BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Senator Ricardo Lara, Chair
2015 - 2016 Regular Session
AB 2542 (Gatto) - Streets and highways: reversible lanes
-----------------------------------------------------------------
| |
| |
| |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|--------------------------------+--------------------------------|
| | |
|Version: March 15, 2016 |Policy Vote: T. & H. 11 - 0 |
| | |
|--------------------------------+--------------------------------|
| | |
|Urgency: No |Mandate: No |
| | |
|--------------------------------+--------------------------------|
| | |
|Hearing Date: August 1, 2016 |Consultant: Mark McKenzie |
| | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
This bill does not meet the criteria for referral to the
Suspense File.
Bill
Summary: AB 2542 would require the Department of Transportation
(Caltrans) and regional transportation planning agencies (RTPAs)
to demonstrate to the California Transportation Commission (CTC)
that reversible lanes were considered for a capacity-increasing
project or a major street or highway lane realignment project.
Fiscal
Impact:
Minor and absorbable CTC costs to review project documents to
ensure that reversible lanes were considered. (State Highway
Account)
Unknown, likely minor Caltrans costs to document that
reversible lanes were considered when submitting a project to
the CTC. Staff notes that Caltrans currently considers where
reversible lanes may be appropriate when developing proposed
AB 2542 (Gatto) Page 1 of
?
projects. (State Highway Account)
Background: Existing law requires the CTC to adopt the state
transportation improvement program and allocate transportation
capital funds for each major phase of a specific project in the
program, among other things. Existing law declares that it is
the policy of the state that public agencies should not approve
projects as proposed if there are feasible alternatives or
feasible mitigation measures available which would substantially
lessen the significant environmental effects of such projects.
Reversible lanes add peak-direction capacity to a two-way road,
and decrease congestion by utilizing available lane capacity
from the off-peak direction. The use of reversible lanes can be
beneficial if capacity-increasing costs are particularly high,
such as on bridges or in dense urban areas. Reversible
facilities are only feasible in specific circumstances, and in
California they are currently used on the Golden Gate Bridge,
the San Diego-Coronado Bridge, and I-15 in San Diego County, all
of which involve movable barriers. Caltrans indicates that a
reversible high-occupancy vehicle (HOV lane is under
construction for Interstate 680 at the SR 24 interchange in
order to reduce the costs to close a gap in carpool lanes on
I-680 in Walnut Creek.
Caltrans has existing guidance regarding when it is appropriate
to consider reversible lanes built into its HOV guidelines.
These lanes are only workable on multi-lane roadways with
predictable directional congestion patterns with an imbalance
(after allowing for long-term traffic growth) of at least
65/35%. From a design perspective, the criteria suggest that
reversible lanes should be barrier-separated and have limited
ingress and egress, and they should only be considered when a
project is severely constrained by right-of-way and
environmental considerations. Operation of reversible lanes can
be expensive in terms of equipment and manpower.
Proposed Law:
AB 2542 would require Caltrans and RTPAs, when submitting a
capacity-increasing project or a major street or highway lane
AB 2542 (Gatto) Page 2 of
?
realignment project to the CTC for approval, to demonstrate that
reversible lanes were considered before the CTC approves the
project.
Staff
Comments: This bill does not prescribe the manner by which
Caltrans or an RTPA would demonstrate that reversible lanes were
considered on capacity-increasing or major realignment projects.
Caltrans currently performs initial traffic analyses prior to
project selection, at which time reversible lanes, HOV lanes,
and other design options are considered. Absent specific
direction bill, staff assumes that Caltrans would self-certify
that reversible lanes were considered during project development
when presenting a project to CTC.
-- END --