BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Senator Ricardo Lara, Chair
2015 - 2016 Regular Session
AB 810 (Ridley-Thomas) - State Highway Routes 1 and 187
-----------------------------------------------------------------
| |
| |
| |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|--------------------------------+--------------------------------|
| | |
|Version: May 28, 2015 |Policy Vote: T. & H. 11 - 0 |
| | |
|--------------------------------+--------------------------------|
| | |
|Urgency: No |Mandate: No |
| | |
|--------------------------------+--------------------------------|
| | |
|Hearing Date: July 13, 2015 |Consultant: Mark McKenzie |
| | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
This bill meets the criteria for referral to the Suspense File.
Bill
Summary: AB 810 would authorize the California Transportation
Commission (CTC) to relinquish specified segments of State
Highway Route (SR) 1 and SR 187 to the City of Los Angeles.
Fiscal
Impact: Unknown one-time costs ranging from minor to
potentially over $10 million to the Department of Transportation
(Caltrans) prior to the relinquishment of the designated
segments of SR 1 and SR 187 to the City of Los Angeles (State
Highway Account). These costs would be offset in future years
due to avoided maintenance costs on the relinquished segment.
Background: The Legislature has provided statutory authorization to CTC to
relinquish a number of state highway segments to local
jurisdictions under specified conditions. Relinquishment
provides the recipient agency with greater control over local
transportation projects and relieves Caltrans of any further
AB 810 (Ridley-Thomas) Page 1 of
?
responsibility to improve, maintain, or repair infrastructure
related to the relinquished segment of state highway.
Generally, relinquishments are subject to terms and conditions
of agreements between Caltrans and a local jurisdiction seeking
control of a local highway segment. CTC must determine that the
agreement for relinquishment, which has typically involved a
one-time payment of State Highway Account funds to the local
entity, is in the best interests of the state.
Historically, Caltrans has annually set aside $12 million of
State Highway Operations and Protection Plan (SHOPP) funding for
rehabilitation necessary for highway relinquishments. In recent
years, however, Caltrans has not set aside funding to
rehabilitate relinquished highways.
Proposed Law:
AB 810 would authorize CTC, upon a determination that the
terms and conditions are in the best interests of the state, to
relinquish the following segments of the state highway system to
the City of Los Angeles if Caltrans and the City enter into a
relinquishment agreement:
The portion of SR 1 between the southern city limit of
Santa Monica (approximate postmile 33.3) and SR 105
(approximate postmile 25.9).
SR 187 between the route's western terminus at Lincoln
Boulevard (approximate postmile 3.5) and its eastern
terminus at Cadillac Avenue near SR 10 (approximate
postmile 8.9).
The relinquished segments would cease to be a part of the state
highway system, and would be ineligible for future adoption as a
state highway. The City of Los Angeles would be responsible
ensuring the continuity of traffic flow, including any traffic
signal progression, and for installing signs directing motorists
to the continuation of SR 1.
The bill would also delete obsolete provisions related to the
construction of SR 187.
AB 810 (Ridley-Thomas) Page 2 of
?
Related
Legislation: Staff notes that the Governor proposed budget
trailer bill language this year that is intended to broaden and
streamline the state process for relinquishing state highway
routes that are deemed to no longer serve an interregional
purpose, and instead operate primarily as regional or local
routes. The Senate Budget Subcommittee #2 rejected the trailer
bill proposal at its hearing on April 16, 2015, without
prejudice, so that it could instead be considered by the
Legislature as a policy bill rather than a trailer bill.
SB 254 (Allen), currently pending in the Assembly Transportation
Committee, is the legislative vehicle for the trailer bill
language. That bill would establish procedures for the
administrative relinquishment of state highway segments that do
not serve an interregional purpose.
Staff
Comments: Relinquishment of this segment would allow the City
of Los Angeles County to assume direct control of the roughly
7.4 miles of SR 1, known locally as Lincoln Boulevard, in the
area between Santa Monica and SR 105, and the entirety of SR
187, known locally as Venice Boulevard. Transferring control of
these roadways to Los Angeles allows for the construction of
improvements and enhancements without the constraints of
Caltrans' state highway design standards, encroachment permit
processes, and other state requirements.
Caltrans usually provides State Highway Account funding to a
local entity that is assuming control over state highway
segments in order to bring the roadway up to a "state of good
repair," although there is no statutory obligation to do so.
The actual amounts vary for each relinquished highway segment
and are determined by a negotiation of terms and conditions
between Caltrans and the local jurisdiction, but those costs are
based upon a cost-benefit analysis covering a ten-year period,
which is included in a Project Scope Summary Report prepared for
legislative relinquishments.
Caltrans has not identified a specific cost estimate for the
relinquishment of this segment, but based on other
relinquishments, one-time costs may range from minimal up to $1
million per centerline mile of roadway depending on numerous
AB 810 (Ridley-Thomas) Page 3 of
?
factors such as roadway condition, projected maintenance costs,
and any planned capital projects. The segments of SR 1 and SR
187 specified in the bill are a combined length of approximately
12.8 miles, so initial costs could be minimal but could exceed
$10 million. The relinquishment of these segments would relieve
Caltrans of any future maintenance and repair costs, resulting
in unknown long-term annual savings.
Actual costs and savings would be more certain if legislation to
authorize relinquishment followed, rather than preceded, the
completion of the cost-benefit analysis and an agreement between
Caltrans and the City of Los Angeles. However, Caltrans does
not typically conduct the analysis and enter into negotiations
until legislative authority for relinquishment has been
provided.
-- END --