Experts see Caltrans’ solution as a given over other options
Even as the county Board of Supervisors prepares to meet May 6
to rehash plans for a new highway through San Juan Valley, Caltrans
and the local transportation agency are ready to embrace a plan
that would stitch together the last substandard link on Hwy.
156.
Experts see Caltrans’ solution as a given over other options
Even as the county Board of Supervisors prepares to meet May 6 to rehash plans for a new highway through San Juan Valley, Caltrans and the local transportation agency are ready to embrace a plan that would stitch together the last substandard link on Hwy. 156.
Hwy. 156 is a strange mongrel of a road, turning from two-lane byways to a phantom highway that shares its lanes with Hwy. 101 to a modern thoroughfare. But it is a key link between the coast where it is born at Hwy. 1 near Castroville and its eastern terminus, at the foot of Pacheco Pass at Hwy. 152.
It has evolved into a vital link for tourists, commuters and the state’s behemoth agricultural industry.
Caltrans already has committed to spending $28 million for a full interchange at 101/156 and Watsonville Road opposite the landmark Red Barn flea market. The grade-level crossing there today forces motorists to cross two lanes of high-speed traffic. Another link, between 101 and 1, is the target of a $300 million project.
That leaves the stretch between San Juan Bautista and Union Road as the weak link. The two-lane highway is dotted with some 40 driveways and a number of rural roads serving rural homes and farms. At peak commute times, the highway routinely backs up for miles.
On the other hand, residents of San Juan, including the city council and the county supervisor whose district covers the valley, fear that a larger highway will mar the valley’s scenic value, further divide San Juan geographically and lead to widespread flooding.
“Today we’re seeing significant delays – an operating speed of 35 mph,” said Lisa Reinheimer, executive director of the San Benito County Council of Governments. COG oversees area transportation issues. “By 2011, the level of service will be F [the lowest level assigned by transportation engineers] where you basically have a parking lot on Hwy. 156. It costs people a lot in time and money.
“Anybody in business knows if you’re stuck in traffic you’re not getting your goods to market.”
Caltrans’ preferred alternative calls for a four-lane highway, paralleled by a frontage road on its north side. Caltrans’ studies show that the highway would reduce delays caused by congestion by 1,902 vehicle hours a day, providing a $102.8 million return on investment over 20 years. Construction cost is forecast at $47.4 million and the highway is expected to be completed by November 2013.
While Caltrans describes the proposed highway as an at-grade expressway, sections of it would be elevated up to six feet above the valley floor.
Reinheimer explained that sections would be elevated to allow drainage culverts to be installed.
San Juan Valley embraces some of California’s richest farmland. That, and a long growing season tempered by coastal influence, has drawn plant breeders and high value agriculture for many years. In recent years, rising groundwater and lower water quality have become issues. Opponents of the Caltrans plan fear that a highway will form a dike along the length of the valley.
“The current design being moved forward by Caltrans is flawed to the detriment of the San Juan area in many ways,” said Supervisor Anthony Botelho in a letter to his constituents. Botelho farms land in the valley. “The loss of breaking up of some of the largest parcels of prime farmland is irresponsible. The noise and air pollution to the city of San Juan is unacceptable and affects every citizen. San Juan Creek has the capacity of 3,000 [cubic feet per second] and the new highway doubles that flow, meaning downstream flooding on average storms is inevitable.”
“It seems like every issue their [Caltrans’] engineers address, then there’s something wrong with the solution,” responded Supervisor Pat Loe. Loe has studied local transportation for more than two decades, and was active as an original member of the committee to pass Measure A, a local transportation sales tax measure passed by voters in 1988.
San Benito County’s link to the outside world is tenuous, Reinheimer noted. All three highways serving the county, 25, 156 and 152, are two-lane stretches of asphalt better suited as farm roads.
“All three of our roadways are over capacity and there is no magic bullet we’ve seen in our studies that would pull traffic onto another roadway. Traffic – it’s like water, taking the path of least resistance.”
Many local residents, including the county Farm Bureau, have advocated a new highway splitting the difference between the three highways and their junctures with 101. The “three-in-one” alternative would cost $583 million in today’s dollars, Caltrans claims, and it would only divert 10 percent of the traffic from existing highways.
Further, Caltrans’ studies indicate that most of the traffic on the section of 156 in question is local.
“If 60 percent is local traffic and we can get Caltrans to pay for it, that’s a good thing,” Loe said.
The county Board of Supervisors is scheduled to discuss the highway at 1:15 p.m. May 6 in its chambers in the county administrative building at Fourth and West streets. Caltrans officials have said they plan to attend.
