
Connection to I-680 at Red Top Road, in the county of Solano. [Approved.]
(Oct) Relinquishment Resolutions: [Approved.]
(Dec) Relinquishment Resolutions: [Approved.]
None
(Oct) (1) Request of $46,851,000 for eight SHOPP projects as follows:
2.5b.(1a) $38,022,000 for four SHOPP projects; 2.5b.(1b) $8,829,000 for
four projects amended into the SHOPP. No particular items were of
interest; typical items included storm damage repair, roadway
rehabilitation, wildlife crossings; rock slope prevention; ADA ramps; and
rumble strips. [Approved.]
(Dec) (1) Request of $25,501,000 for five SHOPP projects as follows:
2.5b.(1a) $22,201,000 for three SHOPP projects. 2.5b.(1b) $ 3,300,000 for
two projects amended into the SHOPP. No particular items required site
changes: Pavement rehabilitation with rubberized asphalt on 07-VEN-101
R40.4/R43.6 In La Conchita, on US 101 from 0.6 mile north of Mobil Pier
Undercrossing to Santa Barbara County line and 11-SD-008 15.3/R21.6 In and
near El Cajon, on I-8 from Johnson Avenue to 0.2 mile west of Lake
Jennings Park Road; updating bridge rail treatments in San Diego; water
quality improvements in Presidio National Park near Route 1; and the
required environmental mitigation for the Route 84 Pigeon Pass project. [Approved.]
None of interest
(Oct) (3) Request for $55,200,000 for the State administered Route 46
Corridor Improvements Proposition 1B STIP project (PPNO 0226H) in San Luis
Obispo County. [Approved as modified.]
(Oct) Approval of the Interregional Transportation Strategic Plan (ITSP).
(Meeting Handouts – Letters from various local agencies.) [Approved,
per Staff recommendation as related to
non-substantive changes, as well as with
Commissioner Earp’s motion that Route 20,
Route 49 and State Route 74 between I-5 and
I-15 be included as priority routes.]
September has rolled around. Before we "fall" into Fall, it is time for another round of highway page updates... just in time for the new year!
Updates were made to the following highways, based on my reading of the papers (which are posted to the roadgeeking category at the "Observations Along The Road" and to the California Highways Facebook group) as well as any backed up email changes. I also reviewed the the AAroads forum, but as usual it contained no additional information beyond what I gleaned on my own. I've given up on misc.transport.road. This resulted in changes on the following routes, with credit as indicated [my research(0), contributions of information or leads (via direct mail) from Bob Flaminio(1), Lee Ivy(2), Steve Riner (3), Steve Sobol(4), Rochelle Stockman(5), Lewis Yee(6) ]: Route 1(0), I-5(0), Pre-1964 Route 7(3), I-10(0,6), Route 12(0), I-15(4), Route 25(0), Route 29(0),, Route 37(0), Route 39(0), Route 49(0), Route 55(0),, Route 56(0), Route 60(0), Route 74(0), Route 75(0), Route 78(0), I-80(0,5), Route 85(0), Route 91(0),, Route 99(0), US 101(0,2), Route 110(0), Route 114(1), Route 140(0), Route 108(0), I-215(0. 4,6), Route 237(0), I-280(0), I-405(0), I-580(0), I-605(0), I-680(0), Route 710(0).
Reviewed the Pending Legislation page, based on the new California Legislature site. As usual, I recommend to every Californian that they visit the legislative website regularly and see what their legis-critters are doing. Noted the passage of the following bills and resolutions:
This bill would instead require, on a 2-lane highway where passing is unsafe due to specified reasons, any vehicle proceeding upon the highway at a speed less than the normal speed of traffic moving in the same direction at that time, behind which 5 or more vehicles are formed in line, to turn off the roadway at the nearest place designated as a turnout or wherever sufficient area for a safe turnout exists.
09/04/15 Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 265, Statutes of 2015.
This bill would additionally require the department, until January 1, 2021, to allow the placement of information signs along Interstate 80 within, or at exits leading to, the City of Truckee.
08/11/15 Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 166, Statutes of 2015.
This bill would delete that provision and would provide that the Toll Bridge Program Oversight Committee is subject to the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act.
08/11/15 Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 172, Statutes of 2015.
Note also that a large number of bills and resolutions have been sent to the Governor, and were awaiting signature or veto. Those are detailed on the Legistlative Information page.
I checked the CTC Liaison page for the results of the CTC meetings from May 27, 2015 through mid-September 2015. This included the May, June, and August meetings. Given the large number of items this period, I'm focusing more on the new items or significant changes, as opposed to funding amendments or implementing agency amendments. The following items were of interest (note: ° indicates items that were below the level of detail for updating the specific route pages) :
(May) (1) The Department proposes to amend the 2014 STIP to revise the
project funding plans for two projects on the Route 138 Corridor in Los
Angeles County: Route 138 Widening, Segment 6 (PPNO 4356); and Route 138
Widening, Segment 13 (PPNO 4357). [Approved]
(May) (2) The Contra Costa Transportation Authority proposes to amend the
2014 STIP to delay $36,610,000 in RIP construction funds from FY 2015-16
to FY 2016-17 for the I-680/Route 4 Interchange - Phase 3 project (PPNO
0298E) in Contra Costa County. [Approved.]
(May) (19) The Department proposes to program $14,095,000 of Federal Safe,
Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for
Users (SAFETEA-LU) Border Infrastructure Program (BIP) funds and revise
the project funding plan and schedule for the Route 11 and Otay Mesa Port
of Entry projects, Segments 2 and 3 (PPNOs 0999B and 0999C) in San Diego
County. [Information only.]
None
(Jun) Submittal of Notice for Availability for Comments: 07-LA-710, PM
26.7/32.1T. Route 710 North Study. Study to alleviate congestion in the
north Route 710 area in Los Angeles County (DEIR) (EA 18790) [Approved,
Including the Pink Supplemental Item.]
(Aug) Submittal of Notice for Availability for Comments: 07-LA-710, PM
various Route 710 Surplus Property Sales. Sell surplus properties along
the proposed 710 Improvement Project in Los Angeles County. (DEIR) [Approved, as distributed in the Pink Meeting
Handout and per staff recommendation that the Commission has no comments
with respect to the DEIR’s purpose and need, the alternatives
studied and the evaluation methods used.]
(May) (3) Approval for Projects for Future Consideration of Funding: [Approved]
(Jun) (1) Approval of Projects for Future Consideration of Funding: [Approved.]
(Aug) (1) Future Consideration of Funding Resolutions: [Removed
from Consent Calendar and Approved. (Commissioner Assemi recused
himself.)]
(Aug) (2) Approval of Project for Future Consideration of Funding.
12-Ora-405, PM 9.3/24.2, 12-Ora-22, PM R0.7/R3.8, 12-Ora-22, PM R0.5/R0.7,
12-Ora-73, PM, R27.2/R27.8, 12-Ora-605, PM 3.5/R1.6, 07-LA-405, PM
0.0/1.2, 07-LA-605, PM R0.0/R1.2. San Diego Freeway (I-405) Improvement
Project. One Express Lane (Toll) and one general purpose lane in each
direction on a portion of I-405 in Orange and Los Angeles Counties.
(FEIR)(PPNO 5054)(SHOPP) [The Commission
accepted the environmental document, Statement of Overriding
Considerations and Findings of Fact and approve the project for future
consideration of funding.]
None
(May) Five Relinquishment Resolutions: [Approved.]
(Jun) Four Relinquishment Resolutions: [Approved.]
(Aug) Relinquishment Resolutions: [Approved.]
(May) Two Vacation Resolutions: [Approved.]
(Aug) Vacation Resolutions: [Approved.]
(May) (1) Financial Allocation: $101,698,000 for 35 SHOPP projects, as
follows: $56,961,000 for 18 SHOPP projects; $44,737,000 for 17 projects
amended into the SHOPP by Departmental action. Noted the following items
of particular interest: [Approved.]
(May) (2) Advance Financial Allocation: $8,784,000 for three SHOPP
projects, programmed in FY 2015-16, on the State Highway System. This
consisted of the following: [Approved.]
(Jun) (1) Financial Allocation: $433,044,000 for 47 SHOPP projects, as
follows: $194,465,000 for 27 SHOPP projects. $238,579,000 for 20 projects
amended into the SHOPP by Departmental action. This consisted of the
following: [Approved, as modified.]
(Jun) (2) Advance Financial Allocation: $8,519,000 for two SHOPP projects,
programmed in FY 2015-16, on the State Highway System. This consisted of
the following: [Approved.]
(Aug) (1) Request of
$852,571,000 $848,979,000 for
109 108 SHOPP projects, programmed in FY 14-15, as
follows: 2.5b.(1a) $313,071,000 for 47 SHOPP projects. 2.5b.(1b) $539,481,000
$535,889,000 for 62 61 projects amended
into the SHOPP by Departmental action. [Approved,
as modified.]
►Under Book Item Attachment for 2.5b.(1b) - Project 25 (PPNO 05-4900) Withdrawn prior to the CTC Meeting. (Revisions to Book Item Attachment for 2.5b.(1b) for: Project 24 (PPNO 04-166C), Project 59 (PPNO 12-2530G), Project 60 (PPNO 12-2864B) and Project 62 (PPNO 4928B).)
(Aug) (2) Request of $108,499,000 for nine SHOPP projects, programmed in
FY 15-16, as follows: 2.5b.(2a) $21,716,000 for six SHOPP projects.
2.5b.(2b) $86,783,000 for three projects amended into the SHOPP by
Departmental action, prior to July 1, 2015. [Approved.]
(Aug) (4) Request of $1,238,000 for the federal earmarked Interstate Maintenance Discretionary Program. Colfax truck climbing lane project on
I-80 (PPNO 5067) in Placer County. [Approved.]
(May) (1) Financial Allocation: $17,715,000 for the State administered
Route 10 HOV lanes from Citrus Street to Route 57 (PPNO 0310B) STIP
project in Los Angeles County, on the State Highway System. [Approved.]
° (May) (2) Financial Allocation: $85,000 for two locally administered STIP
projects, on the State Highway System. Both projects were sidewalk and
gutter repairs on Route 203. [Approved.]
(May) (4) Advance Financial Allocation: $15,000,000 for the locally
administered I-80/San Pablo Dam Interchange – Phase 1 (PPNO 0242J)
STIP project in Contra Costa County, programmed in FY 2015-16, on the
State Highway System. Contributions from other sources: $6,227,000. [Approved per staff recommendation.]
(Jun) (1) Financial Allocation: $23,847,000 for three State administered
STIP projects, on the State Highway System. $19,690,000 was for the I-5
Carpool Lane-Orange CL to I-605 (Segment 2). In La Mirada, from Artesia
Boulevard to Coyote Creek Overcrossing. Contributions from other sources:
$173,000,000. [Approved, as modified.]
(Jun) (2) Financial Allocation: $450,000 for the locally administered
Route 46/Union Road Intersection Improvements (PPNO 2528) STIP project in
San Luis Obispo County, on the State Highway System. [Approved.]
(Jun) (4a) Advance Financial Allocation: $21,278,000 for two State
administered STIP projects, programmed in FY 2015-16, on the State Highway
System. Contributions from other sources: $752,000. This included widening
on Route 99. [Approved, as modified.]
° (Aug) (2) Request of $95,000 for the locally administered I-680 Sound
Walls – Capitol Expressway to Mueller (PPNO 0521C) STIP project in
Santa Clara County, on the State Highway System. [Approved.]
(May) [4.7] Trade Corridors Improvement Fund Program: Add Project 109
– I-10 Pepper Interchange Improvement Project; Add Project 110 -
Hellman Avenue Grade Crossing Improvements. [Approved.]
(May) [4.8] Trade Corridors Improvement Fund Program: Approve the Baseline
Agreement for Project 109 – I-10 Pepper Interchange Improvement
Project [Approved.]
This has been a busy busy year, with most weekends taken up by theatre and theatre reviews (if you didn't know, I see lots of theatre and review every show I see; you can find all the reviews in the "reviews" category on my blog). But Memorial Day weekend is the perfect time to catch up on things. So put something on to slow-cook on the barbeque, and let's dig in:
Updates were made to the following highways, based on my reading of the papers (which are posted to the roadgeeking category at the "Observations Along The Road" and to the California Highways Facebook group) as well as any backed up email changes. I also reviewed the the AAroads forum, but as usual it contained no additional information beyond what I gleaned on my own. I've given up on misc.transport.road. This resulted in changes on the following routes, with credit as indicated [my research(1), contributions of information or leads (via direct mail) from Ronald Hall(2), Ray Mullins(1), and Joel Windmiller(3)]: Route 1(1), Route 12(1), Route 16(2), Route 33(1), Route 64(1), Route 68(1), I-80(1), Route 84(1), Route 85(1), Route 92(1), US 101(1), Route 110(1), Route 118(1), Route 138(1), Route 148(1,3), I-215(1), Route 237(1), Route 241(1), I-280(1), Route 282(1), I-405(1), I-680(1), I-710(1), Santa Clara County Sign Route G2(1), Santa Clara County Sign Route G4(1).
Reviewed the Pending Legislation page, based on the new California Legislature site. As usual, I recommend to every Californian that they visit the legislative website regularly and see what their legis-critters are doing. No items had passed yet.
I checked the CTC Liaison page for the results of the CTC meetings from January through May 26, 2015. I lucked out -- the May meeting was May 28, so I only had January and March to deal with. The following items were of interest (note: ° indicates items that were below the level of detail for updating the specific route pages) :
(Mar) (1) The Department proposes to amend the 2014 STIP to revise the
project funding plans for two projects on the Route 138 Corridor in Los
Angeles County: Route 138 Widening, Segment 6 (PPNO 4356); and Route 138
Widening, Segment 13 (PPNO 4357). [Information
only.]
(Mar) (2) The Contra Costa Transportation Authority proposes to amend the
2014 STIP to delay $36,610,000 in RIP construction funds from FY 2015-16
to FY 2016-17 for the I-680/Route 4 Interchange Phase 3 project (PPNO
0298E) in Contra Costa County. [Information
only.]
(Jan) Submittal of Notice of Preparation for Comments: 04-Son-1, PM
15.1/15.8, Gleason Beach Route 1 Realignment Project. Construct roadway
improvements including realigning a portion of Route 1 in Sonoma County [Approved.]
(Mar) (1) Submittal of Notice of Preparation for Comments: 03-ED-50, PM
67.3. Echo Summit Bridge Project: Rehabilitate or replace the Echo Summit
Sidehill Viaduct on US 50 in El Dorado County (NOP) [Approved.]
(Mar) (2) Submittal of Notice of Preparation for Comments: 07-LA-710, PM
Various. Route 710 Surplus Property Sales. Sale of surplus property along
Route 710 in Los Angeles County (all north of I-10) (NOP) [Approved.]
(Jan) Submittal of Notice for One Document Available for Comments: (DEIR):
04-SCl-680, PM 6.5/9.9, 04-ALA-680, 0.0/12.4. I-680 Northbound HOV/Express
Lane Project: Construct a HOV/Express Lane on a portion of I-680 in Santa
Clara and Alameda Counties. (DEIR) [Approved.]
(Jan) (1) Approval of Projects for Future Consideration of Funding: [Approved.]
(1) (Mar) Approval of Projects for Future Consideration of Funding: [Approved.]
(Mar) One Route Adoption: A Route Adoption as a freeway at 04-SF-80-PM
4.7/8.9, 04-Ala-80-PM 0.0/0.1: On Route 80 from 0.1 mile east of 5th
Street to the Alameda County line, in the city and county of San Francisco
and from the Alameda County line to 1.7 miles west of W. Grand Avenue in
Alameda County. [This is interesting -- it appears Caltrans discovered
they had never formally adopted the routing for Route 80 in San
Francisco.] [Approved.]
(Jan) One Relinquishment Resolution: 04-Sol-80-PM 20.9: Right of way along
Route 80 on Manuel Campos Parkway, in the city of Fairfield. [Approved.]
(Mar) Four Relinquishment Resolutions: [Approved.]
None
(Jan) (1) Financial Allocation: $112,561,000 for 17 SHOPP projects, as
follows: (a) $67,859,000 for 12 SHOPP projects; (b) $44,702,000 for five
projects amended into the SHOPP by Departmental action. Most of the
projects were of the minor variety -- landscape, pavement rehabilitation,
slope rehabilitation, and other forms of maintenance that do not affect
routing. Specific projects/allocations of interest are noted below: [Approved, as modified.]
(Mar) (1) Financial Allocation: $128,229,000 for 50 SHOPP projects, as
follows: (a) $77,757,000 for 23 SHOPP projects; (b) $50,472,000 for 27
projects amended into the SHOPP by Departmental action. Most of the
projects were of the minor variety -- landscape, pavement rehabilitation,
slope rehabilitation, guard rail installation, painting, sealing decks,
upgrading irrigation, replacing signs and lighting, and other forms of
maintenance that do not affect routing. Specific projects/allocations of
interest are noted below: [Approved.]
(Mar) (1) Financial Allocation: $59,569,000 for four State administered
STIP projects, on the State Highway System. Contributions from other
sources: $11,181,000. Projects not mentioned related to landscaping.
Specific projects/allocations of interest are noted below: [Approved.]
(Mar) (2) Financial Allocation: $5,500,000 for the locally administered US 395 Widening (PPNO 0260J) STIP project, in San Bernardino County, on the
State Highway System. Contributions from other sources: $5,019,000. [Approved.]
(Jan) (1) Financial Allocation: $5,526,000 in supplemental STIP funds for
construction engineering for the Route 101 Marin Sonoma Narrows –
Petaluma Boulevard South Interchange and Petaluma River Bridge project
(PPNO 0360H), in Sonoma County. The current construction engineering
budget is $12,190,000. This request for $5,526,000 results in an increase
of 45.3 percent over the current budget for construction engineering. [Approved, as distributed in the Yellow Meeting
Handout at the meeting.]
(Jan) (5b) Financial Allocation: $22,657,000 for State administered
multi-funded Proposition 1B TCIF/BIP Project 104 (Route 905/Route 125
Northbound Connectors [PPNO 1101]), in San Diego County. [Approved.]
FREQUENTLY USED TERMS IN CTC MINUTES: California Transportation Commission (Commission or CTC), California Department of Transportation (Department or Caltrans), Regional Improvement Program (RIP), Interregional Improvement Program (IIP), State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), State Highway Operation and Protection Program (SHOPP), Traffic Congestion Relief Program (TCRP), Public Transportation Account (PTA), Clean Air and Transportation Improvement Act of 1990 (Proposition 116), High Speed Passenger Train Bond Program (Proposition 1A), Highway Safety, Traffic Re-duction, Air Quality, and Port Security Bond Act of 2006 (Proposition 1B), Corridor Mobility Improvement Account (CMIA), State Route 99 Bond Program (RTE or SR 99), Local Bridge Seismic Retrofit Account (LBSRA), Trade Corridors Improvement Fund (TCIF), Highway-Railroad Crossing Safety Account (HRCSA), State-Local Partnership Program (SLPP), Traffic Light Synchronization Program (TLSP), Letter of No Prejudice (LONP), Environmental Phase (PA&ED), Design Phase (PS&E), Right of Way (R/W), Fiscal Year (FY)
© 1996-2020 Daniel P.
Faigin.
Maintained by: Daniel P. Faigin <webmaster@cahighways.org>.