Changes to the California Highways Website: September – December 2017

We’ve come to the end of another year, with many promises broken (where is that Infrastructure bill again?), some kept (SB1 seems to be working), and some satisfied only as an illusion. But, if you want politics, you go to my blog. If you want highway stuff with more facts and less opinion, you come to the main pages. Speaking of the main pages, a thought has begun to crop into my head: I need to do a bit of remodeling. I’m “old school”, working off hard-coded HTML, minimal style sheets, and information generated through perl scripts. I’d like to bring the page frameworks into something more responsive, and something that will work better for mobile devices. I’d also like to move any internal site references to HTTPS if possible (and if Westhost gets the certificate stuff straightened out). I don’t really need HTTPS, but being a cybersecurity professional, my site should probably use it even though there is no real risk to mitigate. Not to mention that I don’t want browsers flagging my site as insecure or dangerous, because they can’t understand the context or the purpose of a site. In any case, if readers have pointers to sites I should peruse to learn how to do this, please let me know.

Moving on to the 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. This resulted in changes on the following routes, with credit as indicated [my research(1), contributions of information or leads (via direct mail) from andy3175/AARoads(2), Tom Fearer​/​Max Rockatansky/AARoads(3), Kniwt/AARoads(4), Sparker/AARoads(5): Route 1(1,3), US 6(5), I-10(1), Route 14(1), I-15(1), Route 26(1), Route 27(1), Route 29(1), Route 33(3), Route 37(1), Route 39(1), Route 41(1,3), Route 46(1), Route 49(1), US 50(5), Route 51/Business Route 80(2), Route 58(3), Route 63(1,3), Route 64(1), Route 66(3), Route 67(1), Route 68(3), Route 70(1), Route 74(1), Route 75(3), Route 79(1), I-80(1,2), Route 91(1), Route 99(1,3), US-101(1,3), LRN 117(3), Route 120(1), Route 121(1), Route 123(1),LRN 134(3), Route 137(1,3), Route 152(1,3), Route 156(3), Route 168(4,5), Route 180(3), I-205(3), I-210(1), Route 216(3), Route 233(3), Route 241(1), I-280(1), Southern Crossing / I-380(1); I-580(3), I-680(1), I-710(1), County Route J1(3), and Los Angeles County Route N1(1).

Added links from Challenger66’s posts on the “Sure, Why Not?” blog to the appropriate pages: Route 1, Route 24, Route 25, Route 41, Route 43, Route 58, Route 63, Route 65, Route 66, Route 68, Route 75, Route 99, US 101, Route 137, Route 140, Route 152, Route 156, Route 180, Route 183, Route 201, Route 204, I-205, Route 216, Route 218, Route 233, I-580, County Route G16, County Route G17, County Route G20, County Route J1, County Route J21. Thanks to Challenger (cough) Max (cough) Tom (cough) Whatever your name is today for putting these up.

Moved all the historic route designations to the proper sections.

Fixed the links to the various resolution archives in the chronology. A tip of the hat to James White, Senior Transportation Surveyor, in Caltrans District 7 for catching that the websites had moved.

Added a question to the FAQ to provide links to sites to see how highway money is being spent.

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. I noted the passage/veto of the following bills and resolutions (for some of these, I’ve highlighted key phrases in red):

  • AB 333 (Quirk) State Highway Route 185: relinquishment: County of Alameda.
    Existing law authorizes the commission to relinquish all or a portion of Route 185 in the City of Hayward to the city, as specified.This bill would additionally authorize the commission to relinquish all or a portion of Route 185 in the unincorporated area of the County of Alameda to that county, as specified.
    09/28/17 Chaptered by Secretary of State – Chapter 339, Statutes of 2017.
  • AB 515 (Frazier) State Highway System Management Plan.
    Existing law requires the Department of Transportation to prepare the State Highway Operation and Protection Program for the expenditure of transportation capital improvement funds for projects that are necessary to preserve and protect the state highway system, excluding projects that add new traffic lanes. Existing law requires the State Highway Operation and Protection Program to be based on an asset management plan prepared by the department, and requires the department to submit the proposed State Highway Operation and Protection Program to the California Transportation Commission by January 31 of each even-numbered year for adoption by the commission and submittal by the commission to the Governor and Legislature by April 1 of each even-numbered year.Existing law requires the Department of Transportation to prepare a 10-year state highway rehabilitation plan for the rehabilitation and reconstruction by the State Highway Operation and Protection Program of all state highways and bridges owned by the state. This plan is required to be submitted by the department to the commission for review and comments by January 31 of each odd-numbered year, and then transmitted by the department to the Governor and Legislature by May 1 of each odd-numbered year. Existing law also requires the department to prepare a 5-year maintenance plan that addresses the maintenance needs of the state highway system, limited to maintenance activities that if not performed, could result in increased State Highway Operation and Protection Program costs in the future. Existing law requires the maintenance plan to be submitted by the department to the commission, the Governor, and the Legislature by January 31 of each odd-numbered year. Existing law provides that these plans shall be the basis for, among other things, the department’s budget request.

    This bill would require the department to prepare a draft State Highway System Management Plan, which would consist both of the 10-year state highway rehabilitation plan and the 5-year maintenance plan. The bill would require the department to make the draft of its proposed State Highway System Management Plan available to regional transportation agencies for review and comment, and would require the department to include and respond to the comments in the final plan to the commission by February 15 of each odd-numbered year. The bill would require the department to transmit the final State Highway System Management Plan to the Governor and Legislature by June 1 of each odd-numbered year.
    09/27/17 Chaptered by Secretary of State – Chapter 314, Statutes of 2017.

  • AB 544 (Bloom) Vehicles: high-occupancy vehicle lanes.
    Existing federal law authorizes, until September 30, 2019, a state to allow low emission and energy-efficient vehicles, as specified, to use lanes designated for high-occupancy vehicles (HOVs). Existing federal law also authorizes, until September 30, 2025, a state to allow alternative fuel vehicles, as defined, and new qualified plug-in electric drive motor vehicles, as defined, to use those HOV lanes.Existing state law authorizes the Department of Transportation to designate certain lanes for the exclusive use of HOVs. Existing law also authorizes super ultra-low emission vehicles (SULEV), ultra-low emission vehicles (ULEV), advanced technology partial zero-emission vehicles (AT PZEV), or transitional zero-emission vehicles (TZEV), as specified, that display a valid identifier issued by the Department of Motor Vehicles to use these HOV lanes until January 1, 2019, or until the date federal authorization expires, or until the Secretary of State receives a specified notice, whichever occurs first. Existing law makes the use by a driver of an HOV lane without those identifiers a crime. Existing law requires the Department of Transportation to remove individual HOV lanes, or portions of those lanes, during peak periods of congestion from access by vehicles displaying the identifiers if the department makes specified findings.

    This bill would extend the authority of drivers of specified vehicles to use HOV lanes until the date federal authorization expires, or until the Secretary of State receives a specified notice, whichever occurs first. The bill would authorize the Department of Motor Vehicles to issue other identifiers until the date federal authorization expires, or until the Secretary of State receives a certain notice, whichever occurs first.

    The bill would make certain existing identifiers valid until January 1, 2019, would make certain identifiers issued on or after January 1, 2019, valid until January 1, 2022, and would make other identifiers issued on or after January 1, 2019, valid until January 1 of the 4th year after the year in which they were issued, as specified. The bill would make vehicles that have been issued an identifier before January 1, 2017, ineligible for those identifiers issued on and after 2017. The bill would additionally condition eligibility for the identifiers on the applicant not having received a rebate pursuant to the Clean Vehicle Rebate Project for a vehicle purchased on or after January 1, 2018, unless the applicant meets certain income restrictions. The bill would provide that if these provisions become inoperative, the driver of a vehicle with an otherwise valid decal, label, or other identifier would not be cited for a violation of the HOV lane provisions within 60 days of the date that those provisions became inoperative. The bill would make additional conforming changes.

    The bill would repeal these provisions on September 30, 2025.
    10/10/17 Chaptered by Secretary of State – Chapter 630, Statutes of 2017.

  • AB 696 (Caballero) Department of Transportation: Prunedale Bypass: County of Monterey: disposition of excess properties.
    Existing law provides that the Department of Transportation has full possession and control of the state highway system and associated property. Existing law generally requires proceeds from the sale of excess state highway property to be made available for other highway purposes. Existing law generally provides for the California Transportation Commission to program available funding for transportation capital projects, other than state highway rehabilitation projects, through the State Transportation Improvement Program process, with available funds subject to various fair share distribution formulas. Existing law, in certain cases, requires the commission to instead reallocate funds from canceled state highway projects to other projects within the same county and exempts those funds from the fair share distribution formulas that would otherwise be applicable.This bill would require the net proceeds from the sale of any excess properties originally acquired for a replacement alignment for State Highway Route 101 in the County of Monterey, known as the former Prunedale Bypass, to be reserved in the State Highway Account for programming and allocation by the commission, with the concurrence of the Transportation Agency for Monterey County, for other state highway projects in the State Highway Route 101 corridor in that county, including, but not limited to, the construction of four express lanes on State Highway Route 156, a major freight and regional corridor, identified by the Governor as a key California infrastructure project in his letter of February 7, 2017, to the National Governors Association, and improvements to the State Highway Route 101 Corridor. The bill would exempt these funds from the distribution formulas otherwise applicable to transportation capital improvement funds.
    10/04/17 Vetoed by Governor. Veto Message: In 2016, I vetoed AB 2730, a virtually identical bill. My reasons then were: These revenues are used to pay existing debt service on transportation construction projects statewide, which is an important purpose. Maintaining this funding stream to the General Fund is even more necessary when the state’s budget remains precariously balanced. That is still my view.
  • AB 857 (Ting) State highways: property leases.
    Existing law provides that the Department of Transportation has full possession and control of the state highway system, including associated property. Existing law authorizes the department to lease certain property, including the area above or below a state highway, and certain property held for future highway purposes, to public agencies under specified terms and conditions, including specific provisions governing leases of airspace and other property in the City and County of San Francisco for purposes of an emergency shelter or feeding program, at a lease cost of $1 per month and payment of an administrative fee not to exceed $500 per year.This bill would revise the provisions governing leases of department property in the City and County of San Francisco under these financial terms to require that a lease be offered on a right of first refusal by the department to the city and county or a political subdivision of the city and county and would also authorize leases of property for park, recreational, or open-space purposes, subject to certain additional terms and conditions, including a requirement for the department to lease property located within a priority development area, as defined, to the city and county for up to 10 parcels, at a specified below market value lease amount, and a requirement, applicable to all leases, for the lessee to be responsible for all associated maintenance costs. The bill would provide for the lease to authorize the lessee to subsidize its maintenance costs through a limited revenue generation model, with any revenues generated above the maintenance costs to be shared with the state, as specified. The bill would require the city and county or a political subdivision of the city and county, in consultation with the department, to follow all applicable health, environmental, safety, design, and engineering standards.
    10/15/17 Chaptered by Secretary of State – Chapter 822, Statutes of 2017.
  • AB 1094 (Choi) Vehicles: automated traffic enforcement systems.
    Existing law requires a driver facing a steady circular red signal alone to stop at a marked limit line, but if none, before entering the crosswalk on the near side of the intersection or, if none, then before entering the intersection, and to remain stopped until an indication to proceed is shown, except as specified. Existing law makes it unlawful for a driver to enter or travel in any lane over which a red signal is shown. A violation of those provisions is an infraction punishable by a fine of $100.Existing law defines an “official traffic control signal” as any device, whether manually, electrically, or mechanically operated, by which traffic is alternately directed to stop and proceed and which is erected by authority of a public body or official having jurisdiction.

    Existing law states that any required stop be made at a sign, crosswalk, or limit line indicating where the stop is to be made, but, in the absence of that sign or marking, existing law requires that the stop be made at the official traffic control signal.

    This bill would also require a stop to be made at an official traffic control signal erected and maintained at a freeway or highway on ramp. The bill would also make technical, nonsubstantive changes to that provision.
    10/07/17 Chaptered by Secretary of State – Chapter 555, Statutes of 2017.

  • AB 1172 (Acosta) State highways: relinquishment.
    Existing law provides that the Department of Transportation has 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 to local agencies state highway segments that have been deleted from the state highway system by legislative enactment or have been superseded by relocation, and in certain other cases.This bill would authorize the commission to relinquish to the City of Santa Clarita all or any portion of Sierra Highway, also known as Route 14U, located within the city limits of that city, upon terms and conditions the commission finds to be in the best interests of the state, if the department and the city enter into an agreement providing for that relinquishment. The bill would make legislative findings and declarations.
    09/28/17 Chaptered by Secretary of State – Chapter 351, Statutes of 2017.
  • ACR 88 (Cunningham) Charles I. Walter Memorial Highway.
    Designates the portion of Route 1 from Kansas Avenue (post mile 20.890) to Canet Road (post mile 25.580) in the County of San Luis Obispo as the “Charles I. Walter Memorial Highway“.
    from Kansas Avenue (post mile 20.890) to Canet Road (post mile 25.580) in the County of San Luis Obispo as the “Charles I. Walter Memorial Highway“.
    09/07/17 Chaptered by Secretary of State – Res. Chapter 140, Statutes of 2017.
  • SB 400 (Portantino) Highways: surplus residential property.
    Existing law authorizes the Department of Transportation to acquire real property for state highway purposes and specifies various procedures to be followed by the department when it determines that real property acquired for state highway purposes is no longer necessary for those purposes.Existing law declares the intent of the Legislature to preserve, upgrade, and expand the supply of current housing to persons or families of low or moderate income through the sale of specified surplus residential property. Existing law requires an agency of the state disposing of surplus residential property to do so in accordance with specified priorities and procedures, including that priority to purchase be given to tenants that are former owners or are persons or families of low or moderate income.

    This bill would, until January 1, 2020, prohibit the Department of Transportation from increasing the rent of tenants who reside in surplus residential property located within the Route 710 corridor in the County of Los Angeles and who participate in the Affordable Rent Program administered by the department.

    10/07/17 Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 568, Statutes of 2017.

  • SB 406 (Leyva) Vehicles: high-occupancy vehicle lanes: exceptions.
    Existing law authorizes the Department of Transportation and local authorities to designate certain highway lanes for the exclusive or preferential use of high-occupancy vehicles (HOVs), requires the department or local authorities to place signage advising motorists of the rules governing the use of those lanes, and prohibits the use of those lanes by motorists other than in conformity with the posted rules. Existing law provides a limited exemption allowing motorcycles, mass transit vehicles, and paratransit vehicles to use HOV lanes.This bill would provide an exemption to allow for blood transport vehicles, as defined, to use HOV lanes, regardless of the number of occupants, however, they are not exempt from tolls. The bill would require certain conditions be met for the new exemption to be operative, including requiring the Director of Transportation to determine that the exemption would not result in a loss of federal funds or conflict with federal law, as specified, and requiring the director to post that determination on the Department of Transportation’s Internet Web site.
    09/30/17Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 392, Statutes of 2017.
  • SB 595 (Beall) Metropolitan Transportation Commission: toll bridge revenues: Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority: high-occupancy toll lanes.
    (2) Existing law authorizes the BATA to vary the toll structure on each of the bay area state-owned toll bridges and to provide discounts for vehicles classified by the BATA as high-occupancy vehicles.

    This bill would additionally authorize the BATA to provide discounts for vehicles that pay for tolls electronically or through other non-cash methods and to charge differential rates based on the chosen method.

    This bill, with respect to the Regional Measure 3 toll increase, would require the BATA to provide a 50% discount on the amount of that toll increase on the 2nd bridge crossing for those commuters using a two-axle vehicle, who cross 2 bridges during commute hours, as specified.

    Existing law, if the BATA establishes high-occupancy vehicle lane fee discounts or access for vehicles classified by the BATA as high-occupancy vehicles for any bridge, requires the BATA to collaborate with the Department of Transportation to reach agreement on how the occupancy requirements shall apply on each segment of highway that connects with that bridge.

    This bill would instead require the BATA to establish those occupancy requirements in consultation with the department.

    (4) Existing law authorizes the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) to conduct, administer, and operate a value pricing high-occupancy toll (HOT) lane program on 2 corridors included in the high-occupancy vehicle lane system in Santa Clara County. Existing law authorizes a HOT lane established as part of this program on State Highway Route 101 to extend into the County of San Mateo as far as the high-occupancy lane in the County of San Mateo existed as of January 1, 2011, subject to agreement of the City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County.

    This bill would delete the authorization for a HOT lane to extend into the specified portion of San Mateo County as part of a value pricing program established on 2 corridors in Santa Clara County. The bill would instead authorize VTA to specifically conduct, administer, and operate a value pricing high-occupancy toll lane program on State Highway Route 101 in San Mateo County in coordination with the City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County and the San Mateo County Transportation Authority, as prescribed.
    10/10/17 Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 650, Statutes of 2017.

  • SCR 8 (Portantino) President Barack H. Obama Memorial Highway.
    Designates the portion of Route 134 from Route 2 to I-210 in Los Angeles County as the “President Barack H. Obama Highway“.
    09/11/17 Chaptered by Secretary of State. Res. Chapter 147, Statutes of 2017.
  • SCR 56 (Anderson) Historic Highway Route 67.
    Designates Route 67 in the County of San Diego as “Historic Highway Route 67
    09/22/17 Chaptered by Secretary of State. Res. Chapter 177, Statutes of 2017.
  • SCR 60 (Nguyen) Lieutenant Colonel Nguyen Thi Hanh Nhon’s Disabled Veterans Memorial Highway.
    Designates the portion of I-405 northbound in the County of Orange between Magnolia Street, approximately postmile 405 ORA 15.210, and Brookhurst Street, approximately postmile 405 ORA 13.780, as the “Lt. Colonel Nguyen Thi Hanh Nhon’s Disabled Veterans Memorial Highway“.
    09/22/17 Chaptered by Secretary of State. Res. Chapter 178, Statutes of 2017.

I checked the CTC Liaison page for the results of the CTC meetings from September 2017 through December 2017 (i.e., October (AgendaDirectory) and December (AgendaDirectory)). The following items were of interest (note: ° indicates items that were below the level of detail for updating the specific route pages; ♠ is an indicator used to keep track of what has been added to the pages) :

2.1a. STIP Program/Project Amendments

♠ (Oct) (1) Request to: (•) Add 36 new projects into the 2016 SHOPP totaling $192,347,000; (•) Add 90 new projects from the 2018 SHOPP advanced for programming due to SB 1 totaling $846,433,000; (•) Revise 12 projects currently programmed in the 2016 SHOPP. (•) Develop 3 Long Lead projects. // Approved, as modified

Most of these projects were road rehabilitation, environmental mitigation, repairs, straightforward bridge replacements to current standards, resurfacing, safety improvements, culvert repair, etc., that are not at the level of interest for the highway pages. This doesn’t make them any less important or of interest; rather, the highway pages focus on significant widenings, route changes, and such. Changes in place that are part of what might be normal maintenance are below the level of page interest. The following did result in page changes:

  • 02-Sha-44 51.6/52.2: On Route 44 in Shasta County: Near Viola, from 0.4 mile east to 1.1 mile east of Bridge Creek Road. Improve curve.
  • 03-But-70 5.6/8.8: On Route 70 in Butte County: Near Oroville, from 0.3 mile north of Cox Lane to south of Palermo Road. Widen for two-way left-turn lane and standard shoulders, and provide a roadside clear recovery zone.
  • 03-But-70 8.8/11.8: On Route 70 in Butte County: Near Oroville, from south of Palermo Road to north of Ophir Road. Widen for two-way left-turn lane and standard shoulders, and provide a roadside clear recovery zone.
  • 08-Riv-10 R60.9/R74.0: On I-10 in Riverside County: In and near Coachella, from 0.5 mile east of Coachella Canal to Hazy Gulch Bridge. Cold plane pavement and overlay with Portland Cement Concrete (PCC). Construct eastbound truck climbing lane. A one-lane temporary detour will be constructed in the median for traffic handling.
  • 04-SCl-237 7.0/8.0: On Route 237 in Santa Clara County: In San Jose, in the westbound direction from Zanker Road to North First Street. Construct auxiliary lane.
  • 08-SBD-60 R7.3/R10.0: On Route 60 in San Bernardino County: In Ontario, from Haven Avenue to Milliken Avenue/Hamner Avenue. Construct auxiliary lane and widen connector and ramps.
  • 05-SLO-1 0.0/0.3: On Route 1 in San Luis Obispo County: Near Guadalupe, at the Santa Maria River Bridge No. 49 -0042; also in Santa Barbara County (PM 50.3/50.6). The bridge is scour critical and needs to be replaced. The existing bridge will be used for traffic handling during construction and then demolished. The highway will need to be realigned as a result of the new bridge location. The new bridge will provide standard lane and shoulder widths and include a protected walkway.

♠ (Oct) (3) The Department and the Kern County Council of Governments propose to de-program $3,942,000 in TCRP funding from Project 113 – Route 46 Expressway Phase 4A project and update the funding plan. (PPNO 3386C) // Approved.

♠ (Dec) (1) SHOPP Amendments for Approval: Request to: (•) Add 22 new projects into the 2016 SHOPP totaling $89,043,000; (•) Revise 96 projects currently programmed in the 2016 SHOPP. // Approved.

Most of these projects were road rehabilitation, environmental mitigation, repairs, straightforward bridge replacements to current standards, resurfacing, safety improvements, culvert repair, etc., that are not at the level of interest for the highway pages (this collection included quite a bit of fire damage repair). This doesn’t make them any less important or of interest; rather, the highway pages focus on significant widenings, route changes, and such. Changes in place that are part of what might be normal maintenance are below the level of page interest. The following did result in page changes:

  • 03-But-70 0.0/3.8: On Route 70, in Butte County: Near Oroville, from Yuba County Line to south of East Gridley Road/Stimpson Road; also, in Yuba County on Route 70 from PM 25.7 to PM 25.8. Widen for two-way left-turn lane and standard shoulders.
  • 03-YUB-20 R18.0/20.3: On Route 20 in Yuba County: Near Smartsville, from the Yuba River Bridge to east of Smartsville Road. Realign and widen roadway.
  • 05-SCR-129 1.4: On Route 129 in Santa Cruz County: Near Watsonville, at Lakeview Road. Construct roundabout and improve street lighting.

2.1b. STIP Program/Project Amendments/Approvals for Notice

♠ (Dec) (2) The Contra Costa County Transportation Authority, in concurrence with the Metropolitan Transportation Commission, proposes to program an AB 3090 cash reimbursement project (PPNO 0222F) in order to use local funds for construction of the I-680 Southbound High Occupancy Vehicle Lane Completion project (PPNO 0222E) in Contra Costa County, with later reimbursement over a three year period beginning in FY 2019-20 // Information only.

♠ (Dec) (3) The Department proposes to amend the Route 11 Highway and Commercial Vehicle Enforcement Facility project – Segment 2 (PPNO 0999B) in San Diego County to replace a portion of the local funds with a federal grant (FAST Act) and segment the project into Segment 2 (PPNO 0999B) and Segment 2A (PPNO 0999D); with Segment 2A being delivered in FY 2017-18. The Department also proposes to program $3,350,000 of SAFETEA-LU Border Infrastructure Program funds to the new Segment 2A. // Information only.

♠ (Dec) (4) The Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA), on behalf of the City of Brea (City), proposes to program an AB 3090 cash reimbursement project (PPNO 3834A) in order to use local funds to replace $9,000,000 of Regional Improvement Program (RIP) funds programmed in FY 2019-20 for the Right of Way component of the Route 57/Lambert Road Interchange Improvements project (PPNO 3834) in Orange County. OCTA and the City are requesting reimbursement in FY 2018-19. // Information only.

2.2a. Submittal of Notice of Preparation for Comments

No Items / No Items of Interest in the Review Period.

2.2b. Submittal of Notice of Documents Available for Comment (DEIRs)

♠ (Oct) Comments on Documents in Circulation: 07-LA-710, PM 5.4/24.5 I-710 Corridor Project: Construct roadway improvements on a portion of I-710 in Los Angeles County. (DEIR) (EA 24990) // The Commission approved, per Staff recommendation, to send a letter of comment to Caltrans.

2.2c. Approval of Projects for New Public Road Connection / Future Consideration of Funding

♠ (Oct) (1) Approval of Projects for Future Consideration of Funding: // Approved

  1. 03-Sut-99, PM 39.2/41.4 Live Oak Streetscape: Construct roadway improvements on a portion of Route 99 in the city of Live Oak. (ND) (PPNO’s 8378 and 8381) (SHOPP)
  2. 04-Mrn-1, PM 24.67 Olema Creek Tributary Culvert Replacement Project: Replace existing culvert and construct roadway improvements on Route 1 in Marin County. (ND) (PPNO 4S780) (SHOPP)
  3. 04-Sol-12, PM 24.3/25.2 Route 12/Church Road Intersection Improvements Project: Construct intersection improvements on Route 12 at Church Road in Solano County. (ND) (EA 0G0500) (Local)
  4. °05-Mon-1, PM 2.5/67.3 Monterey Route 1 Culvert Replacement Project: Replace seven culverts along a portion of Route 1 in Monterey County. (MND) (PPNO 2478) (SHOPP)
  5. °06-Fre-168, PM 36.0/65.9 Shaver to Huntington CAPM and Culvert Rehabilitation: Construct roadway improvements and culvert rehabilitation on a portion of Route 168 in Fresno County. (MND) (PPNO 3484) (SHOPP)
  6. 09-Iny-6, PM 4.3/8.4, 09-Mno-6, 0.0/0.8: McNally Shoulder Widening: Construct roadway improvements including shoulder widening on Route 6 in Mono and Inyo Counties. (MND) (PPNO 0660) (SHOPP)
  7. 12-Ora-133, 3.1/3.6 Route 133 Safety Project: Construct roadway improvements on a portion of Route 133 in the city of Laguna Beach in Orange County (MND) (PPNO 4793) (SHOPP)
  8. 12-Ora-55, 6.4/10.3 Route 55 Improvement Project: Widen a portion of I-5 in the cities of Irvine, Santa Ana, and Tustin in Orange County (MND) (PPNO 3483) (SHOPP)

♠ (Oct) (2) Approval of Project for Future Consideration of Funding: 07-LA-10, PM 44.9/48.3 08-SBd-10, PM 0.0/R37.0 I-10 Corridor Project: Construct additional lanes on a portion of I-10 in Los Angeles and San Bernardino Counties. (FEIR) (PPNO 0134K) (Local, CMAQ, STIP) // The Commission accepted the environmental document, Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations and approved the project for funding.

♠ (Oct) (3) Approval of Project for Future Consideration of Funding: 11-SD-5, PM R32.7/R34.8, 11-SD-56, PM 0.0/2.5 I-5/Route 56 Interchange Project: Construct roadway and Interchange improvements on I-5 and Route 56 in San Diego County. (FEIR) (EA 17790) (Local) // The Commission accepted the environmental document, Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations and approved the project for funding.

♠ (Dec) (1) Approval of Projects for Future Consideration of Funding: // Approved.

  1. °03-Yub-20, PM 0.5/2.0, 03-Yub-70, PM 14.1/15.2 Marysville ADA Improvements Project: Construct pedestrian infrastructure at various locations along Route 20 and Route 70 in Yuba County. (ND) (PPNO 9580) (SHOPP)
  2. 03-Yub-70, PM 15.4/16.5 Simmerly Slough Bridge Replacement Project: Replace existing bridge on Route 70 in Yuba County. (MND) (PPNO 9812) (SHOPP)
  3. 05-Mon-1, PM 58.3/59.8 Hurricane Point to Rocky Creek Safety Upgrades Project: Construct roadway improvements on a portion of Route 1 in Monterey County. (MND) (PPNO 2313) (SHOPP)
  4. 05-SLO-58, PM 3.08 Trout Creek Bridge Replacement Project: Replace existing bridge on Route 58 in San Luis Obispo County. (MND) (PPNO 0072B) (SHOPP)
  5. °06-Ker-99, PM 0.0/19.5 Kern 99 Northbound Rehabilitation Project: Construct roadway improvements and pavement rehabilitation on a portion of Route 99 in Kern County. (ND) (PPNO 6731) (SHOPP)
  6. °10-Mpa/Mad-41, PM 0.10/4.85, D0.63/D1.84 Culvert Rehabilitation near Fish Camp in Madera and Mariposa Counties Project: Rehabilitate or replace drainage culverts at 19 locations on a portion of Route 41 in Madera and Mariposa Counties. (MND) (PPNO 3158) (SHOPP)

2.3a. Route Adoptions

♠ (Oct) One Rescission of Freeway Adoption for: A portion of Route 54 from Route 125 to I-8 in the county of San Diego 11-SD-54-PM 6.7/16.9 // Approved

2.3b. New Public Road Connection

No Items / No Items of Interest in the Review Period.

2.3c. Relinquishments

♠ (Oct) Four Relinquishment Resolutions: // Approved

  1. 01-Lak-20-PM 12.2 Right of way along Route 20 at Nice-Lucerne Cutoff and Pyle Road, in the county of Lake.
  2. 04-Ala-92-PM 6.8/8.1 Right of way on Route 92 from Santa Clara Street to near Atherton Street, in the city of Hayward.
  3. 04-Ala-185-PM 0.4/0.9 Right of way on Route 185 from ‘A’ Street to the Hayward City Limits at Rose Street, in the city of Hayward.
  4. 04-Ala-238-PM 7.8/9.3 Right of way on Route 238 from the Hayward City Limits to Industrial Parkway, in the city of Hayward.

♠ (Dec) Four Relinquishment Resolutions: // Approved.

  1. 04-Sol-780-PM 7.4 A Park and Ride Lot at the terminus of I 780 and along Curtola Parkway, in the city of Vallejo, county of Solano, and within the jurisdiction of Solano County Transit.
  2. 05-Mon-1-PM-99.9/T101.1 Right of way along Route 1 on Jensen Road and Hilltop Road, in the county of Monterey.
  3. 06-Kin-198-PM-R16.91 Right of way along Route 198 on 12th Avenue, in the city of Hanford.
  4. 06-Tul-216-PM-13.9/14.0 Right of way adjacent to Route 216 (Naranjo Boulevard) between Magnolia Street and Palm Street, in the city of Woodlake.

2.3d. Vacation Resolutions

♠ (Oct) Three Vacation Resolutions: // Approved

  1. 02-Sha-299-PM 83.5/83.9 Right of way along Route 299 between Hat Creek Powerhouse No. 2 Road and Hat Creek Park at Hat Creek, in the county of Shasta.
  2. 02-Las-395-PM 52.3/52.6 Right of way along Route 395 between Janesville Grade and Lake Crest Road, in the county of Lassen.
  3. 02-Tri-3-PM 30.9 Right of way along Route 3, 0.1 miles east of Route 299, in the county of Trinity.

2.5a Minor Projects

No Items / No Items of Interest in the Review Period.

2.5b. Financial Allocations for SHOPP Projects / Federal Discretionary Grant Funds

No items reached the level of interest, but with the interest in SB1 and the belief that the state will still misuse funds, I want to share the introduction to the various book items in this section:

The 2016 State Highway Operation and Protection Program (SHOPP) include both support and construction capital programming for rehabilitation projects on the State Highway System. The passage of the Road Repair and Accountability Act (SB 1) necessitates that the California Department of Transportation (Department) and the California Transportation Commission (Commission) establish baseline budgets for each phase of each project in the 2016 SHOPP. In order to establish these baselines, this book item requests allocations for 17 SHOPP preconstruction support phases in the adopted 2016 SHOPP that are currently underway.

It is important to recognize that SB 1 changed the way support phases are managed. SB 1 now requires an allocation of each support phase after July 1, 2017. Prior to the passage of SB 1, the Department could commence work on pre-construction SHOPP support phases without receiving an allocation from the Commission. At adoption of the 2016 SHOPP in March 2016, the Department had the authority to set support budgets in the SHOPP. Since then the Department has identified SHOPP pre-construction phases that began before the implementation of SB 1 and will continue after June 30, 2017. The Department then reviewed and updated the project work plans to arrive at a budget allocation request for each phase. If the budget exceeded the programmed amount, the Department followed existing change control processes to validate the requested allocation amounts.

The Department began work on many SHOPP project phases before the implementation of SB 1 and is still working on those phases. Project expenditures are consistent with the adopted 2016 SHOPP and approved by the California State Legislature through the annual Budget process.

The allocation requested in this book item will ensure that the 2016 SHOPP pre-construction support phases already underway are treated in the same fashion as new phases allocated after July 1, 2017 under the auspices of SB 1. This action by the Commission will establish the baseline budgets for each phase, and will support transparency and accountability. This action will ensure that the budgets for each SHOPP project are managed in accordance with the expectations of SB 1 and the adopted Commission SHOPP guidelines.

I encourage those who find the financial and control side of all of this to be of interest to go to the CTC link above and actually look at the book items to see how your money is being spent.

2.5c Financial Allocations for STIP Projects

♠ (Oct) (2a) Request of $8,793,000 for three locally administered STIP projects on the State Highway System. The following items reached the requisite level of interest for the highway pages: // Approved, as modified.

  • 10-Cal-4 R10.3/16.4: On Route 4 in Calavaras County: State Route 4 Wagon Trail Realignment. Near Copperopolis and Angels Camp, from 2.0 miles east of Copperopolis to Stallion Way. Realign roadway. $2,466,000
  • 10-Sta-99 R21/R22.1: On Route 99 in Stanislaus County: Pelandale Avenue Interchange. In Modesto and Salida, from 0.75 mile south of Pelandale Avenue to 0.35 mile north of Pelandale Avenue. Reconstruct the Route 99/Pelandale interchange and construct auxiliary lane. $4,336,000

♠ (Dec) (1) STIP Allocations: Request of $8,157,000 for two State administered STIP projects on the State Highway System. The following items reached the requisite level of interest for the highway pages: // Approved.

  • 01-Men-101 45.3/47.9: Willits Bypass – Relinquishment of Bypassed Route 101 (Exisitng Route 101 Through Willits). In the city of Willits from PM 46.63 to PM 47.52. Rehabilitate and relinquishment of facilities. $3,992,000
  • 01-Men-101 47.1/47.3: Willits Bypass – Sherwood Road Geometric Upgrades / US 101. In the city of Willits from 0.1 mile north of Sherwood Road. Update the roadway curve, slope and add shoulders. $4,165,000

2.5d Allocations for Projects with Costs that Exceed 20 Percent of the Programmed Amount

No Items / No Items of Interest in the Review Period.

2.5e Supplemental Fund Allocations

No Items / No Items of Interest in the Review Period.

2.5f Financial Allocations for SHOPP

No Items / No Items of Interest in the Review Period.

2.5g Prop 1B Project Allocations

♠ (Oct) (3) Request of $3,942,000 for the State administered STIP Project: Route 46 Widening – Segment 4A in Kern County. (PPNO 3386C) // Approved.

♠ (Oct) (5a) Request of $18,000,000 for the multi –funded State administered TCIF Project 124 – US 101 Marin Sonoma Narrows B2 Phase 2 Sonoma Median Widening HOV Lanes project, in Marin and Sonoma Counties (PPNO 0360U) // Approved.

♠ (Dec) (6) Request of $49,747,000 for the Route 11/125/905 Separation SHOPP project in San Diego County. (PPNO 1035) // Approved.

2.5t Traffic Congestion Relief Program (TCRP) Allocations

No Items / No Items of Interest in the Review Period.

4. TCIF and Aeronautic Program Updates / Policy Matters

No Items / No Items of Interest in the Review Period.

Share

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *