California Highway News

Monday, January 1, 2001

Tunnel proposed for Devil's Slide

PACIFICA -- Residents and travelers weary of detours around the washout-prone Devil's Slide area of Highway 1 are looking to the hills for their salvation.

Caltrans engineers are awaiting federal approval for a tunnel that would bypass future slides and keep traffic flowing through this scenic, coastal locale.

Planners and environmentalists who have worked with the concept for more than a decade say that they've identified the right of way and that the money is available.

Irvine-based HNTB Companies was selected in November to put together a final design of the nearly mile-long tunnel.

"It's really moving along now," Skip Sowko, Caltrans project manager for the tunnel, told the San Francisco Chronicle. "The environmental documents are basically complete and we expect federal approval in a couple months or so. Then it's off to the races."

It will take two more years to design the $165 million project and three years for construction.

The twin 30-foot-wide tunnels -- one lane in each direction -- will cut through San Pedro Mountain and slope slightly downward toward the southwest where they will rejoin Highway 1, south of Devil's Slide.

Two 1,000-foot-long approach bridges will carry traffic over endangered red-legged frogs in their ponds below.

The tunnels are a relief to residents and local businesses, who have watched tourism plummet after winter storms repeatedly caused portions of Highway 1 to crumble into the ocean.

"People are relieved to finally see some real progress after all these years," said Zoe Kersteen-Tucker, a Moss Beach resident and president of the Committee for Green Foothills, which fought for the tunnel.

Slides closed the highway 22 times between 1973 and 1983, making delicate and hilly Highway 92 the sole access road. The added cars created traffic jams on Highway 92.

Caltrans has tried to improve the geologically unstable roadway with drainage systems, anchor rocks and pavement reinforcement, all to no avail, since the highway was built in 1937.

In the early 1970s, Caltrans proposed building a 4.5-mile bypass right through a section of Montara State Beach.

The Sierra Club and several other groups sued and a U.S. District Court halted construction pending more environmental reviews.

The worst came in 1995, when winter storms eroded the highway, shutting down traffic for six months.

Businesses closed, tourism evaporated and everyone grumbled about the commute.

The mood prompted tunnel advocates to hit the streets and gather 34,000 signatures to place Measure T on the San Mateo County ballot in 1996. Voters overwhelmingly approved the tunnel plan over the highway bypass.

Tuesday, January 2, 2001

Homeowners bear down as freeway work begins

By Marianne Love

Staff Writer

LA VERNE -- When Ruth Mahlow moved into her home 14 years ago with her husband and baby daughter, she had heard from neighbors a freeway would be coming through.

First she heard she would be living five houses away. Then three.

She never realized her home, in the 4300 block of Edminister Lane, would be the last home next to a vacant lot adjacent to a sound wall above the Foothill Freeway [Route 210] extension.

The $950 million ongoing construction project will span 28.2 miles once it is completed, stretching from San Dimas, through La Verne, Claremont, Upland, Rancho Cucamonga, Fontana and Rialto and finally connecting to Interstate 215 in San Bernardino.

In La Verne, 174 homes have been demolished. Several streets were closed. Others eliminated to make way for the sunken freeway between Base Line Road and Foothill Boulevard.

Excavation on the Los Angeles County portion of the freeway has just begun in the last few months in Claremont and is expected to begin in La Verne in early February.

"We are going to be losing a third of our front lawn for a turnout for the fire trucks," said Mahlow, a city employee. "I'm concerned some crazy person will be driving too fast and wind up in our house."

With the demolition of her neighbor's home to the north - and after the turnout is in place - Mahlow won't have the privacy she once enjoyed. The couple have installed additional security lights. They also plan to put up light-blocking blinds and install a new front door to avoid headlights and "lookey-loos" intruding into their home.

After spending the past year-and-a-half putting up with rerouted city traffic, trucks and tractors and the construction of sounds walls, neighbors aren't looking forward to the noise and dirt from the excavation.

"I bought two waterfall fountains for inside my house," said Cheri Wallace, a training coordinator for YWCA WINGS, an east San Gabriel Valley-based program for battered women and children. "I'm hoping the sound will help drown out the noise coming from the freeway."

Marianne Love can be reached at (626) 962-8811, Ext. 2108, or by e-mail at marianne.love@sgvn.com.

Land values drive up road costs

$2.1 MILLION PER MILE, AND THAT'S A BARGAIN

BY GARY RICHARDS

When bulldozers next summer begin widening Highway 101 outside Morgan Hill, the project is expected to cost $2.1 million a lane for every mile of new pavement.

That's a bargain.

Most new roads now cost three to five times that much, according to a Mercury News review of recent Silicon Valley projects.

Just as it has fueled the South Bay's sizzling housing market, the high cost of land is driving up the price of highway construction. The only reason the 101 price tag is relatively low is that the state already owns the median, where the extra lanes will be added.

The cost of buying land is a big reason South Bay planners are considering only one new highway over the next two decades -- a one-mile stub of a freeway connecting Interstate 680 with I-880 through Fremont. The projected tab is a stunning $300 million, or $50 million a mile for each lane, under the most economical proposal.

That's nearly four times the $13 million per mile, adjusted for inflation, spent to complete Highway 85 in 1994. It was the most expensive among projects either recently completed or about to be started.

``Those kind of numbers scare people,'' said Eileen Goodwin, former head of the Santa Clara County Traffic Authority, which oversaw the building of Highway 85. ``And that fear kicks new projects far down any priority list, making it that much harder to get money you need before you build anything.''

Of course, there have been more costly roads built in California. The replacement of the Cypress structure on I-880 in Oakland, which collapsed in the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake, ranks as the most expensive in the state at $250 million per mile. That was almost twice the cost per mile of the Century Freeway in Los Angeles, which opened in 1993 and had been the most expensive until the Cypress tab came in.

Both those roads were built in urban areas, where land is most precious. The Cypress involved rerouting pavement around neighborhoods cut off by the old structure.

But even in more suburban areas like the East and South bays, new lanes don't come cheap anymore.

When 85 was being built, hundreds of parcels had to be purchased and land costs accounted for two-thirds of the entire budget -- and was often much higher than forecast.

``It seemed like right of way was jumping higher every month,'' recalled Will Kempton, a transportation consultant in Sacramento who ran the Highway 85 agency in its early years.

Caltrans reserved $375 million to buy land, but right-of-way costs for the 18-mile, six-lane highway topped $900 million in today's dollars -- almost twice the $575 million needed for construction and engineering.

``When you try to cut a swath through the middle of the valley,'' said John Ristow, a highway administrator with the Valley Transportation Authority, ``that's what it's going to cost.''

Adding a carpool lane for more than 11 miles on I-880 in Alameda County cost $10.5 million a mile, earning this freeway the distinction of being the second most expensive behind Highway 85 among those reviewed. Almost 20 percent of that price tag went for eight new interchanges.

Close behind is the work on Highway 87, costing $9.5 million per mile to add carpool and merging lanes from Highway 85 north to Julian Street. Finishing the interchange at 85 and 87 and making drainage repairs will add more than $75 million to the final bill.

Most other current projects run from $6.5 million to $7.5 million per mile. This includes adding diamond lanes on Interstate 680 over the Sunol Grade and widening the bottleneck on I-880 at Brokaw Road.

Transportation leaders say they are fortunate that most future widening will occur primarily in the median of those freeways. Land costs to widen I-880 to six lanes around Brokaw Road are a mere $100,000.

Next to the 101 widening outside Morgan Hill, the cheapest project was the addition of carpool lanes on Highway 101 from Bernal Road in South San Jose to the San Mateo County line. That 26-mile extension was completed in 1992, and today it would cost $3.7 million a mile. The state owned most of the land, and the bill to buy needed property totaled just $7.1 million -- less than 4 percent of the total cost.

But local leaders know they won't be so lucky down the road. Development is engulfing almost every available inch of land, often to within feet of a road. At Highway 87 near Hedding Street, the juvenile hall center and National Guard Armory are literally an arm's length from the sound walls that will separate those buildings from the six-lane freeway.

With space at a premium, traffic planners are now turning their attention to tweaking existing roadways, focusing on locations where they can add merge lanes and upgrade outdated interchanges in attempts to smooth out the biggest bottlenecks.

Even then, bargains are limited.

To fix the 85 and 101 interchange in Mountain View will cost about $131 million.

The interchange at 237 and 880 will eventually total nearly $110 million.

At Coleman Avenue and Interstate 880, the bill is expected to be close to $55 million.

Mass transit is even more expensive. Light-rail extensions in Santa Clara County run nearly $25 million per mile, while bringing BART to San Jose will approach $90 million a mile.

``Whether you are building an urban freeway or updating an existing facility,'' said Mike Evanhoe, head of the highway program with the VTA, ``we know one thing:

``It's not cheap anymore.''

Contact Gary Richards at mrroadshow@sjmercury.com or (408) 920-5335.

2 interchange delays on 880 could detour others

BY GARY RICHARDS

Mercury News Staff Columnist

For weary commuters on Interstate 880, this is not the way to start out a new year.

Work on I-880 interchanges at Highway 237 and Dixon Landing Road in Milpitas has fallen behind schedule, plus both projects are over budget. Those troubles could ripple down the freeway, threatening to delay future improvements at Coleman Avenue and Interstate 880, a key entry point to San Jose International Airport.

The biggest concern is at 237 and 880.

``This is my worry project,'' said Mike Evanhoe, who runs the highway division for the Valley Transportation Authority.

Caltrans had hoped to finish the first phase of this massive rebuilding job in the summer or fall. Although the ramp from eastbound 237 to northbound I-880 could be ready later this year, the state now says the entire $68 million project won't be completed until May 2002.

Making matters worse, Caltrans is short of cash for this interchange although state officials say the amount has not been determined yet.

A mile north, work has been slow on the new interchange at Dixon Landing with PG&E seeking $8 million extra from Fremont and Milpitas to relocate two gas pipelines. VTA officials are upset with PG&E's demand, and say further snags could prevent construction crews from starting work on the overpass this summer as planned. The new interchange is scheduled to open in four years, and VTA officials worry that the problems with PG&E could slow progress on the new overpass and ramps.

``This is another worry project,'' said Evanhoe, adding: ``It's already over budget and hasn't gone to construction yet.''

So how does the Coleman-880 interchange fit in here? State rules now say local agencies must complete projects on time or lose state funding. State dollars will next be available in 2002, and that money has been earmarked for the airport interchange. Should that cash be needed, instead, for the two interchanges in Milpitas, the work at Coleman could be delayed.

``We are at a crunch point,'' said Evanhoe. ``If something goes over budget on Dixon Landing and if something goes over budget on 237, then something will have to slip. That's why I am very concerned.''

He and the 250,000 motorists who use these roads every day.

Contact Gary Richards at mrroadshow@sjmercury.com or (408) 920-5335.

Wednesday, January 3, 2001

Stretch of Route 125 to open today, others later

LA MESA -- A section of state Route 125 between Amaya Drive and Fletcher Parkway is scheduled to open today, officials said.

The section, which includes an on-ramp and off-ramp at Amaya Drive, is the first in a series of openings planned over the next three months.

By the end of March, the 1.4-mile stretch from Fletcher Parkway to Navajo Road will be completed, said Caltrans spokesman Tom Nipper.

The construction is part of a $165 million project to build a six-lane freeway from Interstate 8 in La Mesa to state Route 52 in Santee.

Eventually, planners hope to extend 125 south to state Route 905 as an 11-mile tollway in the South Bay, and north to state Route 56 in Poway, if that freeway is ultimately extended east to Interstate 15.

Workers are starting construction this month on the section of 125 between Navajo Road and Grossmont College Drive, Nipper said.

Officials warned motorists that there is a new signal at the top of the northbound 125 off-ramp to Amaya Drive and Fletcher Parkway. The signal will stop northbound traffic exiting the freeway to allow drivers on Amaya Drive to cross the new bridge over the freeway.

Friday, January 5, 2001

CONTRA COSTA TIMES

Torlakson takes aim at traffic hot spots

He'll form task forces to work for relief on I-580, Vasco Road and Highway 4, and add trains to Altamont Commuter Express

By Lisa Vorderbrueggen

TIMES STAFF WRITER

Hoping to replicate the success of a coalition that netted $200 million for the hyper-congested Sunol Grade, Sen. Tom Torlakson, D-Antioch, will form task forces to lobby for three other East Bay hot spots.

Torlakson is inviting business leaders, commuters, transportation experts and politicians to join the task forces and accelerate congestion relief projects for Interstate 580, Vasco Road and Highway 4, and get two new trains for the Altamont Commuter Express.

"These are high-profile projects the public wants," Torlakson said. "This is a way that people can fight for the kinds of improvements that will help improve the conditions on our roads."

The Sunol Grade coalition, called Solutions on Sunol, is a spectacular example of what can happen when powerful people band together.

The business-led group harnessed politicians and helped push the Sunol Grade from near obscurity in 1996 to the start of construction on $200 million in car-pool lanes by 2000.

That's lightning speed in the transportation world where projects can languish for decades.

"Solutions on Sunol is a good model to follow, although these projects probably won't have quite the visibility of the Sunol," said William Gray, a Walnut Creek businessman and one of the founders of the Sunol coalition. "The idea of a public-private-state-local partnership to focus energy on important transportation projects does work."

"The Sunol coalition was very successful," said Alameda County Congestion Management Agency director Dennis Fay. "Partnering with all the players is key to delivering projects."

Torlakson hopes such forces can be brought to bear on his transportation priorities.

He has already garnered millions for ACE and the corridors in Gov. Gray Davis' transportation budget, but he fears a conventional approach will means years of delays.

"We need to bring everyone to the table and find a way to get things done fast," he said.

Vasco Road, for example, is a small but well-used link between east Contra Costa County houses and Tri-Valley jobs. It is scheduled to get millions of dollars in safety improvements.

But the work is years away from completion, and Torlakson wants to speed it up.

Likewise, Highway 4 in east Contra Costa County is slowly being widened, but Torlakson wants to accelerate planning for future phases.

He is particularly concerned about finding the cash needed to buy land in the highway median for an eventual BART extension to Antioch.

The Altamont Commuter Express, a popular 85-mile commuter rail service between Stockton and San Jose with stops in the Tri-Valley, is the focus of his third task force.

Overcrowding on ACE has reached crisis proportions as 2,300 riders each evening compete for 1,400 seats.

A third daily train service will open in February, but "that will just give our existing riders a seat," said ACE manager Stacey Mortensen.

ACE needs $36 million to $48 million to buy two new train sets, make the necessary track improvements, expand the stations and jump-start its operating budget.

"Torlakson has always helped ACE and if this task force can be a part of that, then we're all for it," Mortensen said.

Interested parties can contact Torlakson's district office at 925-280-0276, call the Capitol office at 916-445-6083 or e-mail senator.torlakson@sen.ca.gov.

Guard rails to be added to Route 74

By Kimberly Trone

Dramatic plunges, blind corners and careening cars are familiar hazards to anyone who has traveled State Route 74 between Palm Desert and the mountains.

"People are cranking it on to get down the mountain. There are a lot of tight turns that people have to slow down for and most of them don’t," said Larry Kueneman, senior volunteer at the California Highway Patrol office in Idyllwild.

The absence of guard rails at some of the road’s steepest drop-offs has prompted one Indian Wells man to undertake a writing campaign to Caltrans officials.

Robert Compton’s efforts may have finally paid off.

"We are committed to putting more guard rails up on 74," said Patrick Hsu, branch chief for highway operations at Caltrans, the agency that maintains the state’s roads and highways.

Hsu said engineers have identified at least six spots with "huge drop-offs" where guard rails will be installed.

He would not give a timeline for the project, but said it will be passed along to a project manager in early February.

"There are so many problems with 74, and then occasionally you read where someone has gone over a 500-foot drop," said Compton, who began writing letters more than two years ago.

At one point, he provided Caltrans officials with a tour of the winding mountain road. Even now, Compton is slow to greet Caltrans’ promise of guard rails with much optimism.

"They procrastinate," he said. "Can we not put lives above red tape and bureaucracy?"

Each day, an average of 19,000 cars use State Route 74, between Highway 111 and Homestead Drive in Palm Desert. The number of cars that undertake the steep mountain climb past Vista Point decreases to 9,500 a day.

By the time vehicles reach Anza, their number has dwindled to 2,600.

"State Route 74 west of Mountain Center is probably the most dangerous," said Kueneman, adding that only two CHP officers are available to patrol 248 square miles of the mountain’s roads.

"The biggest problem," he observed, "are people who don’t want to take responsibility for their driving."

Freeway tangle may ease

Work is planned at the 60-215-91 interchange, but the project may take years to complete.

By David Danelski

For a few more years, Inland commuters will have to put up with the congestion-plagued interchange where Interstate 215 meets up with Highways 60 and 91.

But relief is in the works.

After years of trying, state and regional transportation officials have cobbled together the $294 million needed for a make-over of Highway 60 and Interstate 215 between Rubidoux and Moreno Valley.

The project includes "flyway lanes" to replace two of the often-gridlocked cloverleafs that make up the interchange.

Although the money is in hand, the traffic congestion will continue for years, or even get worse, as drivers weather a long construction period.

The work is expected to start in 2003 and take about four years, said Tim Watkins, a spokesman for Caltrans, the state transportation agency.

Work started in the fall on a separate project to build an eastbound "truck-climbing" lane from University Avenue to Frederick Street on Highway 60/Interstate 215 in Riverside.

The $9.3 million project is expected to ease congestion caused by tractor-trailer trucks that slow to a crawl as they ascend the Canyon Crest grade.

But the big project is the $294 million project, which includes $50 million to buy land for more roadway space.

Two above-ground flyways to replace two of the cloverleaf loops. One will take drivers from westbound Interstate 215/Highway 60 to westbound Highway 91. The other will take drivers from southbound Interstate 215 to eastbound Highway 60/Interstate 215.

Two new carpool lanes, one in each direction on Highway 60.

Relocation of the onramp from Orange Street to eastbound Highway 60 in Riverside; the new ramp will be from Main Street.

New onramps and offramps at Highway 91 and Spruce Street.

Reconstruction of freeway bridges at Spruce Street and Blaine, Linden and Iowa avenues.

New onramps and offramps to Highway 60/Interstate 215 at Martin Luther King Boulevard near UC Riverside.

Elimination of El Cerrito Drive interchange and the reconfiguration of existing interchanges.

Many consider the work overdue.

The cloverleaf was built in the late 1950s and improved in the mid-1960s, Watkins said. Since 1960, Riverside County's population has almost quintupled.

The increased traffic has made the transition from westbound 215/60 to westbound Highway 91 scary, Moreno Valley City Councilman and attorney Richard Stewart said.

"People are really aggressive, and you end up playing a game of chicken," Stewart said. "A lot of people find ways to avoid it."

Stewart and his wife, who works at Riverside Community Hospital, pass up the cloverleaf and instead take surface streets to get to downtown Riverside.

"I avoid it whenever possible," Stewart said.

Wayne Huffer, who commutes from Moreno Valley to Seal Beach, said he avoids the interchange by taking Alessandro Boulevard to get from Moreno Valley to Highway 91 in Riverside.

Surface streets, he said, are quicker than the freeway because of a bottleneck at the 215/60/91 interchange.

Huffer worries that the project might not keep up with population growth.

"By the time they put it in, they will already be behind the times," he said.

Inland population, he said, is expected to double in the next 25 years.

Cathy Rodriguez Bechtel of the Riverside County Transportation Commission said she is pleased that the funding came together for the project.

In September, officials were $49 million short, but state and regional have since "cobbled together different colors of money," said Bechtel, the county agency's planning director.

The agency reallocated $30.2 million that it had set aside for improvements on Highway 91 through downtown Riverside. Other money came from state allocations.

To help ease congestion during the construction, the county transportation agency will step up a roadway assistance program to provide tow trucks to move stalled vehicles out of traffic lanes.

The agency also will promote car-pooling.

New Bay Bridge East Span Moves Toward Construction, but Critics Are Not Satisfied

Construction of the new span should begin by next summer, but a lawsuit could intervene

By Elizabeth Hollander

Emeryville City Councilmember

If you ever drive over the Bay Bridge [Route 80], you probably know you’re putting your life in danger. The bridge was damaged in the 1989 Loma Prieta quake and would likely sustain greater structural damage in the next big tremblor. If this state of affairs disturbs you, you may also know that plans to retrofit the bridge–or build a new one–have dragged on for a decade, hampered by delays, squabbles, and competing visions. The western portion of the bridge, from Treasure Island to San Francisco, will be retrofitted, but the question of what to do with the eastern span has bedeviled leaders and environmentalists on both sides of the bay.

The Browns–mayors Willie and Jerry–have weighed in on the issue, demanding alternate landing points or a more compelling asthetic. Transit activists clamored for bike lanes and light rail, wanting the entire bridge to be retrofitted, to avoid the possible environmental damage of destroying the old bridge. Government agencies–such as the Navy, which owns land on Yerba Buena Island where the bridge would need to touch down–engaged in a drawn-out battle about touch-down points. And the two organizations at the helm, Caltrans and the Bay Area’s Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC)–have been accused of everything from mismanagement to fraud, especially when it became clear that the designs under consideration by the MTC had been submitted by members of the design panel. And once a design had been chosen, the clamor only increased from citizens, politicians, and bureaucrats, for it seemed that the ugliest and least creative alternative–the viaduct with one tower–had won the prize.

After all the fracas, bridge planners hope they’re finally on track. They’ve agreed to incorporate bike lanes into the design, and they’ve even found the funding to do so. The federal Department of Transportation stepped in to transfer the Navy’s land to the state for the bridge touch-down. The mayors have backed off (although Oakland has asked for an additional $50 million for amenities such as observation decks with benches and a ribbon of light as decoration). And when Caltrans and MTC turned their design plans over to the US Army Corps of Engineers, they received what they’re calling a thumbs-up. They hope to finish their environmental review of the project early this year, and start work on the new bridge by next summer.

Unless, of course, they get sued. Although many former critics have now given up and thrown in the towel, reasoning that any bridge is better than more delays, a small but determined group of observers still finds plenty to critique. And, they say, if the final environmental review is as unsatisfactory as they claim the rest of the process has been, they may initiate legal action to halt construction.

Emeryville City Councilmember Ken Bukowski is one of the leading critics of Caltrans and MTC. "I think it’s a total disaster for a lot of reasons," Bukowski says of the accelerated progress toward construction. "It’s unbelievable to me how this could be happening. They’re marching forward with this totally in violation of federal laws of public review." Bukowski could ask his city council and neighboring cities to participate in a legal challenge. He’s joined in his concern by Bob Piper of the Sierra Club’s transportation committee. Both Piper and Bukowski say the Caltrans review of its own project needs to address two pressing concerns: Is a new bridge, as opposed to a retrofit, really the best choice, and is the Caltrans design for the new bridge seismically safe?

These are the same questions that the Army Corps of Engineers recently investigated. In the face of all the public criticism, Caltrans enlisted the corps–to the tune of $1.38 million–to serve as independent experts. By all accounts, the corps was handed a tough job: Caltrans turned over 400 documents (that’s 75,000 pages), which the corps had only four months to review. This tight schedule meant that the corps limited its report to merely analyzing the work Caltrans had already done. Army engineers said they couldn’t generate their own calculations under that time frame. "We’ll evaluate technical assumptions, engineering analyses, and cost estimates as contained in existing sources of data," said corps project manager Jerry Gianelli at the start of the review in June. "We will not generate any new data or analyses."

Because of these limitations, the final report often reads like a careful dance of words. In several cases, the engineers could find no evidence to answer a question in the affirmative, but because they had no evidence otherwise, that did not mean the answer should be a negative. Critics point to the question of the necessity of a new bridge. Caltrans and MTC have delightedly repeated the corps’ main statement on this issue: "At this point in time, a replacement alternative is preferable to a retrofit alternative. A replacement alternative is the path that most quickly resolves the exposure of the public to the seismic vulnerabilities of the existing structure." But that’s because the corps found that "A viable, substantiated retrofit design and related cost estimates have not been completed by Caltrans or any other party. A retrofit scheme that would provide the same level of safety as that of the retrofitted west Span is certainly possible given enough time and money to develop a solution."

Corps spokesman Jim Taylor explains, "A lot of people asked us, ‘Is there a better retrofit option?’ But that isn’t something we were asked to evaluate. The retrofit option Caltrans was pursuing, though, would not meet [safety] criteria." Critics say this only proves that Caltrans never took retrofitting seriously–the agency only considered one inferior option. The upshot of this, claims Bukowski, is that Caltrans is ignoring "the most environmentally viable alternative," which is shoring up the old bridge instead of tearing it down. "They haven’t looked at the impacts of taking down a lead-painted bridge," he warns. Plus, the current bridge was built to hold commuter rail–trains ran across the bridge in the ’40s and ’50s–and environmentalists hoped that fixing the bridge would mean restoring its rail capacity. "From the outset, the Sierra Club wanted additional capacity for transit," says Piper. "We wanted to be able to run trains. You can’t carry many more people through BART, and there will be something like a million people settling in the East Bay, and thousands of jobs being created in San Francisco. Not having rail on the bridge entirely overlooks the idea of organizing an intercity high-speed rail connection around the state."

Caltrans insists that retrofitting would have been too costly and potentially not as safe. "We did consider a retrofit; we did research at various universities," says Denis Mulligan, Caltrans’ toll bridge programs division chief. "But we found that replacement could be more cost-effective, and the new bridge will be built with much more reliable materials. The corps said, ‘You don’t have a final retrofit plan,’ and that’s correct, because we did enough to know there were safety issues and cost questions." MTC officials point out that reinstating trains to the bridge is more complicated than merely retrofitting the old bridge. Even if trains were reintroduced on the eastern span, they’d have to meet up with some kind of track on the west side.

"We did a study that looked at the feasibility of that," says MTC Deputy Executive Director Steve Heminger. "It would be $3 billion just to fix the west span and make it strong enough to handle trains."

Although Heminger says the new eastern span bridge will be built to handle trains if some lanes are ever converted to rail, for the time being the new bridge will offer the same five automobile lanes, which has also drawn criticism. The new bridge, explains Heminger, "is not a congestion relief project. This one’s an earthquake job, and that has caused frustration for a lot of folks who participated in the project because it does not deal with congestion and was never intended to do so." He points out, though, that the new design does incorporate emergency access side lanes that will speed daily traffic; plus, he says, MTC is now beginning a study of an entirely new bay crossing, between the Bay Bridge and the Dumbarton, which could incorporate transit. "That will probably cost less than the $3 billion it would have cost to return rail to the Bay Bridge," Heminger says.

Environmentalists aren’t impressed. "They will give lip service to building it for rail, but that commitment is not really there," says Piper. "They have a different vision than us. They want to maximize the number of cars that cross the bridge, but we want to minimize it."

Then there’s the debate over seismic safety. The proposed design for the new bridge, which would consist of a long concrete viaduct joined to a much shorter single-tower suspension bridge, has been challenged by structural engineers ever since it was introduced. UC Berkeley professor Abolhassan Astaneh, who submitted an imaginative design of his own, spoke out against the single-tower design, citing a number of concerns. A single-tower suspension bridge is an untested innovation, since most suspension bridges rely upon the stability created by two towers, and the hybrid viaduct-suspension bridge creates stress points where concrete meets steel. Concrete itself seems to be especially liable to earthquake damage. Astaneh’s points attracted significant attention, so Caltrans must have breathed a sign of relief when the corps’ report contained encouraging words: "Caltrans’ design team is highly qualified, using state-of-the-art design methods, and is moving along a path to design a bridge that meets the seismic performance criteria."

Of course, moving along a path to seismic performance doesn’t mean the agency has arrived there, and that’s because the Caltrans design plans are not complete. The corps was asked in effect to estimate what the seismic safety of the bridge would be if Caltrans continues designing in the direction it’s currently headed. "Almost every comment we made was qualified based on how far along the design was," the corps’ Taylor explains. But there’s another discrepancy: while Caltrans calculates the seismic safety of its design by a standard called the Safety Evaluation Earthquake (SEE), the corps attempted to evaluate the bridge by a standard called the Maximum Credible Earthquake (MCE). And since the corps had to rely upon Caltrans documents, and since Caltrans documents only provide information relative to the SEE standard, the corps had to conclude that there was not enough evidence to say for certain that the new bridge could sustain an MCE-level earthquake.

What’s the difference between the two standards, and which one is tougher? That depends on whom you ask. The corps uses the MCE when it builds its own projects–dams, air-control towers, hospitals. "We see the MCE as dealing with the largest earthquake you would expect," says Taylor. The MCE uses data from observed earthquakes to calculate how large the ground movements have been in the past, and mandates that structures be able to withstand movements that large in the future. Caltrans consultants such as UC Berkeley seismology professor Bruce Bolt say that trying to predict the maximum possible ground movement is "very subjective." Caltrans adopted the SEE standard, which Bolt says allows for a much wider range of possible ground motions–some of which are much higher in impact that MCE’s predicted motions. But SEE calculations take into account the fact that these larger motions aren’t that likely, so preparation for that kind of quake is considered a lower priority than building for a number of smaller quakes. "You build up a distribution function and allow a range of possibilities," Bolt explains. "You use a computer and work it out to the ground motions the engineers need." No one seems to be able to determine which would build the stronger bridge.

And critics worry that when the really big one happens, it won’t matter which movements were determined to be less likely–the ground will still shake a whole heck of a lot. "They’re designing the earthquake to the bridge, not the bridge to the earthquake," says Bukowski.

Whether or not critics like Bukowski bring a legal challenge, the new bridge will still face obstacles, not the least of which is securing funding. Caltrans will have to justify what are expected to be considerable cost overruns to the state legislature, and nobody thinks that will be easy. In the meantime, MTC faces a few hurdles of its own: the planning agency was recently reprimanded by the US Department of Transportation for failing to adequately involve the public in its planning.

New Highway 44 lane open

Tim Hearden

Motorists confused by construction at Interstate 5's interchange with highways 44 and 299 in central Redding may find some relief as the project prepares to enter its next phase.

State Department of Transportation officials are urging motorists entering eastbound Highway 44 from I-5 to use a newly constructed auxiliary lane.

This week, workers have watched drivers stop to wait for traffic to clear on 44 rather than proceed onto the new lane, Caltrans spokeswoman Debra Ginn said.

"Motorists need to take advantage of it," Ginn said. "They're stopping . . . right where the ramp merges onto 44."

The workers' observations come as the California Highway Patrol has noticed an increase in minor collisions on 44 at or underneath the I-5 bridge, according to public affairs officer Monty Hight.

"It's just one of those things where people aren't paying attention, unfortunately," Hight said. "It's just merging. It's one of those ones where they're coming from a two-lane roadway, coming to a one-lane roadway. They may stop, and the next guy runs into them. It's just inattention." Caltrans has completed work on 44 for the time being and will focus on widening the I-5 bridges over the highway and over an on-ramp, Ginn said.

The ramp from northbound I-5 to westbound Highway 299 will be closed beginning at 7 p.m. Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday and reopening at 6 a.m. on the following days as crews hang pre-cast girders to support a new auxiliary lane on I-5.

Work on 44 will resume in the spring, Ginn said, as crews change the radius of the ramp onto northbound Interstate 5 and widen and resurface the ramp from westbound 44 to northbound I-5. Meanwhile, road widening on I-5 is ongoing during clear weather.

Contractor J.F. Shea Co. Inc. of Redding began the $4.25 million project in July and expects to finish in late summer or early fall. Ginn said the project is on time and on budget.

Sunday, January 7, 2001

Ramps would alleviate gridlock

A city of Pleasanton study predicts traffic problems without an interchange at I-680 and West Las Positas Boulevard

By Bonita Brewer

TIMES STAFF WRITER

An Interstate 680 interchange on West Las Positas Boulevard in Pleasanton would help relieve future gridlock at several key intersections along Stoneridge Drive, according to environmental studies of the new BART station planned near Stoneridge mall.

Even with road improvements planned by the city of Pleasanton, "significant and unavoidable cumulative traffic impacts" are in store at the region's 2020 buildout if the interchange isn't built to take some traffic off Stoneridge, according to the study.

And although traffic to and from BART would worsen problems at certain locations along Stoneridge, the study predicts serious congestion from planned development even if the station isn't built.

The environmental report for the BART station, proposed in the median of I-580 west of I-680, will be the subject of a public hearing Monday night in Dublin. The hearing will begin at 7 in the council chamber at Dublin City Hall, 100 Civic Plaza.

The report says that unless the interchange is built, five intersections along Stoneridge Drive, including at Hopyard Road and at Stoneridge Mall Road, will operate at unacceptable levels.

Even with some improvements that the public-private BART project would help fund, the study predicts persistent traffic problems at I-680's northbound and southbound ramps at Stoneridge Drive and the intersection of Stoneridge and Johnson drives.

However, if the West Las Positas interchange is constructed, "The identified mitigation measures would reduce the cumulative traffic impacts at these intersections to less-than-significant levels."

The finding frustrated some residents and city officials who have long fought the interchange that has been on the books as part of the city's general plan for 30 years. Many residents fear the interchange will dump through-traffic into their neighborhoods and pose safety hazards for children walking to school.

"This report may put another nail in the coffin, you might say, to our efforts," said Judy Fox, who lives south of the potential interchange site and is part of a citywide task force that since early 1997 has explored alternatives -- including widening Stoneridge Drive and making improvements to the Stoneridge interchange with I-680. Fox also is on a separate task force exploring ways to reduce cross-town traffic by promoting car-pooling, shuttles and public transit.

"The interchange may eventually have to be built," Fox said. "But unless we do other improvements first and then come to the gridlock, the neighborhood won't accept that we have to build an interchange. We haven't come to that point yet."

She noted that other freeway interchanges in Pleasanton provide access into business districts, not residential neighborhoods.

Pleasanton Mayor Tom Pico contends that there are better alternatives to the West Las Positas interchange, even while saying he hasn't seen the final studies.

"It (the interchange) could possibly mitigate something, but, in my mind, it just creates a bigger problem somewhere else," Pico said. "It's like a balloon that you squeeze; it just transfers the problem from one side to the other, and creates a greater problem.

"We're looking at the 580-680 interchange being gridlocked by 2020, and if the freeways are gridlocked, then building Las Positas will just allow people to get off the freeway and cut through residential neighborhoods," Pico said. "That would become a disaster for those neighborhoods, in my opinion and in the opinion of a lot of residents who live there.

"That BART station is going to go in, and if it creates more congestion in that area, we'll have to try to find ways to deal with it," Pico said. "But I don't believe that building the Las Positas interchange to make BART work a little better and ruining a residential neighborhood is an appropriate tradeoff."

Part of the city study of alternatives to the interchange is being done in conjunction with Caltrans. City officials said the study could conclude that the only way to allow more traffic from Stoneridge Drive to exit onto northbound I-680 is to prevent it from merging into lanes with traffic already on the freeway trying to head east onto I-580. A grade separation could cost as much as $70 million.

The proposed West Dublin-Pleasanton BART station is part of an overall package also involving private development. On the Dublin side of the freeway, there would be 160 apartments, 240 hotel rooms and a garage of 600 parking spaces. The Pleasanton side would host 175,000 square feet of offices and a 400-space parking garage.

Construction could get under way later this year if the project gets all the final approvals from the BART board and from the cities of Pleasanton and Dublin.

BART officials noted that the station will help reduce traffic from people now driving by car to work or to shop in the Stoneridge mall area.

Carpool Lane Work to Close Freeway

By RICHARD FAUSSET

Southbound stretches of the Antelope Valley Freeway [Route 14] will be closed Monday and Tuesday nights as part of a Caltrans high-occupancy-vehicle lane construction project.

All southbound lanes between Angeles Crest Highway and Sierra Highway will be closed from 8 p.m. Monday to 4 a.m. Tuesday.

The next night, all southbound lanes between Sierra Highway and Santiago Road will be closed from 8 p.m. Tuesday to 4 a.m. Wednesday.

Signs will be posted to help drivers. Weather conditions could alter closure plans, Caltrans officials said.

The $25-million Antelope Valley Freeway HOV improvement project is scheduled to be completed in January 2003.

Monday, January 8, 2001

Traffic Ties Up Cordelia

Commuters avoiding I-680 and I-80 choke the back roads of tiny town

Marsha Ginsburg, Chronicle Staff Writer

At historic Thompson's Corner Saloon, where bras and jockstraps hang from the ceiling with equal notoriety, Mary Gollinger looks like the portrait of old-time Cordelia.

She sips her Tutti Fruiti with friends she's known for much of her 65 years in the quaint three-block heart of Cordelia marked by a simple green sign and a fire station. But lately the talk hasn't been very friendly.

That's because one step outside the door of the 99-year old watering hole is the story of rural life suddenly gone haywire.

Cordelia, a sprawling pastoral setting of subdivisions in western Fairfield,

is being choked to death by local traffic brought on by rapid-fire building of subdivisions and by being wedged between two freeways packed with commuters.

Traffic swelling through Interstate 680 and Interstate 80, particularly where the two converge just south of Fairfield, is so jammed that savvy commuters have figured out an alternative: the back roads of tiny Cordelia.

"It's unfortunate that small towns like that get run over by rampant sprawl, " said Evelyn Stivers, a spokeswoman for the Greenbelt Alliance, which plans to open a Solano County office in response to growth in this northeastern corner of the Bay Area.

The main street through the old town here, also named Cordelia after Gen. Vallejo's wife, is usually so backed up at morning and evening commute times that some surrounding residents literally can't back out of their driveways. An unwelcomed subdivision is sprouting just down the street.

"It floods in Cordelia, so we're just waiting for it to rain, and we hope it rains hard on it," says Gollinger.

But this isn't a story about not-in-my-backyard syndrome, or a nasty fight between old town residents who like rural living and new families who need affordable housing. Residents in this western portion of Fairfield know that growth is inevitable.

But from the wealthier subdivisions of Eastridge Estates to the tiny 1880's homes of old town, Cordelia's 9,000 residents are beyond angry over what they say is growth so wildly out of control that traffic congestion has either turned driving into a living nightmare or is holding them hostage in their own homes.

"Growth is one thing, but overgrowth is something else,"' says Kevin Caines,

a wine truck driver who used to take seven minutes to drive to American Canyon, but now needs 45.

The reason for the rural congestion is so varied that few say anything can be done about it in the near future. Businesses from banks to candy companies are parachuting into relatively inexpensive Cordelia -- an incorporated region of Fairfield -- in unprecedented numbers. Not far behind are subdivisions with soothing names like Southbrook and Vintage trying to accommodate the housing demand. And this area of 3,000 homes, where cows can now only be seen grazing from the outer edges of an expanse of neutral-colored homes, just happens to sit on the western side of I-680 and stretches all the way to the junction at I-80. Some 218,000 cars travel through the intersection daily.

Residents say most roads leading into or out of Cordelia are blocked for miles each morning and on Thursday and Friday afternoons. And if Bay Area freeway drivers getting back from the Sierra are factored in, Sundays can be a nightmare too.

Trisha Loos, who lives off Cordelia Road in the old town, the only part of Cordelia that is still unincorporated, says when backing out of her driveway in the morning, cars speed down her country street of 12 homes at a minimum of 45 mph. Recently, her dog was killed on the road, and a neighbor has posted a sign that reads: "This is not a commuter route. Please drive cautiously and slowly."

Harried commuters run stop signs. And even though a sign says not to turn left from the main artery to her Bridgeport Avenue, Loos says drivers do it anyway.

"Growth doesn't bother me that much, but using my rural road as a freeway does," said Loos.

She can't believe that after being raised on rural Cordelia Road half a mile away, she no longer lets her 13-year-old daughter walk to nearby Green Valley Middle School. Nor can she ride her bike. Loos is afraid her child will be killed by a car.

Those who live in the outlying areas of Cordelia, incorporated into Fairfield some 25 years ago, aren't faring much better.

Judie Burtenshaw, who lives in Cordelia Village, an expanse of 1,000 homes and the area's first modern subdivision, is not kidding when she says that rather than drive to the local grocery store when she's out of milk and pasta, she forages from neighbors first. That's because it's too hard to drive the 7 miles into Fairfield to the nearest large grocery store.

"When I come home on a Friday night, I can't go out again," she says. "There's so much traffic on the back roads I just can't get out."

If she has plans for dinner on Thursday or Friday nights, she has two options: go straight from work or not at all.

She says it's sometimes easier to drive into Vallejo than to downtown Fairfield.

City officials acknowledge they have a problem on their hands.

"The (freeway) interchange is not sufficient to handle peak traffic levels, " says Dave Feinstein, a Fairfield associate planner. "They do everything they can to avoid the interchange, and residents or travelers are savvy enough to avoid it by the local streets, which are not designed for traffic."

But Feinstein also says these are times of economic prosperity, and one can't have the jobs without the housing to go along with it. The inevitable result is traffic.

It doesn't look like there will be relief anytime soon.

Cordelia, which boasts little more than a Costco and Ethan Allen furniture store, will finally get its first major grocery store in the next few months. But Cordelia is also slated for a new high school, promising more drivers on the streets, and up to 5,600 additional homes under the city's approved general plan by 2020.

It will probably take at least that long to get a freeway interchange expansion approved, says Ron Hurlbut, Fairfield's deputy city manager, whose top job as of this summer was to seek federal funding for the improvement.

"We think this is going to be a very long process," he says.

But the the Greenbelt Alliance's Stivers faults city councils and county boards of supervisors for not planning ahead for growth and just reacting to development pressures after they create problems, as in the case of Cordelia.

Some residents have already tried to navigate the commute.

Jim Peek, who moved to Cordelia 15 years ago, finally got sick of five years of commuting from San Francisco and back.

It took him and his wife, Maggie, 40 minutes initially to get into San Francisco. By the time he got fed up, it was an hour and a half. And that was just going into the city.

Coming back took him 2 1/2 hours. Three if it was a Friday night.

They wised up, and he got a job in Concord. That was better, but still a nightmare.

Peek finally become an independent consultant and is recently working in Burlingame. He either stays there all week or leaves for work at 3 a.m.

It's a different scene from Wyoming, where he came from.

"All the great jobs are here," he says. "People can't move any further west,

so it's got to come east. They just need the infrastructure to handle it."

A few noisy nights ahead at Highway 99 overpass

By Abbie Dutcher

Record Staff Writer

RIPON -- Highway 99 will be closed in both directions near Ripon for three nights this week so construction crews can demolish the old Jack Tone Road overpass.

Crews plan to tear down the narrow two-lane bridge during the evening hours Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday, provided bad weather doesn't interfere with the schedule, officials said.

Traffic will be detoured off the freeway onto surface streets and back onto the freeway. The detours will run from 9 p.m. to 5 a.m. all three days.

"This is not new to us. But I expect we will still have some congestion there," Ripon City Engineer Matt Machado said. "Hopefully, people will behave themselves."

Crews will have to work around the new concrete spans over the freeway. Judith Buethe, the project's public-information coordinator, said engineers plan to use inch-thick steel plates, roughly 6 by 12 feet, to cushion the impact of falling debris and protect the pavement below.

Equipment resembling giant hydraulic jackhammers mounted on backhoes will be used to knock out the old deck and soffit of the bridge, she said. Once that is done,

crews will tear out the concrete girders and reinforced steel and remove debris from the site.

Authorities have tried to schedule closures during night hours to minimize traffic disruptions.

Buethe said it's very common when building over a freeway to close off the entire roadway for safety reasons.

Since construction on the new interchange began last year, the freeway has been shut down four times, officials said. This week's operation will be the fifth.

"There may be some lane closures in the future, but no freeway closures," Buethe said. "This will be the last one."

Southbound 99 traffic will be detoured via the Jack Tone Road offramp and directly back onto the freeway via the onramp. Northbound traffic will exit the freeway at the Jack Tone Road offramp and take surface streets to the Austin Road onramp.

City police and California Highway Patrol officers will be on hand during the operation this week to monitor traffic, Machado said.

Digital warning signs also have been posted along the freeway to advise motorists of the closure.

"Of course, everything hinges on the weather," Machado said.

The $23 million interchange-reconstruction project is being funded by the city of Ripon and San Joaquin County's Measure K, a voter-approved half-cent sales tax used to finance to regional transportation projects.

Nolte Associates is handling construction management and inspection services while the California Department of Transportation is providing oversight.

The project, which includes the installation of four new bridges and new freeway entrance and exit ramps, is scheduled to be completed sometime this spring.

Too much noise

AREAS: Noise levels are in excess of 67 decibels

The following areas in the county qualify for soundwalls because studies show that noise levels in those places exceed 67 decibels and that soundwalls would reduce noise by at least 5 decibels:

Highway 126 westbound from D to C streets (Los Serenos Tract): 580 feet of wall

Highway 126 westbound from E to D streets (Waterford Tract): 1,400 feet of wall

Highway 101 southbound at Snow Avenue (between Vineyard and Rose avenues): 1,000 feet of wall

Highway 126 eastbound from Peck Road to 0.1 mile east of Steckel Drive: 2,600 feet of wall

Highway 126 westbound from Peck Road to 0.2 mile east of Santa Paula Creek: 7,450 feet of wall

Highway 126 eastbound from 0.2 mile west of Palm Avenue to 0.1 mile east of Eighth Street: 1,000 feet of wall

Highway 118 westbound from Erringer Road to Sycamore Drive: 4,800 feet of wall

Highway 118 eastbound from Sequoia Avenue to Tapo Canyon Road (portion between Sycamore Drive and Sequoia Avenue not eligible): 3,200 feet of wall

Highway 118 westbound from Sycamore Drive to Tapo Canyon Road: 6,250 feet of wall

Highway 118 eastbound from First Street to Sycamore Drive: 6,900 feet of wall

Highway 101 southbound from Wendy Drive onramp to Borchard Road onramp: 2,200 feet of wall

Highway 101 northbound from south of Hampshire Road to north of Conejo School Road: 3,700 feet of wall

Highway 101 southbound from the Lynn Road southbound offramp to about 1,000 feet north of the offramp: 1,055 feet of wall

Highway 1 northbound from south of Nauman Road: 500 feet of wall

Highway 33 northbound from Ventura Avenue to Canada Larga Road: 1,500 feet of wall

Highway 126 eastbound from 0.48 mile east of Kimball Road to Wells Road: 4,950 feet of wall

Highway 101 northbound from Telephone Road to Highway 126 westbound: 2,100 feet of wall

Highway 126 westbound from Victoria Avenue to Hill Road: 900 feet of wall

Highway 126 eastbound from Youmans Drive to DeBussy Lane: 1,100 feet of wall

Highway 126 westbound from Kimball Road to Petit Avenue: 4,100 feet of wall

Highway 126 eastbound from Hill Road to Holmes Avenue: 2,600 feet of wall

Highway 126 eastbound from Camelia Way to Lilac Way: 1,400 feet of wall

Highway 101 northbound from 0.25 mile west of Lemon Grove Avenue to Main Street: 1,850 feet of wall

Soundwall relief is clearer possibility

RESULTS: Study indicates 23 county areas meet noise requirements for walls.

By Helen Gao

Ventura County Star writer

Like many Ventura County residents who live near a freeway, Cecelia McRoberts of Simi Valley has been pleading for soundwalls for years.

All the while, she has waited hopelessly for Caltrans to build them.

"We have had double-paned windows put in. Still you can hear the freeway," she said. "When you go outside and you hear the freeway all the time, it drives you crazy. You don't relax."

With the Ventura County Transportation Commission now in charge of soundwalls in the county, relief might be on the way.

After securing $10 million in federal and state funding to build soundwalls last year, the commission has conducted a countywide noise study on areas near freeways to decide how to best spend the money.

In December, the results of the study were released. Out of 36 areas surveyed, the commission determined 23 met the requirements for soundwalls.

To qualify, an area's noise level must test at or above 67 decibels. In addition, it must be shown that a soundwall at the location will reduce noise by at least 5 decibels.

Depending on the location, the average height of walls will vary between 10 and 16 feet. The total cost of the eligible projects is estimated at more than $32 million. The cost of individual projects range between several hundred thousand dollars to several millions.

Cities have been asked to contribute 11.5 percent for their projects. They have also been asked to prioritize the eligible areas in their jurisdiction because not all of those areas will be funded due to the limited budget.

"I feel comfortable that we will have one project. Whether we will do more than that I am not sure," said Laura Magelnicki, Simi's assistant city manager.

But she is nevertheless excited about the progress the TransportationCommission has made.

"It has been such a long time. I know it has been so frustrating for the residents of this community. This is really the first time we see something positive coming forward," she said.

Rick Raives, city engineer for the city of Ventura, which has the most soundwall requests among all the cities in the county, agreed.

Raives said it used to be that when Caltrans received complaints from residents, they would take down the information and put the location at the end of a long list of locations.

But even with the matching funds from the commission, Raives is worried about his city's ability to come up with matching funds.

"I am not sure if we have enough funds to get very many done," he said.

The city of Ventura, which is crossed by highways 101, 33 and 126, submitted 16 soundwall requests. Half were deemed ineligible for funding.

Surprisingly, Raives said two of the most frequent areas of complaint are ineligible. Those areas are Highway 101 southbound from Seward Avenue to Beachmont Street and Highway 126 at the westbound Main Street offramp.

The city of Ventura has asked the TransportationCommission to revaluate its findings. The city of Thousand Oaks also have made a similar request regarding Highway 101 northbound from Lynn Road onramp to 2,500 feet west of the onramp. That area did not make it on the eligible list.

After all the cities have returned their priority listings, the commission will re-rank its list of projects to reflect the input. Currently, Simi and Ventura areas top the list according to decibel levels.

"The idea is to have some equity throughout the county, so every city that wants to participate will at least get some project," Magelnicki said.

Tuesday, January 9, 2001

New-lane construction begins soon on 405

By Orith Goldberg

Staff Writer

Tuesday, January 9, 2001

Launching a multimillion-dollar project to ease traffic gridlock at the 101-405 freeway interchange, Caltrans will begin adding a northbound lane on the 405 this month, officials said Monday.

The lane addition to one of the state's busiest interchanges -- the San Fernando Valley's epicenter of gridlock -- is the first of several planned improvements including a second lane from the northbound 405 Freeway to the eastbound 101.

It also is the first visible work on a project that was prompted by a Daily News series in 1997 outlining problems and solutions to mounting congestion at the interchange. A recent nationwide survey called it the sixth-worst bottleneck in the United States.

"It's about time," said David W. Fleming, chairman of the Economic Alliance of the San Fernando Valley and a former member of the state Transportation Commission.

The addition of the $5.6 million lane between the Mulholland Drive overcrossing and Sepulveda Boulevard is scheduled to be completed by December, officials said.

The auxiliary lane is expected to ease the transition to and from the 405 and the 101, as well as reduce the likelihood of collisions, officials said.

Construction, however, is expected to worsen congestion: It will require closing the right lane from 6 a.m. to noon weekdays, beginning in mid-January and lasting through mid-March.

The Ventura Boulevard off-ramp will also be closed intermittently in accordance with the work schedule of the excavation crews.

To avoid freeway delays, Caltrans officials said motorists might want to consider traveling on Sepulveda Boulevard, which runs parallel to the freeway.

"It's really to improve one of the busiest interchanges in California," said Caltrans spokeswoman Margie Tiritilli.

Fleming said he does not expect the new lane to solve the interchange's congestion problem, which has grown every year since it was built in the early 1960s. But he said the project should help.

"You've got to break the egg before you make the omelet," he said.

Fleming expressed frustration with the length of time it has taken to begin work on the improvements. Money from the state's general fund might not be available for other such projects in the area if they take as long to come to fruition, he said.

"I'm concerned this windfall of money might disappear," he said. "We may be losing those funds because they are not being utilized."

California Highway Patrol Officer Frank Sansone said the addition of a lane certainly would help. "Any additions to the freeway lanes are always going to help allow traffic to get through easier," he said.

The construction, however, is bound to cause headaches for commuters. "It slows everybody down with the same amount of volume squeezing through less space."

Caltrans officials said they will install electronic signs along the freeway to inform drivers about the closure.

Wednesday, January 10, 2001

Bypass to divert traffic from Mojave in works

Filed: 01/10/2001

By KERRY CAVANAUGH

Californian staff writer

e-mail: kcavanaugh@bakersfield.com

Construction on the new Mojave Freeway is set to begin in the coming weeks, kicking off the two-year, $76 million project to carry Highway 58 traffic around downtown Mojave.

The nine-mile stretch of fresh asphalt through the desert will divert the major truck traffic from Sierra Highway, alleviating the backup on one of the town's major thoroughfares.

Sierra Highway currently carries Highway 14 and Highway 58 traffic through downtown Mojave.

The project has been in the planning for more than 10 years, but still faced opposition in the final stages from a coalition of Mojave business owners who fear losing the roadside commerce.

The new four-lane freeway will run east from the Randsburg cutoff, cross Highway 14 with an interchange north of the Mojave airport and head south to connect to the existing Highway 58, a few miles east of the town.

Other residents looked forward to a town free of bumper-to-bumper trucks and traffic.

Caltrans expects to complete the bypass in early 2003.

Since the new road cuts through the desert, there should be little traffic impact during construction, according to Caltrans.

But the project does run through the habitat of the desert tortoise, which is considered a threatened species. Construction workers will have to set up 31 miles of special fencing to keep the tortoise out of the construction area.

Overpass construction likely delayed

Filed: 01/10/2001

By CHRISTINE BEDELL

Californian staff writer

e-mail: cbedell@bakersfield

Lack of funding probably will delay construction of a $9 million overpass at Highway 184 and Edison Highway in east Bakersfield by about one year, officials say.

The Greater Bakersfield Separation of Grade District has just $6 million for the project now, less than it had hoped to have by this time.

The agency had planned to start building the overpass in late 2001, but that's not likely now, said Ron Ruettgers, an engineer working on the project for Separation of Grade.

In light of the situation, the Kern County Board of Supervisors voted Tuesday to fund the project's preliminary engineering and ask the governor's office for transportation funds out of the current state budget.

The engineering work will cost the Roads Department about $10,000, according to staff reports.

If local officials don't obtain state money, they will put the project on hold and seek $2 million from Caltrans' 2001-02 budget, reports indicate.

The overpass is designed to improve both safety and traffic flow at the intersection, which has long been accident prone.

In December 1999, Separation of Grade officials told the Board of Supervisors they were only $1 million away from full overpass funding.

They said they planned to ask the city of Bakersfield and county of Kern to ante up the last $1 million.

Caltrans verbally committed $2 million, but now says it only can give $750,000 because it reallocated $1.25 million to other projects. The city remains tied up with projects of its own to complete.

Goleta may get long-promised bridge

1/10/01

By MORGAN GREEN

NEWS-PRESS STAFF WRITER

mgreen@newspress.com

After years of mounting impatience among western Goletans, county officials say they're ready to design a promised $3 million Highway 101 pedestrian overpass to link the community's northwest neighborhoods to southside shopping and recreation areas.

The Santa Barbara County Public Works Department is set to enter a $394,000 contract with URS Corp. of Roseville to design the bridge over Calle Real, Highway 101 and the Union Pacific Railroad tracks. The site is about a half-mile west of Glen Annie Road. The Board of Supervisors will be asked to approve the deal within a month, said Bill Vashon, project manager.

Barring complications, the county's target for the start of construction is mid-2002, with completion about a year later.

In a 5-0 vote Tuesday that encompassed a number of routine items, the supervisors promised Caltrans that the county will indeed build the $3 million project. Caltrans asked for that formal commitment before releasing $500,000 to help pay for the bridge, which is the largest pedestrian/bicycle project in county history, officials said.

With the Caltrans money, the county will have about $2 million earmarked for the bridge. The county will seek the remainder from the federal government later this year, said Wilson Hubbell, senior environmental planner for Public Works.

That the county has amassed two-thirds of the project's costs should influence officials in charge of so-called T-21 monies, he said. "We're bringing a lot cash to the table."

Neighborhood bridge advocates have expressed persistent doubts that it would ever be built, citing the project's glacial progress and cost estimates that have nearly doubled since the plan was first aired in 1995 by then-Supervisor Bill Wallace.

Wallace had pegged the bridge's cost at about $1.5 million. He estimated that local developer fees would cover the cost and that construction would start in 1997.

His successor, Gail Marshall, has repeatedly assured northside El Encanto Heights residents and southside Ellwood residents that the bridge is still a sure bet. "I'm totally committed to this," she said.

Earlier this week Marshall said the county already has in hand the roughly $1 million to round out the project's budget. But, she said, the county wants to get enough state and federal funds to pay for the whole project, saving the county's funds for other needs.

A pedestrian bridge was first advocated in 1982 when 12-year-old Holly Davidson, a junior high school student, was killed by a car as she crossed the freeway on foot. More than 1,000 outraged area residents signed petitions calling for a pedestrian bridge.

But it was not until 1996 that the county appropriated $80,000 in seed money and held neighborhood meetings to choose a site. Wallace pushed the plan, saying children's safety was the issue as western Goleta developed and traffic increased. Goleta's biggest commercial and residential projects were recently built in the area.

Conceptual plans call for a 650-foot-long, 10-foot-wide bridge span. It would connect to a long ramp at the north end and a spiral ramp at the south end designed so people in wheelchairs could use it. A bike path would run from the south end to Pacific Oaks Road, which leads to the Camino Real Marketplace shopping center, the Dos Pueblos Little League fields and Girsh Park. A bike path from the north end leads to residential Tuolemne Drive.

"I'm looking forward to walking over to shop," said Irene Greene, an El Encanto Heights resident and longtime bridge advocate. But the most eager to see the bridge in place, she said, are parents whose children are drawn by southside attractions such as the park, the ballfields, and the big shopping center.

Students from Ellwood also would use the bridge to shorten their walk or bike ride to northside Dos Pueblos High School.

But some say the bridge is a waste of money. Harry Rouse's back yard will face the pathway to the bridge's northside ramp. He said the southside commercial areas are too far for shoppers to carry home purchases on foot, parents won't let their children stray that far from home, and high school students these days mostly drive cars.

The bridge design will be ready for public hearings sometime this summer, Vashon said.

Thursday, January 11, 2001

Agency approves Upland freeway extension contract

Published Thursday, January 11, 2001 12:00:00 AM

By Deborah Clark

Staff Writer

SAN BERNARDINO - The San Bernardino County Associated Governments board of directors awarded an $18.57 million contract to E.L. Yeager Construction Co. of Riverside to build 11.2 mile segment of the 210 freeway running from the Los Angeles County line east to Mountain Avenue in Upland.

That means excavation of the Upland segment of the Foothill Freeway could begin as early as next month, county officials announced Wednesday.

Yeager won the contract even though the company did not submit the lowest bid. R.E. Monks Construction Co. of Arizona submitted a bid of $18.30 million to do the work, but Yeager contested the validity of Monks' bid, arguing the company failed to list portions of work by subcontractors.

Monks' omission disqualified the company's bid, according to the county transportation agency.

"The point of the matter is that Monks did not do precisely as directed," said Gary Moon, director of freeway construction for the county agency. "Yeager did."

Moon told the board that both bids were lower than the agency's $21 million estimate.

Yeager has already been awarded the construction contracts for four other freeway segments in San Bernardino County that have been put out to bid and has completed work on three of those segments, which cut through Rancho Cucamonga and Fontana.

Two remaining unconstructed segments under San Bernardino Associated Governments's jurisdiction are expected to be put out to bid in the next few months.

At Wednesday's meeting, the board of directors also approved issuing $85 million in sales tax revenue bonds to fund three major projects: the Foothill Freeway construction through Upland, Rancho Cucamonga and Fontana, the installation of a truck lane on the 210 Freeway through Redlands and Yucaipa and the installation of a carpool lane on Interstate 215 through the city of San Bernardino.

The bonds are backed by funding from Measure I, the half-cent increase in county sales tax approved by voters in 1989. The money raised must pay for transportation projects within San Bernardino County.

The bonds are the third in a series issued by the San Bernardino Associated Governments in recent years. In 1996, the board approved issuing $60 million in bonds. It issued another $65 million in 1997.

"In October, we had an internal audit done for Measure I projects and determined we needed to increase cash flow and go out for a bond," said Cheryl Donahue, San Bernardino Associated Governments spokeswoman.

Bonds will be released Jan. 23.

Friday, January 12, 2001

Visalia's Highway 198 project advancing right on schedule

Only threat to its June opening would be bad weather, engineers say.

By Lewis Griswold

The Bee

(Published January 12, 2001)

The Highway 198 freeway construction project that began in December 1998 with the first truckload of dirt dumped should be open to traffic by June of this year.

That's right on schedule, said California Department of Transportation senior engineer Elias Mahfoud.

"There's still some work to be done," he said.

The concrete roadway -- two lanes for eastbound traffic, two lanes for westbound traffic, with each lane being 12 feet across -- is in place. The last of several hundred feet of the 10-inch-thick concrete ribbon of roadway was laid in December. Now the shoulders need to be put down using asphalt; retaining walls must be finished and off ramps completed.

The asphalt paving probably will occur in March or April.

The $43 million construction project extends the Highway 198 freeway from Visalia to Plaza Drive, connecting the city more directly to Highway 99. The new freeway is 5 miles long, from Mooney Boulevard to Plaza Drive. It's wide enough to be made into six lanes someday.

About half of the freeway is below grade, requiring that 1.1 million cubic yards of dirt had to be moved. About 60% of the dirt has been given away to farmers, mostly to dairies. The rest was used to build two overpasses, one at Akers Street and the other at Shirk Road.

"The deeper you dig, the sandier the soil," Mahfoud said.

A ceremony will be held before the freeway is opened to vehicular traffic.

"We'll let people walk on the freeway and ride their bicycles before it's open to traffic," Mahfoud said. No date for that ceremony has been set.

About the only thing that would delay the June opening until July or even August would be a period of bad weather holding up construction by R & L Brosamer, the contractor.

The freeway project has been a long time coming. Initial approvals came in the late 1980s, with environmental studies done in 1991. But like many freeway projects in California, it was put on hold in the mid-'90s when highway funds were spent to upgrade highway bridges in California to withstand earthquakes.

Contract runs out for tollway

January 12, 2001

Plans to build a $1 billion, 11-mile tollway [Route 57] above the Santa Ana River became increasingly unlikely Thursday after a company's contract to build the road expired.

The state Department of Transportation said it would send a notice to American Transportation Development of Irvine that it defaulted on a 10-year franchise agreement to begin construction by Jan. 11. Caltrans declined the company's months-old request to extend the contract.

Company President Grant Holland said he could not comment. The company has 60 days to respond to the notice.

Sunday, January 14, 2001

Yearning for the road less traveled

Sutter Creek bypass may be on fast track after decades of plans

By Francis P. Garland

Lode Bureau Chief

Originally Published Sunday, January 14, 2001

SUTTER CREEK -- Over the years, plans to reroute cars and trucks that clog historic Main Street onto a modern expressway have come to resemble the traffic itself.

Stop and go.

Folks in this Gold Rush-era community have been talking about a state Highway 49 bypass since Eisenhower sat in the White House. Through the intervening years, dozens of alternatives have been studied and in 1968 a preferred alternative was chosen.

But funding problems prevented the road from being built.

Now, though, officials believe the latest plan to relieve congestion and preserve the area's historic buildings is going to reach the concrete-and-asphalt stage -- at a cost of more than $30 million.

State Department of Transportation officials last week held a public hearing on the proposed Amador Bypass, a four-mile, two-lane expressway that would carry commuters, delivery trucks and others around both Sutter Creek and Amador City.

The state also has published an environmental assessment and draft environmental impact report that is available for comment through Jan. 26.

The environmental document outlines two proposed alignments and describes the impacts both would have on air quality, noise, aesthetics and the land itself. One home and an adjacent emu ranch might have to be relocated to accommodate the new road.

The two proposed routes share about two-thirds of the same alignment. Both would replace existing Highway 49 from just north of Highway 104/Ridge Road to just south of the Rancheria Creek Bridge.

The draft environmental impact report pegs the bypass price at

$27.8 million or $29.9 million, depending on the alternative. However, Charles Field, the Amador County Transportation Commission's executive director, said the cost is more like $30.5 million.

Field said the project is funded, thanks to a combination of state and federal money and a partnership formed by Amador, Calaveras and Alpine counties. The three counties agreed to pool some of their transportation money and spend it on the Highway 49 bypass, with the understanding that a similar arrangement would be used to fund projects that help the other two counties.

In Calaveras County's case, that's the Angels Camp Highway 4 bypass, which is now in the planning stages.

Field said if all goes well, the environmental review and approval work for the Highway 49 bypass should be completed by October. Design work and right-of-way acquisition is scheduled to be completed by December 2002, and tractors could start moving dirt by the summer of 2003. The new bypass could be finished by the fall of 2004 or the summer of 2005.

It couldn't be finished soon enough for those who say the growing traffic congestion is ruining Sutter Creek's ambience and tearing up its historic buildings.

"I think the bypass would improve the quality of life in our little town," said Jerry Budrick, who runs Caffe Via d'Oro on Main Street. "Traffic can get pretty outrageous.

"The bypass will make the town more attractive. It'll be a more peaceful place."

According to the environmental report, congestion is driving the need for a new bypass. As many as 15,000 cars and trucks per day were charted driving through Sutter Creek in 1999, and that number is projected to climb to 26,000 a day by 2025.

Without the bypass, traffic through Sutter Creek would slow to a crawl in 15 years.

Officials looked at widening the existing highway through town, but that would have required the removal of parking and the destruction of wood or plank walkways in front of the downtown businesses of both Sutter Creek and Amador City.

That would have destroyed part of the historic nature of the business districts, the environmental review concluded, and that alternative was eliminated.

Lee Goodin, the mayor of Amador City, said the huge trucks that rumble past his town do plenty of damage without hitting anything. Goodin said he sometimes works as a docent at the town museum, and when he opens the doors in the morning "there's all this mortar crumbling all over the floor. It's the result of those big trucks coming through.

"We know for a fact that heavy truck traffic is slowly destroying our historic buildings."

While many merchants along the old highway are anxious to see the trucks and commuters take an alternate route, some are concerned that the current bypass designs might make it difficult for people to reach the art galleries, boutiques and other shops downtowns.

Josie Cadieux, president of the Sutter Creek Business and Professional Association, said southbound travelers would need to make a left turn off the bypass onto the old highway -- and that means turning in front of high-speed traffic.

"I don't think a lot of tourists would want to do that," she said.

Cadieux also said the state needs to install adequate signs to make sure Main Street merchants don't lose customers to the bypass. According to the environmental document, merchants might lose some business at first, but with signs directing traffic to the business districts, the economic impacts would be minimal.

Other potential impacts include changes to the rural landscape, but again the review document pegs those impacts as minimal. The new road could result in the loss of nearly 60 acres of blue oaks, but new trees would be planted.

Some area residents say they're not convinced the state is looking at the best alternatives. Joyce Sutton said the state should direct trucks onto Highway 124 and build a smaller bypass near Ione, thereby preserving the rural area that otherwise will be home to the bypass.

"They already have a good road -- they should use what they have," she said, referring to Highway 124. "Why disrupt the wildlife and the beautiful countryside?"

Pleasanton committee considers I-680 ramps

A draft report suggests widening Stoneridge Drive as an alternative to building an interchange at West Las Positas Boulevard

By Bonita Brewer

TIMES STAFF WRITER

Published Sunday, January 14, 2001

PLEASANTON -- A city-appointed committee exploring options to the controversial Interstate 680 interchange at West Las Positas Boulevard issued a draft report Friday, saying that a viable alternative is to widen Stoneridge Drive and upgrade Stoneridge's interchange with I-680.

But the 11-member panel's loosely forged consensus to pursue a Stoneridge alternative -- without actually removing the West Las Positas interchange from the city's general plan -- is fragile and has not resulted in a final recommendation to the City Council.

The panel will seek public comment in February or March, and some city officials said the issue may be so controversial that it will end up on a citywide ballot.

"It's going to be a controversial, difficult decision," said Pleasanton Councilwoman Becky Dennis. While she supports looking at alternatives, "Not building the interchange will certainly have traffic impacts in Pleasanton, and it will have to be one of those community decisions, which is why we included in our general plan update an opportunity for folks to field a ballot initiative on this. Normally, something like this is not a referendable decision."

Friday's report from the committee and its city-hired transportation consultant concludes that widening Stoneridge, improving its intersections and reconfiguring its northbound ramps onto I-680 -- coupled with planned traffic improvements elsewhere in the city -- would eliminate the need for a West Las Positas interchange to deal with traffic congestion from future growth.

But there are some potentially significant environmental impacts with the alternative, as well as some financing questions.

"The elimination of the West Las Positas interchange essentially shifts traffic to Stoneridge Drive and some south to Bernal Avenue," the report says.

The proposed widening -- to four lanes each way between Hopyard Road and the I-680 interchange -- would require removal of most of Stoneridge's existing trees and median landscaping, and some of its meandering sidewalks, the report says.

The West Las Positas interchange has been part of the city's general plan for 30 years. But nearby residents fear it will dump through traffic into their neighborhoods and pose safety hazards for children walking to Donlon Elementary School.

Four years ago, the City Council appointed the 11-member committee to explore options to the West Las Positas interchange. The panel consists of seven residents, including four from the immediate area of the interchange, and four members from the city's business community.

The alternative being explored is to add a lane in each direction to Stoneridge between Hopyard Road and Stoneridge Mall Road, including over the interchange structure itself. A $45.3 million upgrade to Stoneridge's on-ramps to northbound I-680 would be needed by 2015, sooner than if the West Las Positas interchange is built, the report says.

None of that sits well with residents whose homes back onto Stoneridge.

"It's not right; we've taken enough of the brunt for the city," said Allbrook Circle resident Ella Moore, whose back fence is less than 10 feet from Stoneridge.

Her husband, John, said a West Las Positas interchange would spread the pain and be better for residents throughout the city.

"Widening Stoneridge is just going to create more traffic," he said. "Why not just spread it out by building the West Las Positas interchange? There would be less traffic in any one spot; it disperses it a little more."

But committee member Tom Gill said some additional impacts to Stoneridge are preferable to creating a whole new access from the freeway at West Las Positas, which he said would only increase the number of out-of-town cars cutting through Pleasanton to get from I-680 to I-580. He said that would be bad for the entire city.

"It doesn't make sense to make a second major east-west route across town," said Gill, who opposes the interchange even though he has moved from the affected neighborhood to south Pleasanton. "The interchange would take 1,000 cars off Stoneridge but add 2,000 to West Las Positas."

"Stoneridge would not look good with this alternative, but it is pleasant now? How much worse can it get? And do we want two streets like that, especially when it impacts one of Pleasanton's biggest elementary schools (Donlon) and one of its newest middle schools (Hart)?" Gill said.

The report says the Stoneridge widening and intersection improvements would cost $7.5 million compared with $29.4 million for the new interchange.

Developers have already agreed to provide funding for the West Las Positas interchange. But City Manager Deborah Acosta said it is unclear whether there is enough money to do the project and how much of that money can be shifted to alternatives.

Monday, January 15, 2001

Agency not buying into higher bypass costs

By SHAROKINA SHAMS

BEE STAFF WRITER

(Published: Monday, January 15, 2001)

OAKDALE -- Leaders of the Stanislaus Council of Governments don't want to help the state pay for the $28.5 million increase in the price tag for the Oakdale Bypass [Route 120].

"They asked, and I said, 'No,'" said Gary Dickson, the council's executive director.

Dana Cowell, district chief for the California Department of Transportation, said his agency will continue talks with Stan COG, a regional transportation agency.

Last month, state officials told the Oakdale City Council about the almost 30 percent increase. They made the same presentation Wednesday to a meeting of the Council of Governments. Its leaders were not persuaded.

"Our concern here is that we have so many other needs for this region clamoring for these funds that we can't afford to spend it all in one place and bail them (the state) out," Dickson said.

"Every dollar we are asked to dedicate to this project would have to come out of somewhere else: Highway 132, the Pelandale interchange, other Highway 99 plans or the Highway 108 project."

State and local officials said they are still committed to starting bypass construction by 2004, but no one could say where the additional money will come from.

The State Transportation Improvement Program already has earmarked $74.3 million for the Oakdale project.

The additional money will also come from state transportation funds, Caltrans' Cowell said.

Not so fast, says the Stanislaus Council of Governments.

A 1997 state law gives local agencies more say in where state transportation money is spent. Local agencies like Stan COG decide where they want to spend 75 percent of transportation improvement program money, while the state decides where to spend the rest.

The Council of Governments is getting about $14 million a year, Dickson said, which means "we would have to use the money for two years to pay the additional (Oakdale) cost."

But the Stanislaus agency will not do that.

The state in 1991 agreed to pay for the Oakdale Bypass, and agreed to pay for it completely, said Modesto City Councilman Tim Fisher, chairman of the Stanislaus Council of Governments.

"In our minds, this was a project selected under the old system in 1991," Fisher said. "They're saying that the costs have increased, but in my mind those monies should have grown as well."

Caltrans officials say the increased costs are the result of the need for a truck-climbing lane and additional bridges, and moving irrigation lines. Also, Caltrans did not add in what it calls relinquishment costs: the cost for safety improvements to the existing Highway 120, before the bypass replaces it and the old route is given to the city.

"It boggles my mind that they failed to factor in the cost of doing that," Oakdale City Councilwoman Britta Skavdahl said.

Finally, because of inflation, and because the project has been delayed so long, asphalt and other materials cost more.

"I have a problem eating the shortfall because of bad planning," Modesto City Councilman Mike Serpa, a Stan COG Policy Board member, said in a statement. "Even when you consider factoring in inflation, the enormity of the shortfall is suspect."

The bypass has been talked about for more than 30 years.

Cowell maintained that construction will start in 2004 and end in 2007.

"There's no stopping," he said Friday. "We're still going full speed ahead."

It is not necessary to have all the money in place until construction begins, officials said.

"It's not like we need to literally have it in the bank, but what we need to know is who is going to be the source," Dickson said.

He said he is doubtful that the state will put additional money into the Oakdale Bypass because Stanislaus County projects often are passed up for projects in Los Angeles and San Francisco.

Fisher and Dickson said they believe local legislators will have to get involved.

"At some point, this becomes a political issue," Dickson said. "And I think we're getting pretty close to that."

Friday, January 19, 2001

Highway 242 improvement near completion

BAY CITY NEWS SERVICE

Posted at 12:03 p.m. PST Friday, January 19, 2001

Caltrans officials have announced that the improvement of southbound State Highway 242 in Concord, a result of the $23 million Measure C project, is near completion.

Except for some minor work, the improved version of the roadway is expected to be 96 percent complete, weather permitting, by Sunday, after three years of work.

Remaining to be completed will be a few "punch list items" and three years of plant establishment on the new landscapes.

The project includes the widening of the highway from four to six lanes, the widening of connectors to Interstate Highway 680 and State Highway 4 by one lane, and the construction of five soundwalls.

From tonight through Saturday, Caltrans will close Highway 242 at the Olivera Road, Grant Street and Market Street / Clayton Road on- ramps, and the Gregory Lane / Monument Boulevard off-ramp to remove striping and the centerline.

On Sunday, several lanes and ramps along the highway will be closed between 8 a.m. and 6 p.m for the striping of the new road markers.

Saturday, January 20, 2001

THE PRESS-ENTERPRISE

Eucalyptuses felled as part of I-10 project

New interchange set at busy Sierra Avenue

By Sharon McNary

The Press-Enterprise

Published 1/20/2001

Lumberjacks felled scores of eucalyptus trees that have shaded Interstate 10 for decades early Friday morning to make way for a new interchange at Sierra Avenue.

About 300 of the trees will be removed on both sides of the freeway from Citrus Avenue to about 1,500 feet east of Sierra Avenue to create a 30-foot safety zone on either side of new auxiliary lanes, said Dennis Green, a Caltrans construction liaison.

The sight of the old windrow reduced to tree trunks on lumber trucks was the first visible sign of heavy construction that will continue until September 2002.

Long lines of trucks and cars often jam the freeway waiting to exit Sierra Avenue in Fontana. Caltrans and city officials broke ground for the interchange construction late last year.

The trees, most planted up to 80 years ago to shield vineyards and orchards from the wind, provided late-afternoon shade for westbound drivers on the highway that opened in 1955.

The trees were not in the direct path of new lanes to be constructed on both sides of the freeway, but they were within 30 feet of the lanes and would endanger vehicles that veer off the highway, Green said.

Cars waiting to exit the freeway will be able to wait in the new lanes without jamming the regular lanes, Green said.

Although it was not a primary reason to cut the trees, the longhorn eucalyptus borer and the red gum lerp psyllid beetles had infested the eucalyptus trees, posing the additional danger that weakened limbs could fall into traffic lanes during storms, Green said.

The public is invited to a meeting about the $18 million project at 9 a.m. Wednesday at the training facility at Kaiser Foundation Hospital, 9961 Sierra Ave., Fontana. For more information, call Dennis Green at (909) 383-6291.

I-15 interchange upgrade to open land for projects

CHUCK MUELLER

Saturday, January 20, 2001

BARSTOW Nearly 2,000 acres of prime land in north Barstow will be opened to commercial and residential development with the upgrading of the Interstate 15/Old Highway 58 interchange.

The project, expected to cost as much as $9 million, will create easy access to nearby Soap Mine Road and property along the north side of the Mojave River. The land has been eyed for years for upscale homes overlooking a golf course.

The City Council has awarded a $200,000 contract to Dokken Engineering of Rancho Cordova to draw plans to rebuild a substandard interchange structure so it can span five freeway lanes.

The firm will prepare preliminary designs and an environmental analysis, City Planner Scott Priester said. Its report is expected to be completed in 11 months.

The city has received a $3 million federal grant toward $3.6 million in design and engineering costs, officials said.

"We're responsible for 20 percent, or $600,000, of these costs," Priester said.

The present interchange, with sharp turns and no access to the south side of the freeway, does not meet standards of the California Department of Transportation, officials said. And it must be widened if a fifth lane is added.

Los Angeles-based Catellus Development Corp. owns land surrounding the interchange, City Manager Paul Warner said, and plans to give it to Caltrans.

Catellus and an environmental group, the Wildlands Conservancy, included the property in a land exchange with the federal government as part of efforts to swap land to protect habitat of endangered wildlife such as the desert tortoise.

By modifying the interchange, about 800 acres at the site will be opened for development. Construction of the interchange is expected to begin in late 2002, Warner said.

"A specific plan will be prepared to allow commercial services at the off-ramp," he said.

Another 1,000 acres of private property could be opened for development on the bluffs overlooking the river and in the bottomlands adjacent to city-owned land used to grow alfalfa.

In October, the city entered into an exclusive six-month negotiating agreement with developer Howard Palmer of Anaheim to find a viable use for about 160 acres of land along the river.

Since the 1980s, visionaries have looked at the site for a golf-course community, with water park and hotel. However, without access from the freeway, development has been stymied.

Wednesday, January 24, 2001

Businesses fret as trees fall to freeway work

EMILY SACHS

Wednesday, January 24, 2001

FONTANA As the trees come down, so comes the wind, dust and noise.

The early complications resulting from the weeklong felling of eucalyptus trees is just the beginning of Interstate 10/Sierra Avenue construction woes, which may last until September 2002.

For businesses near I-10, the loss of the 80-foot trees is opening them up for future problems.

At 24 Hour Fitness, the club gets a regular corporate inspection that includes the parking lot. Without the trees, dust will cover the parking lot and seep through the entrance, said operations manager Leigh Ann Ortiz.

Cleaning it all up will be a difficult feat.

"I would have to hire more staff, and that's not possible," she said.

The 300 trees are being cut down to make way for the $17.5 million interchange and its extended on-ramps. The trees, which Caltrans officials said are diseased, are mostly

being removed along the westbound lane.

Wood along the freeway will be removed by a contractor.

The trees were planted in the 1950s, the same time the now-outgrown interchange was built.

"We don't want to take out any more than we have to," said Caltrans project liaison Dennis Green.

As the interchange gets updated, the trees also have to go, according to a Caltrans rule that requires solid objects be removed if they are within 30 feet of main or merging lanes in new construction, said city Redevelopment Director Ray Bragg.

For the businesses that face the freeway, the loss of the greenery is just one of the worries.

The noise is a concern at the Inland Empire Center's Ultrastar movie theater, which has its entrance facing the westbound side of the freeway, said on-duty manager Ramses Gonzalez.

"It might get worse before it gets better," he said of the project.

Employees are already hearing complaints from customers, who are having trouble navigating the interchange and alternate routes.

"They're going to go to Rancho Cucamonga or San Bernardino," said April Ortiz, who supervises the front desk at 24 Hour Fitness. "We're going to lose a lot of business."

City officials said relief isn't far away.

Citrus Avenue improvements near the freeway are within two weeks of completion, and Valley Boulevard sewer projects near Cherry Avenue also will be completed shortly,

Bragg said.

Additional concerns from businesses can be addressed at regular advisory meetings led by Caltrans and sponsored by the Fontana Area Chamber of Commerce.

"That's where they can get all their questions answered," Bragg said.

Besides being in the way, the eucalyptus trees have likely fallen victim to deadly tree insects that are attacking trees around the state, said Leo Juma, San Bernardino County's plant pathologist and entymologist.

In 1998, about 250 eucalyptus trees were destroyed along I-10 west of the Ontario Mills mall because of the poor environmental outlook.

Because much of the Sierra project money came from city efforts, officials were able to put some of that money aside for replacement plants from Sierra to Citrus avenues.

"So that which we are taking out, we'll be replacing with new landscaping," Bragg said.

Thursday, January 25, 2001

SAN DIEGO UNION-TRIBUNE (?)

Caltrans to spend record amount on roads

By Kelly Thornton

STAFF WRITER

January 25, 2001

Caltrans will undertake a record $330 million in freeway projects in San Diego County this year, including widening the merge at Interstates 5 and 805 and extending reversible car-pool lanes on Interstate 15.

"We've got a lot of things going on in terms of new projects," Caltrans District Director Gary Gallegos said during his annual State of Transportation address Tuesday.

At least 15 major freeway projects are scheduled to begin in 2001, more than in any recent year. By 2006, about 365 lane-miles will be added to the county's freeway network, Caltrans said.

Gallegos attributes the freeway extension boom to more state and federal funding after the recession of the 1990s, and to politicians whose constituents are complaining about traffic.

County transportation officials, acknowledging that congestion is worse than ever, said they have a $29 billion plan for the next 20 years that includes major freeway construction projects, trolley expansion, a network of car-pool and bus lanes, and almost doubling the number of ramp meters at freeway entrances.

Freeways aren't the only answer, Gallegos said. Public transit, car pooling, telecommuting, staggered work hours and freeway patrols that help stranded motorists must all be part of the solution.

"We can't just build our way out of congestion," he said. "We've got to manage our way out."

SAN FRANCISCO CHRONICLE

Concord's East Contra Costa Neighbors See Red

Metering light will stall commute

Joe Garofoli, Chronicle Staff Writer

Thursday, January 25, 2001

Changing one traffic signal in Concord may unclog one of the city's worst backups, but it could create a chain reaction of bottlenecks across Contra Costa as other cities threaten to retaliate by metering lights on their streets.

Critics say it is another example of how the one issue -- traffic congestion -- that should unite Contra Costa too often pits city against city, with frustrated morning commuters literally stuck in the middle.

And even though the Concord City Council voted Tuesday night to change only one signal near the Chronicle Pavilion, the effect may be felt 20 miles east in Brentwood.

"Some cities want to cooperate only when it's good for them," said Antioch Councilman Jim Conley, whose morning commute will be lengthened because of the change. "This move (by Concord) just says, 'Screw you,' to the rest of us in east Contra Costa."

The chain-reaction theory goes like this: When Concord officials activate a metering signal late this summer at the corner of Myrtle Drive and Kirker Pass Road, they expect the morning commute to flow more smoothly from there all the way to the I-680 entrance in Walnut Creek. The metering signal will make westbound traffic in the morning move slower than it does with the current stoplight.

But east Contra Costa officials fear that commuters from their cities trying to avoid the daily crawl along Highway 4 may find traffic backed up through Pittsburg, Antioch and Brentwood.

The irony: According to Concord's traffic models, this favorite shortcut among east Contra Costa commuters through Concord city streets is actually nine minutes slower than taking Highway 4 to the same point.

This light has been a sticking point for years. Two years ago, then-Contra Costa County Supervisor, now-Assemblyman Joe Canciamilla blasted Concord for blaming east Contra Costa motorists for the Kirker Pass backup. He said Concord has acted irresponsibly by continuing to grow without considering the regional effect on local roads.

Yet Concord officials said the change, two years in the making and blessed by a variety of regional agencies, will help local drivers marooned on nearby city side streets as well as east Contra Costa commuters. The signal, estimated to cost $275,000, could be working by August.

"This will be like a reservoir, letting a little water through at a time," said John Templeton, Concord's transportation manager.

Computer models estimate that the backup will slow the commute from Pittsburg by only three minutes. But Pittsburg leaders accuse Concord of just passing on the bottleneck it inherited. Tie-ups along Kirker Pass began several years ago, when Walnut Creek put a metered signal at the Oak Grove Road intersection.

And the downstream reaction could start soon. To loosen expected tie-ups in his city, Pittsburg Mayor Frank Quesada said that next week the City Council will examine installing metering lights on all of its major east-west thoroughfares. And that could mean longer delays for commuters from Antioch, Brentwood, Oakley and all points east.

"This is like a domino effect," Quesada said.

Countered Antioch City Manger Mike Ramsey: "It's interesting that a city that is upset about metering lights would think about installing them in their city." He said Antioch's council had no plans to meter its streets.

But Concord officials say the change might not even be noticeable to eastern commuters, given other traffic improvements on the horizon.

The Kirker Pass metering light will not be installed until after Highway 4 is widened to Railroad Avenue in Pittsburg, making the freeway alternative more palatable to morning drivers. In addition, the Highway 242 widening is expected to be completed within a few weeks, speeding up that leg of the commute.

Regardless, this infighting is missing the real problem, said Pittsburg Vice Mayor Frank Aiello. Metering lights may temporarily ease a traffic issue, but they will not address the congestion's cause: the lack of jobs in the predominantly bedroom communities of east Contra Costa.

"This is a Band-Aid to the problem," Aiello said. "The real issue is that people are forced to get up at 5 in the morning to drive to their jobs somewhere else. We'd like Concord to come to the table and help with economic development in Pittsburg. That's what will help."

Friday, January 26, 2001

Oceanside gives work on interchange top priority

By Lola Sherman

UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER

January 26, 2001

OCEANSIDE -- Speeding construction of the Rancho del Oro Drive-state Route 78 interchange is the top priority for the city's Economic Development Commission this year.

Even before intersection plans could be approved, protests by neighbors stalled the project by forcing a new environmental-impact report.

In a retreat session yesterday at Marty's Valley Inn, the commission established its goals to help boost economic development in this city.

Commissioners ranked "branding" of the city second on their list. Branding means developing a theme, something more than a logo, that will be instantly recognizable as Oceanside's.

Commissioner Anne-Marie Maxe gave as examples the golden arches of McDonald's and the green and brown colors identified with the Starbucks coffeehouse chain.

"It's not going to be cheap," she said of the branding concept.

City redevelopment director Jane McVey has suggested a new city slogan: "Oceanside -- Take a Closer Look."

The city has had several slogans over the years. Perhaps the best known, on a prominent freeway billboard for many years, advised passing motorists to "tan your hide in Oceanside."

Commissioners also rated as high priorities the completion of the state Route 76 expressway to Interstate 15 and improvements to the interchange of northbound Interstate 5 to eastbound Route 78.

The state Department of Transportation is working on plans for the Route 78/I-5 interchange but has postponed design of the continuation of the Route 76 expressway due to environmental and resident concerns.

"If we're going to choke our access," Commissioner Kevin Stotmeister said, "all the good things Jane does go up in smoke."

Commissioners discussed written reports from four subcommittees -- on transportation, tourism, image/gateway and marketing -- and then marked their priorities on each. Items with the most first-place votes were deemed top priorities.

Also rated highly were efforts to create brochures and a forum to impress real-estate brokers in San Diego and Orange counties with the benefits of helping to locate new businesses in Oceanside.

Saturday, January 27, 2001

Bayshore Expressway extension put on hold

Published Saturday, Jan. 27, 2001, in the San Jose Mercury News

BY CHUCK CARROLL

Mercury News

The $60 million Bayshore Expressway extension project that would usher the Peninsula's Highway 101 commuters to and from the Dumbarton Bridge will be put on hold indefinitely next week, but other plans to relieve traffic on Highway 101 are expected to proceed.

The need for the expressway extension, which would parallel Highway 101 between Marsh and Woodside roads, will be evaluated after new lanes are added to the highway between the two intersections and the Woodside interchange is improved. There are also plans to widen Woodside Road between El Camino Real and Broadway.

In addition, work is expected to begin by the end of February to add new lanes to Highway 101 from Hillsdale Boulevard to Ralston Avenue.

Only after all that work is completed would San Mateo County transportation officials decide whether to proceed with the Bayshore Expressway extension, said Christine Dunn, a spokeswoman for the county transportation authority.

``We're not killing the project, we're just suspending it,'' Dunn said of the Bayshore Expressway extension.

``Right now the Route 84 extension is not cost-effective in terms of traffic relief,'' said Redwood City Mayor Ira Ruskin, who joins the transportation authority next week.

The existing Bayshore Expressway comes off the Dumbarton Bridge and runs north along the bay as far as Marsh Road. Current plans call for it to be extended to the next interchange, at Woodside Road.

But Redwood City engineer Joel Patterson said it makes little sense to invest $60 million in county transportation funds for a project that will simply move the bottleneck from Marsh Road to Woodside Road. Even with an upgrade, the Woodside interchange will not be able to handle the additional traffic, he said.

Patterson said he doubted the Bay Conservation and Development Commission would permit construction of the extension and that the money could be put to better use elsewhere in the county.

Sunday, January 28, 2001

SAN JOSE MERCURY NEWS

Work begins on alternative to Highway 1's Devils Slide

TUNNEL PAIR WILL PROVIDE RELIEF FROM NOTORIOUS STRETCH OF ROAD; PROJECT TO BE READY IN FIVE YEARS

BY MARILYN LEWIS

Mercury News

Published Sunday, Jan. 28, 2001

San Jose Mercury News

Impossibly beautiful. Inconceivably dangerous. Unequivocally the worst piece of pavement in California. And now, the coastal stretch of Highway 1 known as Devils Slide is about to be put to pasture, relegated to hikers, tourists, wildflowers and critters.

With that will die one of the state's longest and most bitter environmental battles. It is an improbably happy ending in which environmentalists and state highway engineers, who were once implacable enemies, have become amiable colleagues.

The saga of Devils Slide is the 30-year history of environmental policy and citizen influence in Northern California.

It's been a long, bloody fight.

``I'll believe it when I see it,'' Moss Beach resident Don Thornton said of the inland tunnels, now slated to be finished in about five years, that will take the place of Devils Slide. And when that infamous piece of Highway 1 becomes parkland, hikers and tourists will revel in some of the best whale-watching on the Pacific coast, Thornton said.

Next month, designers will begin detailed plans for two 4,000-foot-long environmentally acceptable tunnels, one in each direction, to route drivers just inland of the slide.

In a couple years, engineers will drill through San Pedro mountain. In five years -- maybe six -- drivers approaching the notorious slide south of Pacifica will lose sight of the ocean as they plunge through darkness to re-emerge on the coast.

As activist Lennie Roberts tells the story, the fight over Devils Slide began in 1971, when state engineers, full of the wilderness-subjugating hubris of the era, decided to move Highway 1 inland, slicing through wild peaks and spanning fragile wetlands with a 4.5-mile, four-lane sweep of elevated concrete.

History of trouble

In truth, the tale begins much earlier. According to Caltrans geologists, San Mateo County's public works office has complaint letters from 1866, when cranky residents were calling the slide area ``an abomination'' and ``an apology for a road.''

A century ago, a private electric railroad was built across the slide area -- a bad piece of engineering whose repairs helped drive the railroad company into bankruptcy by 1922. After that, the county seized the land, building Highway 1 in the 1930s.

California government eventually took over the highway, to the lasting regret of state engineers and bureaucrats.

``Quite frankly, we never really wanted it,'' Jeff Weiss, a Caltrans spokesman, said. ``There is no other road in California that compares to the amount of work and money per square inch that we have put into Devils Slide.''

The state's headaches weren't all related to engineering. After state engineers broached the elaborate bypass plan, environmentalists -- including the Sierra Club and Committee for Green Foothills -- took them to court in 1971, using new state and federal environmental laws to make Caltrans inventory the slide's ecosystem and list alternative plans and potential damage.

The bypass concept lost momentum. Although Gov. Jerry Brown's administration researched repairing the slide area and Gov. George Deukmejian pushed to start bypass construction, nothing changed -- except for the slides, which constantly damaged the road. Slides closed the highway 22 times between 1973 and 1983.

The trouble is not just from massive piles of rock and rubble that fall onto the road in bad weather. Erosion has caused the highway to drop 46 feet since the 1930s. During the winter of 1995 alone, the road bed was lowered eight feet.

Devils Slide's troubles are ancient. They predate bad engineering by humans, and humans themselves.

The trouble began in Southern California. In prehistory, geologists say, the granite mass that makes up the slide's cliffs erupted from the Earth's crust about 300 miles to the south. Inch by inch the mass, then underwater, moved north as the crustal plates ground against each other. And then layer after layer of sea deposits were piled atop each other and compacted on the granite mass. As the sea eventually retreated from the coast, this squirrelly, unstable knob became a cliff on dry land.

A solution to the problem

It was a bad spot for a road. But not until a prolonged 1995 closure did San Mateo County government officials feel sufficient pressure from residents to hire independent engineers to study the slide. The consultants had a new idea: a tunnel.

Environmentalists liked it. Why hadn't they thought of that, local activist Roberts remembers them asking. Persistent, they took the fight to the voters. ``We don't go away,'' she said, dryly.

In a 1996 election, foes of an overland bypass persuaded San Mateo County voters to pass a ballot measure promoting a bypass tunnel. That -- despite a court challenge by Half Moon Bay businessman Oscar Braun, who liked the overland bypass -- settled the political question.

Rep. Ted Lempert, a canny observer of the political process, was a county supervisor then. He divined that the bureaucracy would need constant poking to get the tunnel built. To keep the voters' decision from dying of neglect, Lempert corralled representatives from all the old warring parties -- state, federal and county government, politicians and engineers, environmentalists and bureaucrats, parks and the public -- into monthly meetings to keep the project moving.

Supervisor Rich Gordon, Lempert's successor, adopted the battle in 1997 and took it to Washington, D.C. He, Rep. Tom Lantos and Sen. Barbara Boxer scored ``continuing and ongoing federal emergency'' designation for the slide, placing it squarely at the mouth of the federal funding spigot. Now, $11 million for design is in hand and the future of the project -- estimated at $165 million -- is assured, Gordon said.

One of the environmental thickets through which tunnel plans had to pass was what to do about the home of the threatened red-legged frog species. The frogs live in a pond right in the tunnel's path, which is why state specialists are working on a new $100,000 pond nearby. Fifty or more of the little amphibians eventually will be moved at a cost of up to $2,000 a frog.

As if in compensation for their years of agony, San Mateo residents will endure little fuss during the tunnel's construction. No lanes will be closed -- construction will be inland of the present highway. No dirt and rock will be hauled away -- it will be needed for the approach roads.

The slide, ultimately, will remain. It never should have been burdened with a road, Caltrans spokesman Weiss said, and the hope is that after the old road is closed, it will become a park.

IF YOU'RE INTERESTED Project status meetings for Devils Slide, which are open to the public, continue every fourth Thursday of the month at 10 a.m. at San Mateo County's government center in Redwood City. Call Supervisor Rich Gordon's office at (650) 363-4569 for details.

Stuck on Rosedale Highway

Filed: 01/28/2001

By TIM BRAGG

and KERRY CAVANAUGH

Californian staff writers

Watching as a freight train trundled over the crossing on Rosedale Highway [Route 58] recently, California Highway Patrol Officer Sterlin Smith imparted a bit of wisdom common to regular Rosedale commuters.

"Five minutes of delay makes for 30 minutes of congestion," he said, as traffic steadily stacked up.

Very quickly, eastbound cars and trucks were stopped from the crossing all the way back to Fruitvale Avenue, nearly a quarter mile away.

"It's not going to get any better on this road any time soon," Smith said. "As a matter of fact, it's just going to get worse."

It's days like this that make Smith glad he lives in southwest Bakersfield.

"We have property out in this area, but we decided not to build a house on it because the traffic is so bad out here."

Looking at Rosedale's traffic challenges as a whole, it's hard to imagine a more poorly planned roadway.

Rosedale serves as the main east-west connection from Highways 99 and 58 to Interstate 5 so intra- and interstate traffic is heavy, mixing Winnebagos and truckers with daily commuters.

The highway is a corridor of heavy industry, including refineries, pipeyards and construction equipment companies. That means tractor-trailer rigs come and go at all hours making their pickups and deliveries.

The road fluctuates between being six, four and two lanes wide, creating regular bottlenecks.

Increased retail development has added traffic lights and attracted more motorists.

Increased residential development pours more motorists onto Rosedale every day.

The San Joaquin Railroad tracks east of Fruitvale do not have an overpass. So, when trains need to cross, traffic comes to a snarling halt – sometimes six times a day.

It didn't start out this way.

The planning was there, according to traffic planners and other officials. But not always the money or the political will.

So, through a series of nothing more than stop-gap measures, the Rosedale traffic nightmare was created. And it will take years to fix.

"If there's one underlying problem with Rosedale, it's that it has to play so many roles," Smith said. "With most roadways, you can say it's either a commuter road or a commercial road. But this one is both. You have SUVs and big trucks trying to stay out of each other's way."

In 1999, the latest year for which Caltrans has complete numbers, more than 3,200 vehicles squeezed through the intersection at Rosedale Highway and Highway 99 at the peak traffic hour.

Each 24-hour day, Caltrans recorded an average 41,000 vehicles through that same area, which is close to the road's capacity limit. The accident rate on the four-lane portion of the road is slightly above the state average.

Twenty years ago, 2,700 vehicles were recorded at that intersection during the peak hour, with 24,500 the daily average, according to Caltrans figures.

Meanwhile, the population has boomed in northwest Bakersfield.

In just the last 10 years the number of people living in the northwest has nearly doubled, 22,000 to 42,000. In the next 10 years the number of residents is expected to jump again to nearly 60,000.

If the metro area west of Highway 99 and north of the Kern River was separate from the city of Bakersfield, it would be the second largest city in the county in 2010, said Peter Smith a demographer for the Kern Council of Governments.

Asking city, county and state transportation planners if Rosedale Highway has kept up with development results in a resounding "no" on all counts.

"There's already enough growth planned for Rosedale and northwest Bakersfield to make Rosedale Highway stop functioning as a road," said Kern County Roads Commissioner Craig Pope.

If current development trends hold true, he said, that could be in as little as five to 10 years.

The best-laid plans

There is a widening project planned for Rosedale in the metro area's road construction plan, but transportation planners say that's not the answer.

The congestion, they say, is a symptom of a larger problem.

"If we were to widen Rosedale to six lanes without doing another east-west arterial, it's futile," said Jack LaRochelle, engineering services manager for the city of Bakersfield.

"It's like putting a Band-Aid on open-heart surgery," he said. "The only way to take enough pressure off Rosedale Highway in the long term is to build the Kern River Freeway."

While some see the freeway as the answer to Rosedale's ills, others have called it a boondoggle freeway to nowhere.

The first phase of that project would run seven miles from Mohawk Street to Heath Road. It's the top priority in the county's regional transportation plan and funding was approved by Kern Council of Governments in 1998.

A proposed second phase to connect the freeway with Highway 99 is not yet determined. Local transportation agencies commissioned the Bakersfield Systems Study last year to evaluate the metro area's traffic flow problems, including Rosedale Highway. The study will suggest that vital link between the Kern River Freeway and Highway 99.

There is still opposition from some local lawmakers who are worried about the environmental impacts to a water recharge area the first phase of the freeway would cross over.

The freeway has become such a point of contention among locals that in October two Bakersfield City Council members – David Couch and Mark Salvaggio –voted against purchasing land for the alignment.

And the route has yet to be adopted by the California Transportation Commission. That adoption is on hold until the Federal Highway Administration approves the first tier of environmental documents, according to Caltrans Deputy District Director Alan McCuen.

Meanwhile, transportation planners and others have gone on with developments, assuming the freeway will become reality. Proponents expect construction on the first phase to begin in 2006, McCuen said.

From country road to highway

Even as far back as the 1950s, when Rosedale was a sleepy country road threading through farm lands, it was the subject of big plans.

State transportation planners had designated State Route 58 as Kern County's east-west freeway.

The alignment paralleled Brundage Lane coming from the east to hit the area around Real Road and Stockdale Highway. The freeway was then supposed to curve northwest through the area that is now the California Avenue corridor, cross the Kern River, meet with Meacham Road and head straight west.

But three factors stopped Highway 58 from fulfilling its western trek past Real Road, retired Kern County Public Works Director Dale Mills said.

They were money, politics and public opposition.

From 1975 to 1983, Governor Jerry Brown put a stop to all freeway projects in the state both because of a recession and as an anti-sprawl measure, halting the funding for construction on Highway 58.

The freeway was completed to Real Road in the late 1970s, but that left Bakersfield with half a freeway. The city and county would have had to pick up the bill for the western progression, Mills said.

Transportation planners couldn't muster the money or political support for the project, he said.

The western alignment met with opposition from the few homeowners in the area and the former Tenneco, which was planning to develop business complexes along present-day California Avenue, west of Highway 99, Mills said.

At that time, Bakersfield was concentrated east of Oak Street. The area west of Oak was largely empty except for a small subdivision near Real Road and Belle Terrace, Mills said. Only a few houses would have been impacted by the new freeway.

The money, opposition and politics of the time put an end to the freeway at that point, Mills said.

Transportation planners continued to try to figure a way to continue the freeway, envisioning the original Kern River Freeway route connecting to Highway 99 and then winding west through oil fields, Mills said.

But that version of the Kern River Freeway was stalled in the 1980s when transportation dollars were sparse and interest in the project waned, McCuen said.

The freeway was resurrected when traffic conditions worsened, he said.

The specific line for the Kern River Freeway as it is planned today was adopted by the city and the county in 1991 amid outcry from environmentalists and Rosedale residents.

Despite the opposition and challenges to the latest incarnation of the Kern River Freeway, it has served as the backbone for the development boom in the northwest and southwest.

Subdivisions approved in western Bakersfield since 1991were almost all approved by the city and county on the assumption that the Kern River Freeway would be built and would serve the area's transportation needs.

Even more developments are in the planning stages. They include an expansion of the Northwest Promenade at Rosedale Highway and Coffee Road that will nearly double the development's current size. And a Costco is planned on Rosedale near Gibson that will bring more traffic to an already busy intersection.

Looking for extra lanes

While waiting for an ultimate solution, widening schemes abound for Rosedale Highway.

The Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 Plan calls for the road to ultimately be widened to six lanes between Highway 99 and Allen Road, as it is considered a thoroughfare.

A project to make sure the road is at least a consistent four lanes from Highway 99 to Enos Lane is supposed to occur between 2008 and 2012, according to the Regional Transportation Plan.

Caltrans has pinpointed areas where the road could be widened to six lanes, but there is no time frame for such an expansion, McCuen said.

But there are few undeveloped frontage areas left to accommodate extra lanes.

Getting Rosedale to six lanes could mean local governments would have to turn to eminent domain, forcing owners to sell, LaRochelle said. That is a very unpopular option even though local governments would be required to buy the land at market value.

Widening is made more complicated because Rosedale is a state highway, meaning it has to adhere to Caltrans standards rather than city or county standards.

"It adds to the costs to buy the right-of-way and the building of the lanes," LaRochelle said.

City and county coffers do not have the dollars for those kinds of expenses at this point.

Paying to play

Widening projects are now done on a piecemeal basis, prompted and paid for by new commercial development along the road since the mid-1990s.

New commercial developments bigger than 100,000 square feet, such as the Northwest Promenade, are required to conduct traffic studies to figure out how best to accommodate increased traffic caused by the development. That can sometimes mean new signals and new lanes.

New developments that require an amendment to the city or county's general plan must also conduct such traffic studies.

To help pay for street improvements, new developments in the city pay what's known as traffic impact fees that go into a fund for projects all over the metro area.

For residential developments, the fees are $2,197 per home, and $1,417 for every unit of a multi-family housing structure.

The fees for commercial and industrial properties vary depending on how many car trips the retail centers are expected to create and the total square footage of the buildings.

The new Costco retail center planned at Gibson Road will bring an extra westbound lane in the area. Costco will pay $600,000 to $700,000 of the $1.2 million total cost.

Because of differences in city and county development standards, not every project is subject to the fees or traffic mitigation requirements.

Pope said the county and city have different road building requirements such as landscaping on medians and shoulder widths.

Pope and LaRochelle said the city and county are meeting to make these codes more similar, so that roads will have a more uniform look and design.

Stuck in the slow lane

Even with traffic impact fees, planners say there just isn't enough money to bring Rosedale up to speed. Especially considering the fees have only been collected since 1992 and development before then doesn't have to pay into that traffic impact fee pot.

And when fees are raised, developments that are already finalized don't have to pay the increase, even if they're constructed after the raise.

As development brings a hodgepodge of improvements to Rosedale, local government considers ways to regain its footing on road construction and improvements.

"Before the 1980s, local government paid for the building of almost all the roads in the county," Pope said. "But things have changed. The last road the county built by itself was in 1987."

City Councilman David Couch believes an inflator mechanism should be added to the city and county transportation impact fee ordinances so the fees will take into account the rising costs of construction of new roads, similar to the way sewer fees are structured.

"We have a mechanism with the sewer fees that allows for the rising costs of construction over the years," Couch said. "A similar mechanism for traffic impact fees would help to keep taxpayers from subsidizing the costs of new development."

Others feel Kern County voters need to step forward and approve a half-cent sales tax to fund much-needed road improvements throughout the county, including on Rosedale. Such a tax came before voters in 1989 and was promptly tanked, recalled Mills.

"The lack of money that could have come through the half-cent sales tax is the single major factor that has not allowed the city and the county to handle the traffic improvements necessary to fix congestion," Mills said.

Pope said a group of state legislators tried to make passing a sales tax measure for roads easier by adopting State Constitutional Amendment Three, which would have lowered the necessary two-thirds voter approval to a simple majority. But State Constitutional Amendment Three also failed.

Pope said the chances of getting the public to pass a tax increase measure are slim because of the required super-majority.

"The problem is the public doesn't think that things are bad enough yet," Pope said. "If we could educate them so that they know in five years we're going to have a problem, then we could get the thing passed.

"But most won't vote for a tax increase until they're stuck on the roads," he said. "Even once a tax is passed, it takes another five years more before you start to see some relief."

Traffic planners believe the solution to Rosedale's troubles lies in an expressway adjacent to Rosedale with no traffic signals and no intersections.

But with the Kern River Freeway still shaky and at least five years from construction, some are looking at other options.

Couch believes a better way to design the Kern River Freeway project is to make it a parkway, keeping it a city – instead of a state – highway.

Couch also believes building a flyover of Hageman Avenue to allow it to connect to Highway 204, known as Golden State Highway, would provide many in the area with a good alternative to using Rosedale Highway.

One thing is clear, the problem of truly solving the Rosedale mess won't come from an engineer's drafting table, but from elected officials charged with the final decision.

"Freeways have been planned for years but they've never been able to implement them because of objections," Mills said.

"It will take a lot of vision on the part of politicians to bite the bullet and construct (roadways) looking into the future."

Monday, January 29, 2001

Officials seek Freeway 41 extension to Yosemite

Madera supervisors cite crashes on the two-lane highway.

By Charles McCarthy

The Fresno Bee

(Published January 29, 2001)

MADERA -- For the public's safety, a four-lane Freeway 41 must be extended now all the way to Yosemite National Park, two Madera County supervisors say.

The alternative, Supervisors Frank Bigelow and Gary Gilbert say, is a mounting toll of deaths and injuries on the heavily traveled, two-lane state route north from Avenue 12, where the freeway presently ends.

And, they say, the federal government should be the entity that pays for it.

"I think the time is long past to start beating the drums to the concerns of safety along Highway 41," Bigelow says. "If we don't start today, it won't get done tomorrow."

Gilbert, a retired California Department of Forestry planner, estimates that 30% of the yearly traffic on Highway 41 has a "direct relationship" to Yosemite and Sierra National Forest.

"A lot of the freeway definitely is federal responsibility on 41," Gilbert says.

Highway 41 is a state-designated route under the jurisdiction of the California Department of Transportation.

Bigelow's and Gilbert's supervisorial districts include foothills and mountains between the Valley flatlands north of the San Joaquin River and Yosemite. Both warned about unavoidable danger, particularly in one notorious area: Rocky Cut.

Drivers traveling north reach Rocky Cut just after Highway 41 rises above its straight-arrow course from Fresno and begins winding through the hills. Its name comes from California Highway Patrol and California Department of Forestry fire dispatchers.

Bigelow lives in the foothills community of O'Neals. As a Madera County volunteer firefighter, he says, he has seen "carnage" along Highway 41: "People decapitated, body parts strewn along the highway ... people's lives torn apart."

Within hours after the supervisors' warnings last week, Madera County firefighters, California Highway Patrol officers, helicopter crews and ambulance crews rushed to a four-car, head-on crash "with fire ... in the Rocky Cut."

CHP reports note that in this accident, four people were injured. No one was killed. The injured were from Fresno, Clovis, Madera and Coarsegold. Traffic in both directions was tied up for more than three hours.

Gilbert says the most dangerous section of 41 is between Highway 145 and the North Fork turnoff at Road 200. That's where the present two-lane roadway winds through a "no-recovery zone" that includes Rocky Cut.

"There's no recovery. If anything happens, you're into rocks," Gilbert says.

Caltrans records in Fresno confirm increasing traffic through the "no-recovery zone." A daily average of 10,000 vehicles zoomed through there in 1998. In 1999, the most recent year for which counts have been tallied, the daily average rose to 12,100 vehicles.

Since 1992, 221 accidents have occurred, with seven people killed and 197 injured, along Highway 41 just in the nine miles between Highway 145 and Road 200, CHP officer Robert Clay said.

Drivers fear risks of Winchester Road

By Rocky Salmon

The Press-Enterprise

Published 1/29/2001

Jenna Leon said she is tired of the deadly live version of "Frogger" she must play everyday while driving on Winchester Road [Route 79].

With cars and trucks roaring down the busy two-lane highway, Leon, 24, said she feels like the frog that must cross a busy highway to reach the next level in the arcade game

"Driving along you feel pressure from every side," Leon said. "People tailgate. Others weave in and out, crossing double-yellow lines without worry of other's safety. Cars at intersections trying to get on the road dart in and out, with tires squealing.

"One mistake and it's game over," she said.

With four traffic deaths along the 15-mile stretch of Winchester from Highway 74 to Murrieta Hot Springs Road in the past two months, combined with a recent boom in housing, traffic and county officials have refocused their attention on the two-lane road, also known as state Highway 79.

"The consensus seems to be that there needs to be improvements to the road," said Riverside County Transportation Commission spokesman John Standiford. "But there is not a widely agreed upon solution."

Some improvements are in the works. The six-mile stretch of Winchester between Keller and Newport roads will be widened from two-to-four lanes. Work could begin in two or three years, he said.

In the longer term, transportation officials want to realign Highway 79 through Hemet and San Jacinto. But that's five to 10 years away, Standiford said.

Caltrans spokesman Tim Watkins said a traffic signal will be installed at Scott and Winchester roads. A date has not been set because the funding of the signal must be discussed. Riverside County also wants to erect a signal at Auld and Winchester roads before the new courthouse at Southwest Justice center opens in 2002.

Drivers say the 15-mile stretch of Winchester Road from Murrieta Hot Springs Road to Highway 74 is a dangerous alternate route for those who do not want to take Interstate 215. The road shoots straight from the small rural community of Winchester, with cows and wheat grass lining the shoulders, into an area of Temecula backed up by mall traffic and commuter getting on Interstate 15.

California Highway Patrol Capt. Jeanne Jungers said the rural road is such a straight and open line that motorists often drive faster than they realize.

Barbara Simons travels daily from Murrieta to Hemet to volunteer at the Hemet Unified School District. For the past month she has avoided Winchester Road altogether.

"People treat the road like a freeway," said Simons. "You can't possibly make a turn from a side street onto Winchester Road and be traveling the same speed as the rest of traffic. I wish people would just follow the rules of the road."

Jungers said the recent spate of accidents have been the result of negligent driving by the motorists.

But she said any new stoplights would significantly decrease the number of accidents as drivers would not be able to sustain a constant high rate of speed. The lights might also reduce the number of accidents caused by people trying to pass over double yellow lines.

Fortunately for motorists along Winchester Road, the Temecula CHP has been granted funds as part of a larger CHP County Road Enforcement program, which will put more of its officers on the dangerous county road. The money pays the overtime of officers, Jungers said, and most will spend time along Winchester Road enforcing traffic safety.

Jungers said Winchester Road has also been nominated by Temecula CHP to receive funds for a CHP corridor project. The program focuses on lowering fatalities and injuries in a 10-mile strip from the Temecula city limits to Scott Road. Highway 76 in Palomar in San Diego County has also been nominated.

Still, Jungers said the CHP can only lower accidents by a small amount and that part of the problem stems from an increase in residential growth along the road.

"When you increase the number of people in an area, the number of cars increase," Jungers said. "Pretty soon you have a quantity of cars in a small volume of space and injuries are inevitable. It's unfortunate we have had a rash of injuries from negligent drivers and hopefully with the new program and road improvements we can lower the numbers."

For motorists like Jenna Leon, those improvements could not come quick enough.

"Every time you travel on that road you pray the monster accepts your quarter and you can continue on with your life," Leon said. "In this short year too many people have had their lives ended too soon because of that road."

Wednesday, January 31, 2001

Twenty routes for freeway unveiled

Filed: 01/31/2001

By CHRISTINE BEDELL

Californian staff writer

Transportation officials on Tuesday unveiled 20 potential freeway routes to better move traffic throughout Bakersfield, the first release of findings from a $1.9 million study started last year.

Half of the proposals, shown to the Kern County Board of Supervisors, are route variations of the proposed Kern River Freeway [Route 58], while the rest are alternatives to that freeway.

The alternatives include alignments along Stockdale Highway and 7th Standard Road and a full beltway system around the city.

Based on local government and other public input, engineers will select the three to six best physical and economic options and study them in more depth.

The next presentations will be at 7 tonight at the Bakersfield City Council meeting and at a public workshop from 6 to 8 p.m. Feb. 7, at the Bakersfield Convention Center.

The firm URS Greiner Woodward Clyde drew up the plans as part of the so-called Metropolitan Bakersfield Transportation Systems study commissioned by the Kern Council of Governments last April.

Kern COG, a regional transportation agency whose board consists of county and city officials throughout Kern, partnered up with Kern County, the city of Bakersfield and Caltrans to bring on URS Greiner.

They used state and federal grants to fund the study.

The projects outlined Tuesday would direct traffic over the next 30 years by linking local freeways to each other and to major arterial roadways.

URS Greiner did not put a price tag on – or describe the community impacts of – any of the options.

It will make those kinds of assessments after the list gets pared down to a more manageable number, said Jeff Chapman, senior project manager.

Kern COG and URS Greiner have set an ambitious schedule for completing the systems study and selecting the best projects.

An analysis of each of the three to six most-favored routes should be complete by April or May, said Craig Pope, director of the Kern County Roads Department.

The new studies will be presented to the Board of Supervisors and Bakersfield City Council for comment and then Kern COG will settle on a single plan, Pope said.

Kern COG is expected to send that plan to Caltrans in June or July, he said, in hopes of receiving state funds for them.

The supervisors expressed no strong feelings for or against any of the 20 project options. But they did request frequent updates on the decisions made about them.

There is no shortage of ideas to help end gridlock on Highway 101

Frustrated commuters wonder if anything will work.

By Mark Prado and Rebecca Rosen Lum

Solving gridlock is uphill struggle

The projections are grim.

By 2020, the Bay Area's population is expected to grow by 16 percent to 7.7 million. The number of employed residents will increase at a 36 percent pace to 4.3 million, exerting more pressure on the transportation system.

The Metropolitan Transportation Commission - the Bay Area's transportation planning agency - projects congestion on Bay Area roads will increase 250 percent over the next two decades. More than a million new cars and trucks will be on the roads.

Today, Highway 101 between Rowland Boulevard and I-580 is the sixth busiest traffic corridor in the Bay Area during commute hours, according to Caltrans. Only the Bay Bridge, Sunol Grade, I-880 from the Nimitz Freeway though Milpitas. I-880 through Santa Clara and San Mateo Bridge are worse.

Commuters aren't looking forward to the future.

"We will drive all-purpose vehicles so that we can camp out during gridlock," Sausalito physician Robert Burton mused. "We will develop new friendships during rush hour: those mired in adjacent lanes. Marriages and deaths will be recorded by the CHP."

But there are plenty of plans, some around the corner and others long-range. Some improvements have already been made.

The electronic toll system on the Golden Gate has helped ease what for many is the final leg of the commute into San Francisco.

Bridge officials say FasTrak has saved some commuters up to 20 minutes on their drives as the toll plaza backup between 6 and 10 a.m. has been virtually eliminated.

This summer, work will finally begin on a complete car-pool lane along Highway 101. The main project calls for a southbound car-pool lane to be built first to bridge the 4.5-mile gap in the car-pool lane between Lucky Drive and North San Pedro Road. That $78 million project has been fully funded.

Once that is finished, the entire section would be converted to a reversible lane at a cost of $39

million. Southbound traffic would use the lane during the morning commute and northbound traffic would use it in the evening. A movable median barrier would be installed and maneuvered for commute periods.

For years drivers have been calling for a continuous car-pool lane. Such a lane provides more of an incentive for car pooling and using buses, which could use the lane.

A recent survey by Bay Area Rides, an organization that coordinates carpools, showed people who use car-pool lanes save an average of 21 minutes one-way on their commute. That's five minutes more than the RIDES survey showed in 1999.

The $175 million Novato Narrows widening project continues to lurch forward. The commute bottleneck that occurs along the Narrows - as six lanes merge into four - has been a growing source of frustration for drivers as more cars use the section of Highway 101. The project - which is not yet funded - calls for widening eight miles of Highway 101 from four to six lanes between Novato and Petaluma.

Adding lanes to expand Highway 101 at the Novato Narrows could save commuters who carpool up to 24 minutes a day and improve traffic flow for other motorists, an MTC study says.

The study looked at the possibility of making the added lanes - one northbound, one southbound - "hot lanes." Under the concept, those who carpool could use the lanes for free or at a discounted rate, but solo drivers would have to pay.

Some also say ferries may help relieve congestion. There is a plan to create a network of commuter ferries criss-crossing San Francisco Bay - with supporters saying it is key to unlocking worsening congestion on Bay Area roadways.

Hamilton Field and Port Sonoma have been mentioned as North Bay terminal sites. Golden Gate Ferry will add a second high-speed ferry later this year, and officials believe it will attract more commuters.

Supervisor Hal Brown has drawn together a group of Marin elected officials and school and community leaders to brainstorm congestion solutions. They are approaching the county's major employers about pitching in for a shuttle service and footing the bill for bus rides.

While Brown expects the group to exert "a major impact within the next few months," he acknowledges that breaking the current logjam "is complex, and everybody has to play."

That includes school districts. Brown said students account for 20 to 30 percent of the commute traffic in many areas.

More students would cycle, thus easing auto gridlock, if it weren't so treacherous to do so, said David Wolf, chair of the San Anselmo Bicycle Task Force.

"You look at the bike racks and they're almost empty. Parents don't want their kids to cycle because it's too dangerous," he said.

There is a a pilot "safe routes to schools" program that has been initiated in the county with the idea of getting more students on bikes by providing instruction and safety tips. The Marin Bicycle Coalition and Go Geronimo!, an alternative transportation group, are overseeing the $75,000 project in nine schools.

A broad plan for improving and expanding Marin's network of bicycle routes has also been developed. Among the major suggestions is creating a north-south bikeway along a Northwestern Pacific Railroad right-of-way stretching from Sausalito north to the county line, and an east-west bikeway following a Northwestern Pacific Railroad right-of-way from Point Reyes to San Quentin State Prison. The rail project would cost roughly $124 million to get up and running. Annual operational costs would be $7.9 million.

There has been a call to open railroad tunnels that were closed in the 1960s. The study looks at reopening four tunnels - Alto, CalPark, Puerto Suello and Woodacre - to improve bike circulation.

"If we were able to open up the Alto Tunnel, that connects to an extended pathway in Corte Madera and to the Ferry," said Debbie Hubsmith, executive director of the Marin County Bicycle Coalition.

"We'd have a non-motorized bicycle freeway - flat, separated from autos, direct. It could be striped to show northbound traffic, southbound traffic, and pedestrian use."

With more than 100,000 bicycles in the county, the plan says Marin residents want the county to push ahead with improved and new bicycle facilities.

Marin is rich in computer technology, and that may help ease gridlock. A RIDES survey shows 2.5 residents in Marin telecommute. That's a higher percentage than those who walk, bike or take vanpools.

The Marin Citizens for Effective Transportation has called for express bus service between Marin and Sonoma, something the Metropolitan Transportation Commission also backs. The extended car-pool lane would improve bus service.

County officials also are looking at a $378 million, 68.2-mile rail line that would link San Rafael and Cloverdale with nine stops in between. The Northwestern Pacific Railroad right-of-way would provide a rail line between the counties. New tracks would have to be laid to make the route functional.

Politicians say approving a new tax is key.

A half-cent sales tax increase could raise as much as $300 million over 20 years for transportation costs.

"Rail service is hinging on that," Brown said. "You can't get something like that for free. The other thing that depends on that is (a solution) to the Novato Narrows."

Within two years, voters will again "have the chance to put their money where their mouths are," Brown said. "With a sales tax, we can bond and leverage state and federal dollars, which otherwise come in dribs and drabs."

The county's freshman Assemblyman Joe Nation said he has hopes for reducing the two-thirds vote required to pass the sales tax.

"We'd have a much better shot at passing it," he said.

THE PRESS-ENTERPRISE

Supervisors OK pact for design of ramps

It is the first step toward relieving congestion from Highway 60 in Jurupa.

By Sandra Stokley

The Press-Enterprise

Published 1/31/2001

Riverside County officials have taken the first step toward easing traffic woes at one of the Jurupa area's most congested intersections.

The Riverside County Board of Supervisors voted unanimously Tuesday to award a $427,000 contract to a Santa Ana firm for engineering and design plans aimed at moving the eastbound Highway 60 on/offramps at the corner of Valley Way and Mission Boulevard.

Plans call for the ramps to be moved farther west on Mission Boulevard.

Construction of the $4.1 million project, which is being funded through a combination of federal and local funds, is set to begin in October 2002.

Ed Mann, who has lived on Valley Way for 15 years, said he welcomes the development.

"In the late afternoon, it's almost impossible to get through that intersection because of the freeway traffic," Mann said. "It's always been bad, but it's been getting progressively worse." David Barnhart, the county's transportation director, said problems at the corner of Valley Way and Mission Boulevard date to at least 1961 when he graduated from Rubidoux High School.

"There was congestion back then. The problem is the freeway exits and entrances are too close to a busy intersection," Barnhart said.

Barnhart said a transportation study completed in about 1992 concluded that improvements were needed for the entire Highway 60/Valley Way interchange.

Because of the cost, county officials decided to concentrate on moving the eastbound on/offramps because the study had deemed that a priority.

County transportation officials have spent the past nine years trying to assemble funding sources to get the project started.

Barnhart said the project got a major boost about a year ago when it received $3.5 million in federal highway funds from the Riverside County Transportation Commission.

Another $110,000 comes from local gas tax money.

County officials will spend the next 18 months looking for sources to make up $460,000 that remains unfunded, Barnhart said.

SAN JOSE MERCURY NEWS

S.J. considers taking curve out of Julian Street

Published Wednesday, Jan. 31, 2001

San Jose Mercury News

BY BARRY WITT

Mercury News

About three decades ago, when San Jose officials were concerned about how to move traffic through downtown and land was cheap, Julian Street was realigned into an S-curve to help cars reach the future Route 87 interchange.

But what seemed a good idea at the time is now considered a constraint on development, so city officials want to get rid of the curve and restore the historic street grid to downtown's northern edge.

``The new alignment will be a more urban, pedestrian-safe approach that will try to bring that part of the area back into the rest of downtown, physically tying it together,'' said Harry Mavrogenes, executive director of the city's redevelopment agency.

The city council on Tuesday got its first look at the proposed alignment as part of a development deal with Foster City-based Legacy Partners to open the area for 1.1 million square feet of new office space. The council approved starting non-binding negotiations with Legacy over the proposal, which would include property Legacy has under option from the Brandenburg family, property owned by the city and property owned by the state or private parties that the city would use its power to obtain.

In addition to creating three large blocks for Legacy's planned commercial development, the realignment would open several nearby parcels for future housing construction, said Susan Shick, the agency's executive director.

And downtown Councilwoman Cindy Chavez said she has been talking to the developer about incorporating what she called her ``dream of putting a skateboard park nearby.''

City officials believe cars traveling at high speeds across the existing one-way lanes of Julian Street create a barrier to what they're calling downtown's ``northern gateway.''

But getting rid of the S-curve will come at some cost to traffic flow in the area. Those consequences remain under study and will be addressed before final approval.

``The real capacity of that street is constrained by the intersections, particularly Julian and 87 as the primary controlling point,'' said Jim Helmer, deputy director of the city's Department of Streets and Traffic.

The ramps at that interchange are being looked at for possible widening.

City officials also hope the new alignment will lead to a revitalization of long-neglected Pellier Park, which sits behind locked gates between St. James and Julian streets.

The city plans to put the controversial statue of Thomas Fallon, who raised the U.S. flag over San Jose in 1846, in the median island next to Pellier Park. But installation will be put on hold at least until a final decision is made on the alignment, Mavrogenes said.

``I don't think anybody wants to move a statue twice,'' he said.

Approving the Legacy negotiations was one of several significant downtown actions the council took Tuesday:

The council gave Shick permission to launch preliminary talks with New York-based Palladium Co. to become ``master developer'' for what would be at least a 1.6 million-square-foot downtown residential, office and retail development. Shick recommended the developer last week from among 13 applicants that originally sought the role last year.

It gave the go-ahead to the Improv comedy club to negotiate a deal to revitalize the shuttered Jose Theatre on South Second Street.

And the council approved a lease with House of Blues, a national nightclub chain, to take over the former Woolworth's building on South First Street.

The vote on the House of Blues lease was unanimous, but three council members expressed deep reservations about its terms, which could yield no rent for the city in return for a $5.7 million taxpayer investment.

``It strikes me as being an extremely sweet deal,'' said Councilman David Cortese.

John Erwin Sr., who recently lost a barbecue restaurant on Santa Clara Street after being unable to make his own rent payments, asked the council why businesses such as his weren't being subsidized.

``If these types of concessions were made for small, mom-and-pop operations, all of us could be successful,'' Erwin told the council.

The city will collect rent only if House of Blues has annual revenues from its restaurant, beverage and merchandise sales of $8 million, a figure far in excess of any existing San Jose restaurant. Ticket sales are not included in the calculation.

Shick said House of Blues has predicted its non-ticket revenues will hit $12 million by the second year after its planned spring 2002 opening date. If the club is wildly successful, the city's rent -- which is 5 percent of the gross above $6 million -- will grow substantially.

Mayor Ron Gonzales strongly defended the deal, despite criticism pointing out that San Jose has subsidized other failed enterprises in the past, including the Pavilion retail center and United Artists movie theaters.

He pointed to city subsidies of the Fairmont Hotel and Adobe Systems as pioneers for first-class hotels and corporate headquarters downtown, leading the way for the other hotels and companies that have followed. He predicted that the club would help bring customers to existing restaurants and clubs -- some of which have criticized the deal because of the huge rent break.

House of Blues has ``a track record of being a magnet for people,'' Gonzales said.

Local streets increasingly congested

By MARK HEDGES/The Daily Journal

Wednesday, January 31, 2001

Perkins and State, Talmage [Route 222] and State, Main and Perkins, Perkins and Orchard - you name it, traffic problems have become a part of Ukiah life and don't expect them to be leaving anytime soon.

Everybody notices the plague of car congestion that hits the crucial intersections at peak hours in our town, and in actuality there's simply more traffic on all streets, everywhere.

"I've just noticed an increase, period," said Jeff Clary, manager of the Chevron Station at Perkins and Orchard. "There's just an increase of traffic flow all around." "Traffic volumes increase at a higher rate than population," said City Council member Eric Larson.

"It's something like a 6 percent traffic increase for every 1 percent of population growth." But the problem is as complicated as traveling through downtown Ukiah at lunch-hour.

Everybody wants Ukiah to flourish, to be economically healthy. But other changes accompany every aspect of the town that changes.

"An increase in commercial activity brings more traffic, more crime," said Larson. "This isn't always adequately addressed, and sometimes it isn't even possible to adequately address."

Take said intersection at Orchard and Perkins - "it's maxed to capacity," said Larson. "There's not many more things to do than make alternate routes."

Larson credits many of our traffic problems to a long history of insufficient streets being developed.

Many existing streets are over 100 years old.

"Take Hortense Street. It's very wide," said Larson, "almost as wide as State, because all the rich people back then lived up there and had to turn around their carriages. In poorer parts of town, the streets were less wide to maximize building size. We've inherited those old problems that are difficult to fix."

Another boon Ukiah has inherited is a population of drivers who are the same old brand of human which made up our forbears.

"Driving behavior is the biggest part of the problem," said Larson. "It's perceived in several areas of

town that traffic is bad, and people feel delayed by lights. Psychologically, people speed up to make

up time. In reality, you can get across town anywhere in about five minutes."

Larson noted that traffic studies have consistently shown that most "problem areas" of traffic in truth amount to only about 30 seconds of time-loss. "In life, 30 seconds isn't much," said Larson, "but people's demeanor changes when they get behind the wheel. They may be nice, laid-back people, but put them behind a wheel and they turn into aggressive monsters. That's a social problem that traffic engineers have to deal with that's harder to fix than anything else."

Larson points to what he calls an unusually high number of pedestrian traffic casualties, many of

which were fatal incidents. "Whether people are walking, or bicycling or riding on a motorized wheelchair, they have a lot of difficulty getting around town. It's an issue that needs to be addressed."

Driving is a social experience, requiring cooperation. "Paying attention to traffic is very important when you're driving," said Larson. "It's not just a safety concern; it's also an efficiency concern.

Responsibility, maturity, respect and consideration all help to solve traffic problems. All it takes is one person not showing respect to affect the flow of traffic."

Check insurance rate tables and you'll find verification of this concept - why do the rates go down when drivers' leave their teens and early 20s?

"We've joked about raising the driving age to 26 as a solution," laughed Larson.

Sanjee Balajee is one of Ukiah's bicycle commuters, and he sees much to praise in local drivers.

"Since I moved to Ukiah two years ago I've been a bicyclist," said Balajee. "For the most part, motorists haven't been a problem. In fact, sometimes they're too nice. They wave me through

stopsigns when I'm supposed to be following the same rules as they do. But I am concerned about the quality of our air as the number of people and vehicles increase. So I think one solution is to encourage more people to walk, bike, use public transit or electric vehicles, and this could easily be achieved by creating more bike lanes and paths."

Balajee suggested one interesting idea - that "private property owners and Mendocino College could come to an agreement to make a path for bikes from the college to North Ukiah so that they can be apart from the air pollution, away from State Street."

Indeed, though some congestion troubles may never be solved except in our attitudes, there are some areas that we can physically improve.

The "Regional Bikeway and Pedestrian Plan," being developed by city government, is one positive direction. Recent considerations on the plan have been the possible creation of a pedestrian and bike path down Gobbi Street from Dora. Speedbumps and improved crosswalks are other options.

"Other areas in the city where we can improve the circulation system to offset traffic is an extension of Orchard Avenue to Low Gap," said Larson. "But that would impact both the Orchard and Perkins intersection and the Low Gap and State Street intersection, and also it would be very expensive, costing millions."

Larson also added that the City has plans to do a separate pedestrian/bike path on Talmage Road [Route 222] and is talking to Caltrans about widening Talmage itself.

Modified: March 11, 2001.