 |
 |
A model of the proposed bicycle and pedestrian bridge over Highway 101
By KEVIN McCALLUM
THE PRESS DEMOCRAT
A proposed $20 million bicycle bridge over Highway 101 again appears in peril after Santa Rosa council members raised new questions about the cash-strapped city’s ability to afford the soaring cost of the controversial project.
To some it’s a vital link for bicyclists and pedestrians between Santa Rosa Junior College and Coddingtown Mall neighborhoods, one that will create construction jobs and reduce greenhouse gases.
To others it’s an expensive pet project the city can ill-afford given its current budget crunch, the need to maintain pothole-pocked roads and uncertainty about the arrival of a second Santa Rosa rail station.
But to City Councilman Scott Bartley, the prospect of cost increases when the project is still in its infancy was difficult to stomach.
“I’m getting a little heartburn over something going from $200,000 to (another) $300,000 in four months,” Bartley said during Thursday’s budget meeting.
Bartley and fellow Councilman Jake Ours questioned the rising costs of a key Caltrans study of the project, which is three years away from construction at the earliest.
Initially expected to cost $200,000, the new study — called a project initiation document — is now expected to top $500,000, council members learned.
Caltrans informed the city that the state budget crisis has forced it to push more costs back onto the city, said Colleen Ferguson, deputy director of public works. Caltrans now estimates its costs to participate in the study at $150,000, while the city’s consultant, Berkeley-based Steven Grover & Associates, has estimated higher than expected costs at $250,000.
“It is much more than we had originally anticipated,” Ferguson said.
The city has spent more than $150,000 to date on a feasibility study, which envisions a curvaceous 15-foot-wide span from Elliott Avenue on the east side of Highway 101 to Edwards Avenue on the west. The precise design and layout would be determined later after negotiations with property owners and community meetings.
“This is a really important project, I think, for Santa Rosa and for Sonoma County,” said Christine Culver, a project manager with the Sonoma County Bicycle Coalition.
The bridge would let more people bike and walk, with all the associated health benefits and greenhouse gas reductions. It would also support ridership at the Sonoma-Marin Area Rail Transit’s proposed station at Guerneville Road. And the bridge would offer an alternative to intersections like the Steele Lane undercrossing, which Culver called “thoroughly nasty” for bikers and pedestrians alike.
But the $300,000 surprise didn’t sit well with Ours, who said he was concerned about the cost increase and wanted a list of other projects the city council might spend the gas tax money on.
Bartley agreed. “It’s a good project, but if that’s the cost, right now maybe there’s a more prudent place to spend that money,” Bartley said.
The council didn’t vote on the issue Thursday. The comments came during a review of the city’s $13 million capital improvement budget, which will return to the council for public hearings in mid-June.
But the remarks by Ours and Bartley were significant because they echoed comments made late last year by council allies Mayor Ernesto Olivares and John Sawyer. Together the four, who have the backing of most of the city’s business groups, represent the new council majority.
After airing his concerns about funding the project during a meeting in late November, Sawyer threatened to block $100,000 in funding for the Caltrans study once the new majority came to power.
Sawyer said the timing of the project, while a good one, wasn’t right in part because the location for the second Santa Rosa SMART station had not been formalized. Olivares voted against the project for similar reasons.
But some shrewd parliamentary maneuvering by former Mayor Susan Gorin and her allies parried Sawyer’s threat at a meeting in December and the $100,000 was preserved.
If the money for the study were removed from the budget next year, Ferguson told the council that the city would lose the $100,000 grant it had already received for the work.
Councilmember Marsha Vas Dupre also noted that Santa Rosa Junior College has agreed to spend $1 million toward the project. The reference was to a settlement between the college and the Sonoma County Bicycle Coalition, which sued over the use of funds for the construction of a multi-story parking garage in front of Bailey Field.
But that $1 million offer may have already left the station. The settlement requires the city to commit to construction by the end of 2012, a deadline that would appear impossible given Ferguson’s estimate of 18 to 24 months to complete the Caltrans study before environmental work could begin.
Gorin, in an email to supporters, said the opposition now expressed by the four members of the majority means the project “will be effectively killed or delayed for a long time,” adding “now is the time for advocacy and organization.”
Subscribe by Email
Follow us on Twitter
@Reality Check
The Berkeley I-80 bridge is 300 feet long whereas the pedestrian bridge here is projected to be at least 1,000 feet long. That is one difference that accounts for the higher price tag.
Still, while the bridge would ideally promote safe walking and cycling, the benefits would not currently outweigh the costs. It would take a very long time for the bridge to pay for itself.
We need to be sustainable with money, too.
http://www.mtc.ca.gov/news/transactions/ta0502/I80bridge.htm
http://ci.santa-rosa.ca.us/departments/publicworks/BicycleProjects/BikePedBridge/Pages/default.aspx
I don’t know a whole lot about the facts of the bridge proposal, but it doesn’t seem to be completely necessary at this time considering the $20 million price tag. I also sadly don’t think the city will ever be a truly bike friendly place. I ride my bike around town and still feel scared to death by all the drivers who either feel like cyclists are “wrong” to be riding bikes, or are too wrapped up in their ipods, cell phones, what-have-you, to be aware of the cyclists. It is truly scary to know that there are people out there aiming to scare you by passing too closely or not yielding. But then again, there are clueless cyclists too! Until we can be tolerant of cyclists who are actually following the rules, a $20 million dollar bridge to Coddingtown (Why Coddingtown, by the way?) just seems useless and could be better spent on a cohesive and mutually beneficial plan to get everyone on the same page regarding transit and the rules of the road.
Not only did Wysocki & his friends extort $1 million from SRJC, their lawsuit delayed construction and cost SRJC an additional $6 milllion due to the dramatic increases in steel and concrete prices during the time the lawsuit was pending.
He and his bike buddies should be ashamed of how they ripped off the local taxpayers and SRJC students.
I feel discriminated against because of the proposed bike bridge. $20 Million dollars to be spent and I won’t be able to drive my Hummer over the bridge! I think I will have to sue the City and the bike coalition because my civil rights are being violated. I shouldn’t have to drive ALL the way to Steele Lane or ALL the way to College Avenue in order to cross the freeway. Think of all the global warming I will cause by having to drive that far!
I’d say 1 or 2 billion dollars should make up for my rights being violated.
Please make the check out to Dave’s Fishing Fund.
Thank you for you support!
Cherie Maria, Jobs are good but only if you are using Fed money and they can keep raising the debt ceiling to cover it. But when you are talking about state or county money it is from OUR pockets and we Cannot afford it! Please tell me what you will cut to pay for this without hurting others and I will vote for it! Nothing in life is free and someone has to pay for it.
@Stop Crying – The proposed Guerneville station is 1/2 mile from where the bridge would cross 101(at least as it is depicted in the photo in this article) – maybe you should stop crying and learn how to read a map…
RE: Cherie Maria – “Can someone please explain to me why a job creating project is now a bad thing?”
I think I’ve heard this argument before; oh yeah, getting the stimulus package passed. How’s that worked out for everybody? High unemployment still exists, billions in federal government debt and home foreclosures running at an all time high.
We shouldn’t be spending $20 million just for the sake of jobs; our financial resources are so scarce, the money should be spent where we get the most and spending the least. Just how many people is this bridge going to serve on a daily basis? Maybe to help on the funding, their could be a toll to use and cross the bridge. Wait, scratch that idea; that goes against the grain of bicyclists getting something but not having to pay for it.
And it’s not like you can’t currently walk or ride your bike from SRJC to Coddingtown, as if for some reason with all the roads in such poor condition, thats a real priority in Sonoma County.
@ Cherie Maria….it’s easy, NO MONEY! Besides, wouldn’t you think if we did have money it should be used to put people to work on projects that are necessary? Prioritizing projects should be the practice of our government….I’m sure they prioritize their home budget…don’t you?
I do think there probably are things that could be done to the Steele Lane underpass that would make it better for bicycles and pedestrians. But doing this would in some way involve taking some number of feet from the roadway, the main problem with bicycling here is that you just don’t have enough room. It is something they should look into, the majority should be looking for solutions to what I’m sure they would agree is a real problem.
Were talking Jobs folks something a certain set of newly elected city council members promised, so why now are they sitting on their hands about a really beneficial job creating project?
A project of this size is going to employ Truckers, Heavy Equipment Operators, Electricians, Carpenters, Welders, Concrete Finishers, oh and just a few Engineers, you need concrete and re-barb so your putting material suppliers to work.
Can someone please explain to me why a job creating project is now a bad thing? Isn’t construction something we need to put the local economy back on track? Why all of a sudden are the “jobs” candidates turning their backs on construction workers?
There’s a THIRD thing these bicycle moves do. They INDOCTRINATE the serfs to having their town reconfigured pursuant to Agenda21 objectives. Happy bicycle day.
Thanks to cyclist and Jim M. for the info on ADA compliance.
Does anyone else think some nice white subway tile, super lighting, security cameras and perhaps mosaic murals on the walls would make the Steele Lane Hwy. 101 underpass safer and more usable to pedestrians and cyclists, and a lot cheaper and certainly less visually intrusive.
Imagine that your local Government WANTS to screw everything up for us…oh wait-we don’t need to imagine. They’re signed up with ICLEI, and we have ‘poster child’ operatives showing thier loyalty.
Villager with pitchfork and Sam Christopher…you nailed it. In addition.These Smart/Sustainable Development/Redevelopment/bicycle moves usually do TWO things. They install physical infrastructure persuant to ICLEI goals and directive AND they help impoverish the local coffers. An Agenda21-two punch.
I completely support that council members Ours, Bartley, Sawyer, and Olivares are opposed to funding things for those damn bicycle riders. If we spend too much on them, there won’t be anything left for the Police & Fire Unions, their generous pensions, and their rich benefits, right?
I say NO to bicycles. And YES to pensions, pay raises, and benefits!
@home girl the current design is ADA accessible.
@home girl
It is ADA compliance that’s why it looks like a monstrosity and cost $20 mil.
Who wouldn’t want easier access to Coddingtown? It’s the place to be.
“The city has spent more than $150,000 to date on a feasibility study….”
I’m sure the council wouldn’t pay someone an obscene amount of money to study a project they want to do on their home’s with their monthly household budget!
Prioritize people! Take care of what NEEDS to be taken care of before you spend money that you don’t have for frivolous pet projects that only a few will use! Try thinking of what money “WE” do have and pretend that money belongs to the people you work for and if you don’t handle it right…you’re going to be fired!
@ reasonable??? Sorry the smart train station is proposed over a mile away- no connection at all to the proposed ped bridge. WRONG SORRY!
Once this project is underway, hopefully never, the next big added on expense will be ADA compliance. A pedestrian walkway is part of the selling point, what is the angle required to access the actual overpass? What amount of strength will be needed to utilize this overpass for a wheelchair confined person? Will this lead to a case in Federal court? Just asking.
If the bike coalition want a bridge then let Levi and his followers pay for it. Potholes need to be filled.
This project was killed when they decided to move the railway station further north. Now it is a bridge to no where, does not support the junior college and I believe the funds they put toward it will be withdrawn. It was only a million dollars, I am sure they can find that funding elsewhere.
Point is this counsel cannot think past their own cronies and work toward that rare but noble cause of the public good.
OK, here is it is:
$20,000,000
Your bike fits on a bus.
You can walk.
You can just use a bus.
Commuting from the mall to the JC.
This is a farce.
Susan Gorin and Gary Wysocky should be recalled for being obstructionist, hysterical, and extremists. They are out of touch–and both are hypocrites too.
Gorin lives in Fountaingrove and I bet she never has ridden a bike back and forth to Council. Wysocky has three cars.
Phony. Concern. Masquerading. As. Environmentalism.
Wasting our money and our time just to make themselves look good to a small segment of their ever-shrinking fan base.
This is what happens when the Bike Coalition takes over the City Council.
The entire council would like to see a bicycle/pedestrian bridge here, and the entire council knows they cannot put in anywhere close to $20 million to do it. The two sides are not that far apart here, the only debate is over how many of how many $100K’s they are willing to put in to try to get the grants.
It’s time to come together, renegotiate with the JC to keep those funds available after 2012, and design a less expensive bridge.
Getting this bridge build has nothing to do with bicycles and pedestrians. The city council don’t care about the cost just as long they get it build. They want to have a legacy with their names embossed in a plaque. The simplest things to do is to re-layout the Bicentennial and the Mendocino over passes with appropriate bike lanes. They should put the money in the studies of these 2 over passes instead of wasting on a costly bridge.
$20 Million Dollars. Twenty-Million Dollars. $20M. 20M Dollars. twenty-million-dollars.
Yep, no matter how I look at it, spending $20 Million for this bridge looks really, REALLY ridiculous.
Thank goodness for the common sense that Olivares,Ours and Bartley are showing.
Santa Rosa looks like a ghost town, is riddled with debt and has incredible real problems that need to be addressed.
The city can not afford to build the roadway under the new 5th St. overcrossing that was just completed by Caltrans.
Like so much of dwontown it is a hangout for transients.
Well done Mr. Olivares,Ours and Bartley.
Our hard earned tax dollars are better spent on infastructure that is needed, not wanted by an eco-green, carbon intolerant minority.
Thanks, Lets Be . . , for the correction on when the federal gas tax got its start. It doesn’t however change my point much.
As to funding, according to the PD bike bridge money will mostly come from the once named federal highway fund, now renamed to include the word transportation.
Just how elastic is that word? The city of Portland had a river front park classified as a “transportation corridor” to get gas tax money to complete the park. Its bike lanes allowed rides to commute to work.
Unfortunately, when crime became a problem late at night the city wanted to close the park, they discovered the federal strings attached to that money. They couldn’t. It was, after all, a transportation corridor. Now the city was stuck with the expense of policing the park. Who says there isn’t some justice in this world.
At this point I don’t care if they build a bridge to the moon.
JUST BUILD SOMETHING!!!
For crying out loud if there was ever a time for local government to invest in construction and infrastructure that time would be NOW! Transit oriented development is going to be this state’s future take a look at the planning for the state and you see high speed rail, light rail, bus route connectors to housing and mass transit.
The longer we sit on our hands the higher the costs, cause everyone remembers when a loaf of bread cost a nickel.
AND it is just plain ugly! This thing will be visible from the moon.
same as the tower of bike parts on Santa Rosa Ave, just plain ugly and visible from the moon, if Susan and her bike friends keeps this up SR will be broke and ugly
I ride a bike, I own a car, I register it and I support a bridge that connects the JC to Coddingtown. I have ridden under the 101 from both directions and it is very unsafe. There is no reason that they can’t build a bridge for far less that the 20mil though, or just put a nice ped/bike lane under the overpass and that should make us all happy and safe.
AND it is just plain ugly! This thing will be visible from the moon.
@Stop Crying – actually, there is a proposed SMART station very close to Coddingtown, and it is an option in the RFP for the current phase of work if the construction costs are low enough. Location-wise, this bridge makes sense.
@Reality Check – Actually, the Feds first imposed a Gas Tax in 1932 to help balance the budget. It was increased in 1940 to help pay for the war, and then increased again in 1951 to help pay for the Korean war. In 1956, it was increased again to pay for the interstate highway system. But, unless I’m wrong, this money is actually coming from the California Gas Tax, not the Fed Gas Tax. This money goes towards a lot of stuff, including mass transit, roads, and recently to balancing the budget. Santa Rosa gets about 2 million of this gas tax per year, which according to the budget, gets spent along with Measure M funds (~6 million) towards:
1) Pavement Management
2) Traffic Safety and Transportation
3) Bike/Pedestrian/ADA
4) Storm Water
All of this seems worthwhile, and as others have said, the council should decide what the split is.
The $1 million from the JC was to settle a frivolous lawsuit by Wysocky/Jenny Bard in the Junior College Neighborhood because they were against the parking garage being built at the JC.
They didn’t care that the neighbors wanted the parking garage because students were parking on neighborhood streets.
No, Wysocky/Bard sued because they have a fundamental obsession with removing cars and punishing car owners. So the settlement was $1 million in funds from the JC IF the City came up with additional money for the bike bridge.
WHY SHOULD WE, THE TAXPAYERS, BE ON THE HOOK FOR THIS BRIDGE? If it was a settlement between the Bike Coalition (Gorin/Wysocky/Bard) and the JC then why should we be paying another NINETEEN MILLION DOLLARS FOR A BIKE BRIDGE?
The fact is that Susan Gorin is grandstanding, can’t stop running for office even when she lost the majority, and has to join with Wysocky in beating a dead issue. Thank god Veronica Jacobi lost or she’d be the vote they’d need to make this happen.
Wysocky/Gorin/Vas Dupre are lockstep bike nuts who refuse to accept reality. Stop wasting our money on bike boulevards and bike bridges! Shut up and work. You’ll be out next election–won’t get fooled again.
There already exists an easy and safe way for bicyclists to go UNDER the 101 freeway at West 9th Street if you want to get from the Coddingtown area to the SRJC area.
But perhaps the additional 3 miles of pedaling (15 minutes or so) vs. a direct bridge is too much effort for the noodle legged proponents of this $20million boondoggle.
When the federal gasoline tax was first imposed (1950s) its purpose was to pay for the interstate highway system. Since then, the tax has become a slush fund for all manner of projects having nothing to do with interstate travel.
This bridge, if ever built, would be (mostly) paid for with federal gas tax money. Meanwhile, our interstate highways deteriorate.
Guess it’s more important for Ours and Bartley and Olivares to fullfill their sweetheart deal with the cops than have a safe walkway for SRJC students and pedestrians. Too bad Pedestrians don’t have a lobby group to make a backroom deal and give big money to the SR City Council. Then I bet their demands would be as well received as Public Safety!
The only reason to support this bridge would be so we could have an ongoing contest between this brige and the DUMB train as to which is a bigger waste of taxpayer money.
This bridge is like the end of Fatal Attraction, where Glenn Close emerges from the bathtub at least three times, with a knife in her hand. I thought it died a well-deserved death months ago, but it keeps coming back endlessly.
Incidentally Deputy Director of Public Works Colleen Ferguson’s math is a textbook example of Progressive math: Santa Rosa should spend at least $350,000 on a project initiation document for a project that will never be initiated, because they risk losing a $100,000 grant which is already set aside for the same wormhole.
Plus $200K, a vanishing $1million from the JC and no indication of a final (?) cost. The taxpayers are really going to be pouring money into a bottomless hole on this one. Studies that cost hundreds of thousands and no end in sight.
Good. This was a waste of money and designed ONLY to connect SRJC students with Macys and Coddingtown to spend money. If the children want to spend their money, they can get their to Coddingtown on their own. We don’t need to build a 20million dollar bridge to make it easy for them. THERE IS NO PROPOSED TRAIN station even REMOTELY close to Coddingtown. It would be MILES away – if it even happens. FINALLY the City Gets it. This was a dumb idea and a monumental waste of tax dollars. Now that that 20 million and do something constructive with it- and PLEASE stop giving SIMON money. Would someone please investigate any Simon ties to the City- seems they have a suspicious relationship (first the nod to pay for parking at the PUBLICALLY OWNED PARKING LOT) then nearly half million to spice up Coddingtown? what gives?
Former Mayor Gorin states opposition now to the bike bridge project could in her words “will be effectively killed or delayed for a long time,” adding “now is the time for advocacy and organization.”
Rewind. Their has been opposition to spending city funds on this project all along this is not a new concept. Stop with the saber rattling please. The City of Santa Rosa like most of us are struggling. Take a clue from Governor Brown – STOP – with the pet projects. The Governor killed the silly San Quentin expansion and I didn’t hear folks screaming about that project being good for jobs and the local economy.
The idea of the bridge is fine. The use of city funds to build the bridge should be put to a council vote. The votes are not there plain and simple. So to ask the citizens to organize to fight city hall seems a little self centered. We need leaders that understand the being a leader is not about grabbing headlines it is about getting things done.
I believe the majority of voters understand that delaying a bridge over Hwy.101 that will benefit Codding Town Mall is the right choice now. The council should try and show a unified front to the public and get to work in cutting the budget. Most of us already have cut our spending so do your job and balance the city’s budget.
I wish the article had answered the question why a bicycle bridge costs $20 million? The desirability of increasing, however modestly, connection across the freeway is obvious.
A 15-foot wide bicycle bridge spanning I-80 opened in 2002 in Berkeley at a cost of $6.4 million. Have construction costs tripled since then?
Something’s not right here.
@Kevin – it is confusing on how much the City has paid ($150,000?) to date, how much more the City will need to pay for the study and how much for the construction. How much has been given in grants to date, and how much has been approved for the construction. This project makes sense, but not if the City has to pay a lot of it, given the current budget situation. What funds would be used for the City’s portion (redevelopment, gas taxes?), and what are the competing projects? Can the money be used for street maintenance? It would bring needed construction jobs to SR, and the location makes sense. It would also benefit the mall – have they come foward to help?
Let’s not forget Gary Wysocky’s comments about car owners needing to pay their full share of costs.
This bike bridge is a perfect example for Mr. Wysocky. The bike coalition can collect the money to cover the full cost for the bike bridge.
Come on green/eco/progressive people…time to pay up!
“But the $300,000 surprise didn’t sit well with Ours, who said he was concerned about the cost increase and wanted a list of other projects the city council might spend the gas tax money on.”
You know, I’m getting sick and tired of the bicycle community getting perks off the taxes of others. If they want this so bad, then let them tax themselves and raise the funds that way! Don’t use our gas tax money that is needed to repair our roads that they also ride on for free.
Hunters and Anglers have a self-imposed tax called the Pittman-Robertson Act (hunters) and the Dingell-Johnson Act (Anglers) of EVERYTHING they buy for their activity is taxed 10-11%. This money goes into these funds for use on conservation projects nation-wide.
Vehicle drivers are taxed in their license fees and at the gas pump and these funds are supposed to help maintain our roads.
What tax do the bicyclists have to accomodate all their “share the road” ideas? What bicycle tax do they havve to fund this bike bridge.
Start paying your own way bicyclists! Tax yourselves 10-11% on your bicycles, tires, parts and spandex!