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 --