Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1985-06-25; City Council; E; Widening 78 freeway ProjectSari Diego ASSOCIATION OF GOVERN-MENTS Suite 524, Security Pacific Plaza 1200 Third Avenue San Diego, California 92101 (619) 236630p I PEL 4 ED ~. JUN 17 1985 City of Vista Admin. Svck June 14,1985 Mayor Mike Flick City of Vista P. 0. Box 1988 Vista, CA 92083 Dear Mayor Flick: This letter summarizes the Route 78 freeway widening project information and actions as discussed at the June 4 luncheon meeting held at Shadowridge Country Club. The general discussion at that meeting centered on what is the current status of the proposed Route 78 6-lane widening project and what steps can be taken to accelerate its construction. Attached is a background paper that discusses the current status of Route 78 and the proposed 6-lane freeway widening project between 1-5 in Oceanside and 1-15 in Escondido. The paper also discusses the current funding status of Route 78 which is the critical item to advancing construction of the Route 78 widening project. Following are those actions discussed at the June 4 meeting that would help to provide funding priority for Route 78. 1. Each of the North County agencies should communicate to Congressman Packard the importance of the following Congressional actions to the Route 78 project: a. Designation of Route 78 as a Priority Primary highway route (Title 23 CFR, Sec. 147). b. Consolidation of the Interstate 4R and Primary programs in a new federal surface transportatian bill (Program consolidation). c. Extension of the federal 85% Minimum Allocation program in a new federal surface transportation bill (Minimum allocation). 2. Local funding efforts should be pursued and supported to provide full or partial funding of the Route 78 widening. Senate Bill 361 authorizing up to 1% sales tax in San Diego County for transportation purposes could provide the Route 78 project funding. 3. The North County Transportation Coalition (NCTC) should evaluate local means to provide partial project funding. Benefit-assessment and private developer financing should be investigated. 4. The North County agencies should continue to request both CALTRANS and SANDAG to program the Route 78 freeway widening project as soon as funding is identified. MEMBER AGENCIES: Cities of Carlsbad, Chula Vista, Coronado, Del Mar, El Cajon, Escondido, Imperial Beach, La Mesa, Lemon Grove, ADVISORY/LIAISON MEMBERS: California Department of Transportation, U.S.Department of Defense and Tijuana/Baja California Norte. ! . National City, Oceanside, Poway, San Diego, San Marc-, Santee, Vista and County of San Diego. I , I Mayor Mike Flick June 14, 1985 Page 2 There was .general agreement at the June 4 meeting that additional Route 78 studies or reports are not needed at this time. Primary efforts would best be directed at pursuing funding for the 6-lane widening. SANDAG staff will continue to place high priority on the Route 78 widening project in our future transportation actions. If there is anything else you need regarding this or other matters, please let us know. Sincerely, / BILLTUOMI Senior Transportation Planner BT/rw ' Attachment PROPOSED ROUTE 78 WIDENING GENERAL INFORMATION Proposed Project and Cost The 16.5 miles of Route 78 between 1-5 in Oceanside and 1-15 in Escondido is currently a 4-lane freeway with some auxiliary traffic lanes. Route 78 has a right-of-way width of about 200 feet with a 22' median from 1-5 to the Melrose Drive area and a 46' median east of Melrose Drive. Current Route 78 traffic volumes vary from about 47,000-78,000 average weekday traffic (1984 ADT). Route 78 currently operates at a Level-of-Service (LOS) "C" to "E" with average peak-hour operating speeds in the 30-50 mph range. The three year accident data (1980-82) show that Route 78 fatal, injury, and total accidents are at or below statewide averages for similar facilities. The SANDAG/CALTRANS traffic forecasts for year 2005 show a substantial increase in Route 78 traffic which would vary between Oceanside and Escondido in the 85,000-112,000 ADT range. A 6-lane freeway could accommodate these traffic levels at an LOS "D" condition with average peak-hour speeds in the 45-50 mph range. The proposed project would add two additional traffic lanes making Route 78 a full 6-lane freeway (3 continuous lanes in each direction). There is sufficient room in the existing median area along most of Route 78 to provide for one additional traffic lane in each direction. Some interchange and auxiliary lane improvements will also be required. CALTRANS most recent cost estimate is that the 6-lane widening project with some bridge work would cost about $27 million (1985 dollars). The cost of bringing Route 78 up to full Interstate standards with a 30-foot median, 16-foot structure clearances, and improved 1-5 interchange ramps (1-5 southbound to SR78 east bound direct connector ramp) is estimated at $85 million. Highway System & Funding Eligibility The 16.5 mile portion of State Route 78 from 1-5 to 1-15 is currently on the desig- nated Federal aid Primary (FAP) highway system. As such, the two categories of federal highway funds that can now be used for widening SR78 are Federal-aid 1 r I - Primary funds and Federal 85% Minimum Allocation funds. In both cases the federal funding share of project costs would be 86.22% with a minimum of 13.78% state matching funds. In addition, state highway funds or State Cash (non-federal funds) can also be used for the Route 78 widening. Federal-aid Urban (FAU) funds cannot be used to widen Route 78 since it is a Primary - not Urban system route. In November 1984 the California Transportation Commission (CTC) adopted the 1985 Fund Estimate which identifies the anticipated amount of federal and state highway funds available over the next 5 years (FY86-90). The Fund Estimate indicated that there are no Primary, 85% Minimum Allocation, or State Cash funds available for any new projects statewide during the next 5 years. Further uncertainties regarding the Interstate Completion program in the Los Angeles area and the estimated $650 million State Cash shortfall could further restrict the addition of new projects in the future until additional highway program revenues are found. Two highway system changes have been considered to help Route 78 receive higher funding priority. One relates to designating Route 78 as an Interstate or non-chargeable Interstate route and the other relates to Priority Primary desig- nation. SANDAG staff concurs with both Senator Craven and Commissioner Tom Hawthorne that there is virtually no chance that Route 78 would receive Inter- state designation. Further, the higher costs associated with bringing Route 78 up to full Interstate standards would negate any advantages of getting Interstate funding. The more promising idea is to try to get Route 78 designated as a Priority Primary route. Priority Primary routes are designated as those portions of the Primary highway system connecting to the Interstate system with "priority of improve- ment" to supplement traffic services provided by the Interstate system. An example is Route 86 in the Imperial County area which is a designated Priority Primary route. There are no additional federal funds available for Priority Pri- mary routes, however; the Federal share of project costs is raised from the normal 86.22% to 95% which in turn lowers the state matching funds to only 5%. Given the State Cash shortfall it has been the policy of CALTRANS and the CTC to provide higher priority to those projects which maximize federal funds to Cali- fornia with minimal state commitment. Consequently if Route 78 were desig- 2 nated Priority Primary, it would gain a higher priority when allocating highway funds in California. Commissioner Hawthorne has indicated that Congressman Ron Packard will attempt to get Route 78 designed as a Priority Primary route. Reauthorization of the Federal Highway Program The 1982 Federal Surface Transportation Act included highway program funding authorization through 1986. Congress is now holding hearings on what items should be included in a new surface transportation bill for highways and transit. Two items under consideration are particularly important to the funding of widen- ing Route 78. The items relate to "Program consolidation" and "Minimum allo- cat ion." The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) in their recommendation to Con- gress has considered consolidating the Interstate 4R and Primary programs. If program consolidation were to occur, the Route 78 project could remain on the Primary system and be eligible for the combined Interstate 4R and Primary funding. This action essentially could allow Route 78 to receive what are now Interstate funds without being an Interstate route and having to be constructed to full Interstate standards. Program consolidation could certainly improve the chances of Route 78 receiving federal highway funds in the future. The Federal 85% Minimum Allocation program was created in the 1982 Federal Highway Act to insure that each state receives back to it at least 85% of the federal highway funds collected from that state. These funds may be used for any eligible federal highway system project such as the Route 78 widening. The 85% Minimum Allocation program has only been authorized to 1986. Both the FHWA and the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) have recommended its continuance in the next federal reauthorization bill. The continuance of the Federal 85% Minimum Allocation could be an impor- tant fund source for the Route 78 improvements. Local Funding Alternatives Local funding alternatives can also be considered for the full or partial funding of the Route 78 widening project. Local funding has the primary advantage of not having the numerous federal and state fund allocation constraints. Full local 3 funding could- allow the route 78 widening to proceed as soon as the funding is available. Partial local funding would raise the project's priority in future allo- cations of state and/or federal funds. In addition there was discussion at the June 4 meeting relating to the consideration of providing some area of benefit or assessment district funding to assist with the Route 78 widening. That idea was to be brought to the attention of the North County Transportation Coalition. Finally, Senate Bill 361 (Introduced by Senators Deddeh, Bergeson, and Craven; Co-authors Assembly Members Bradley and Chacon) which is enabling legislation in San Diego County for up to a 1% sales tax for transportation purposes could provide funding for the Route 78 widening project. 4