HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Report - August 4, 1982 (57)'i#. � "s � :'# bF�-.Y �zti .� y-�'+w- . �..c.. ..y�r r..:.z - M.:�M ,r �? .:'.t .�F s .. ... .- .. ...:. ... 5� • .-. '"�"4 . ..- ..•..mF:ca.�,�
ii �.� q�✓ x }. � ;: � iW 1L 's , s '.,'* r l' '•vr�y y
`JY
F i lQ Y`.7e �
+��;6.yny#`�"�'Nr'a'rt'=y.r,."4 12 ; nl r F - s �'s a -a• t-�`v�``.-
iT
15�'���
,i, Ta
P t�� �1 7�2- _ ',.;^ ,�',Y. i,iAS*
�} ��PcM.G n�f •�� � __ w.._.r. � � �� P — ... - *... ...-... G ltL l �tl.�� _� '
Continued August 4, 1982
RES. ADOPTED following introduction of the matter, and discussion, Council,
SUPPORTING S.J. on motion of Mayor Reid, Olson second, adopted Resolution
COUNTY PROJECTS No. 82-83 - Resolution Supporting California Transportation
ON SIIP Commission's adopted 1982 State Transportation Improvement
Program.
RES. NO. 82-83
t
ar, e
MEMORANDUM, City of Lodi, Public Works Department
TO: City Council
FROM: Public Works Director
DATE: July 29, 1982
SUBJECT: Support for the San Joaquin County Projects on the State
Transportation Improvement Program (STIP)
Attached is a COG Staff Report summarizing the California Transportation Com-
mission's (CTC) action on the State Transportation i-mprovement Program (STIP).
The adopted STIP includes projects of regional significance such as the wid-
ening of Route 99 bridge over the Mokelumne River, the widening of Route 4
through the Delta, the construction and inclusion of the Stockton Route 4 cross-
town freeway on the Project Development list. The California Department of
Transportation will be challenging these projects and others at the Highway
Commission Appeal Hearings on August 5.
Also attached is a copy of a July 30, 1x82 editorial by Earl Waters from the
News Sentinaland a letter recently received from California Department of
Transportation.
It is felt important that the Council support the adopted State Transportation
Improvement Program by the adoption of the attached resolutions
C n 2�--
Ronsko
Works Director
JLR/meq
project to address an area that has historically had a high
accident rate and is presently below highway design standards.
f Caltrans claims the project. is "not cost-effective,"
Two additions were made on Route 4, One is the addition of
$300,000 to a reconstruction project just east. of the Middle
River Bridge to widen the roadway. The other project is a
$1>4 million project to widen Rouge 4 beLwcen the Old River
Bridge and the Middle River Bridge. l-fliile the local distriet
office considers this a good project, they are concerned that
the widening and straightening of the approaches to the two
bridges should come first ro assure: improved safety.
Caltrans has promised to appeal the addition of the Route 99
Mokelumn.e River Bridge widening and the Reute 4 widening at
the Commission's Appeals hearing, August 5 in Sacramento.
These two projects plus 29 others will be challenged by Caltrans.
COG staff and CTC staff will have to be prepared to defend these
projects before the Commission.
These projects were added as part of. the Cotimiission's policy of
attempting to meet guaranteed county minimums with state cash.
San Joaq,iin County was previously a deficit county to the tune
of $29.3 million over the next fine years. The addition of
these projects to the STIP only brings LWIL deficit down to
$25,7 million. The Commission will therefore be attempting to
bring that deficit down even more in ensueing years.
ti
•
,%.w �
ONE LAV
MW
J
er families
les have actually la,sened their zon-
0 proposed state law would make it
f them to allow free action for
irs %1W want to carve new units out of
fs.
pposal by Democratic state Sen.
alo of Watsonville compels all local
nts to allow second units on at least
Firsingle-faintly lots
I units adapt the existing housing
it primarily for large households, to
of current population trends,"Mello
!y also help young households pur-
)es and meet current interest rates.
+- it helps the housing market in many
i TeMr, director of the state Depart-
ilotitMg and Community DeveIW
tis iia housing solution that can be
iiic*. There are no new land costs
...c.., ic .•ti.,... n,. .. ....... ....�•.
the-
Appersi tO staff ' Tranapoe'tatioa Di.vow 8acramts to and the clges a . asd
Glmtta+ce. oboes tetwt+s m airier a• litarysvWs: .. ": � `. •
pew wftb the endoef Governor JsM Browny Tbm toutss, first aptbor6d ,'ter the
term less than Its months from now. is dearer I-Agislatt" as earth as 19135, have bad a bistory
me
Inlned go out the saway abs carate K block' o,blockagS by, the bureaucratic state blowsy
Int every high project she can. efflelals- 1444lt the routes. the most direct bet.
The firebrand official. Imported from. ween tbe•Capital sed the two uorthM cities
YassacbuMdU by Brown. has been constantly about 5tl.miles distant. weren't actually opened
undo fire for her oppoation to road construe- ' until many years after the Legislature had
Um projects througbout the state. Legislators decreed them. ..
have demanded her resigaa- . As soon as they icer constructed the need for
tion and even cut her salary i at least four lanes became more than evident.
from the budget in attempts to , And that need has grown to the critical stage of
compel Sro,-n to replace her. being a matter of life and death. to the past
But the tows+ talking, em• P four years alone. more than 40 accidents have battled appointee bat resulted In seven deaths and '50 injuries.
weathered the storms one t'� Acting on that need. the commissioners last
another, indicating that, while month authorized two dozen projects for the
her actions anger the public widening of the mutes, an expenditure of some
and the sobos, she is pleasing flo millba, not a great sum compared to many
the guy who gave her the job. other highway projects.
For her policies carry out the governor's "no- Rut Gianturco now has ordered that wort not
growth" and mass transit positions. In tact. she . ' begin on the projects pending bar appeal of the
has done everything possible to steer money authorizations. The order has created a storm
away from both highway construction and- among thousands of residents as well as
maintenance Into long range plans or mast . legislators and even congressmen.
transit. Glanturco apparently remains adamant,
It was because of these policies that the refusing to discuss her reasons with reporters
Legislature created the California Transporta- and accusing the puss of td this furor". and
tion Commission with authority to decide which distortions "which have caused this furor".
highway projects are la tx undertaken, a So far, as fie has in such cases in the past, the
power formerly held by the director. governor has refrained from entering the bat -
tic although appeals by civic groups and others
Yet Gianturco, known among detractors as have been made to Atm to overturn Glantumm's
-The Glant Turkey", has been unwilling to ac- actions•
cept their decisions and has become embroiled Whatever deaths and Injuries which may
In atempts to block the projects they approve. result from this arbitrary delay In widening the
Her most recent rebellion Involves the heavi• highways Inescapably will be blamed on her
ly travelled Routes 99 and 70 between action.
"OF- TeMe rT tie Eairo r "qu
Too convenience oriented Alternative to unionism
Editor:
1 would like to respond to the column written
by Earl G. Waters on July 22.
His arguments against a deposit on beverage
containers are way off target. He claims that
"dirt and vermin" are attracted to the bottles
when In storage Aren't the same "dirt and ver-
min" attracted to a throw -away bottle as it sits
in a garbage pail'' Does he know what it means
to rinse a bottle before storage'
lie places the cost to consumers at $300
million annually. Perhaps this is true. But he
makes no mention of the fact that our present
methods of disposal in landfill operations are
Inefficient and costly. We can not afford to con-
tinue wa—ting our valuable resources. Granted,
a deposit on beverage containers would not put
an end to litter, but if just one less bottle gets
broken at my favorite beach, then t am In favor
Editor:
This is an urgent message to all public school
teachers.
Don't give up your freedom of choice by let-
ting your union bargaining agent demand an
agency shop agreement with your school
board.
Agency shop is the Calif Teachers Associa-
tion's highest priority because it allows CTA
union officials to collect "agency" fees from
teachers who do not belong
This practice is wrong because it allows a -
private organization to coerce non-members
Voluntarism and freedom of association are
supposedly cornerstones of our Constitution,
but union lobbir_sts have succeeded in legaliz-
ing agency shop.
With the help of Professional Educators
Group of Calitornia, 1 have been able to keep
It
•`.Y ; s .�....bitlHYY'tC't'.`�e.++w+r*..!..--.... ....... .....-..i+•�f.Y'�..�!!i=?`:ir%!�i'svxY.Lmi: �:� .bL`Yi: ., .. ..
f
STATE OF CALIFORNIA-6USINESS. TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING AGENCY EDMUND G. BROWN 1R., 00"Wn"
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION KtULIV
P.O. BOX 2046 (1976 E CHARTER WAY) � »�26 � 9 20
STOCKTON, CALIFORNIA 95701 I382 JUL 2
ALICE M. REIMCHECITyy
CiTY91 1 198?
City Council
City of Lodi
221 W. Pine Street
Lodi, CA 95240
Gentlemen:
Several weeks ago, the California Transportation Commission tormally adopted
a State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) for the next 5 year period. In
so doing, the Commission made a number of adjustments, augmenting certain program
categories at the expense of others. The State Department of Transportation
(Caltrans) has some serious concerns about some of the program reductions and
plans to make a formal appeal at the appeal hearing on August 5.
In the period between now and August 5, we are trying to meet with as many
organizations and individuals as possible to explain our concerns with the
present STIP and why we are making an appeal. We realize we just won't have the
time to meet with everyone we would like. The purpose of this letter is to pro-
vide a summary of our concerns in case we are unable to personally meet with you.
Our primary concern is that the Commission has severely cut four already
small but important programs in order to provide more funds for additional
highway capital outlay. The four programs cut are:
Roadside Rests. The Commission has reduced this program from our recommended
5 year -level of $44.2 million to $17.0 million. This means four important
roadside rests will not be constructed, one of which would have been in our
area on I-5 between Sacramento and Stockton.
Park and Ride Pro ram. The Commission has reduced this program from our
recommended 5 yearTvel of $19 million to $11.9 million, This cut wilt
result in the elimination of 27 planned park and ride facilities throughout
the State.
Bicycle Program. This program has been cut drastically by the Commission from
our recommended level of $15.7 million for the 5 year period to $4.4 million.
This will result in the elimination of 32 projects statewide. One of these
eliminated projects in our District would be the addition of shoulder width
for bicycle commuters on Route 49 in Tuolumne County between Sonora and the
Columbia Wye.
Transit Guideways. This transit program would be reduced from a 5 year level
0 39 m ion to 5348 million by the Commission's actions. This would be a
severe setback for the State's transit programa
a
-2-
July 23, 1982
Overall, Caltrans does not believe that the adopted STIP is consistent with
commonly held California Transportation Commission and Caltrans goals for a
balanced transportation system in California. This inconsistency is best evi-
denced by the Commission severely cutting four programs that the Department
believes are an important part in developing a balanced system. Even at the
levels we originally proposed for these four programs, they represented collec-
tively only about 10.9% of the total proposed capital outlay. The cuts made by
the Commission are not going to allow us to deliver much of a program in these
areas. We are charged with providing for all modes of transportation and we are
convinced that if these cuts stand, we will not be fulfilling our obligations in
these areas.
We have other concerns as well. It appears the STIP adopted by the Com-
mission may be overprogrammed by about $125 million. Also, the adopted STIP is
about $90 million overprogramned for the northern counties and about $ 40 million
underprogrammed for the southern counties. This could mean we are raising false
hopes in some areas. Unless this is resolved now, we may have to tell some
communities at some future date that the money for their projects just isn't
there.
This just highlights some of our concerns. I have enclosed some attachments
that provide greater discussion and detail. The next step in the STIP program
approval process is a public meeting on August 5 in Sacramento when the Com-
mission will hear formal appeals. If you share any of our concerns, we urge you
to make your thoughts known to the Commission members prior to that date.
Please feel free to contact me at (209) 948-7975 or call on any of my staff
if you have any questions.
Attachments
Very truly yours,
i JOHN D. PETTINE
Acting District Director
RESOLUTION NO. 82 -83' --
RESOLUTION SUPPORTING CALIFORNIA
TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION'S ADOPTED
1982 STATE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
WHEREAS, the California Transportation Commission adopted a 1982
5 -year State Transportation Improvement Program on June 25, 1982,
which maximizes the availability of Federal highway dollars,
provides for a balanced state transportation system, and makes
at least some attempt to meet guaranteed County Minimums
adopted in SB 215, and
WHEREAS, the adopted State Transportation Improvement Program
provides for the construction of several projects of regional
significance such as the widening of the Route 99 northbound
bridge over the Mokelumne River, the widening of Route 4 through
the Delta, the construction of the Sonora Bypass, and the in-
clusion of the Stockton Route 4 Crosstown Freeway on the Project
Development List, and
WHEREAS, the California Department of Transportation seeks to
challenge these projects and others, and undo the efforts of
the California Transportation Commission and its adopted State
Transportation Improvement Program during the Commission's
appeals process in August;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of
Lodi does go on record as supporting the 1982 adopted State
Transportation Improvement Program approved by the California
Transportation Commission on June 25, 1982, even though it does
not fully meet all our areawide needs;
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Lodi
urges the rejection of the California Department of Transpor-
tation's appeals and the immediate implementation of the adopted
1982 State Transportation Improvement Program;
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk of the City of Lodi
is directed to send certified copies of this resolution to the
Honorable Jerry Brown, Governor of California; Chairman Ivan
Hinderaker, California Transportation Commission; the Honorable
John Garamendi, State Senator; the Honorable Norman Waters,
State Assemblyman; the Honorable Patrick Johnston, State
Assemblyman; Chairman Edmund Feichtmeir, San Joaquin County
Council of Governments; and Director Adriana Gianturco,
Department of Transportation.
82-83
-1-
Dated: August 4, 1982
I hereby certify that Resolution No. 82-83 was
passed and adopted by the City Council of the
City of Lodi in a regular meeting held by
the following vote:
Ayes: Council Members - Olson, Snider, Pinkerton,
Murphy and Reid
Moes: Council Members - None
Absent:Council Members - None
ALICE M. REIMCHE
City Clerk
82-83
-2-