[{"_1":2,"_109":-5,"_110":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,73,85,97],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":44,"_46":47,"_48":49,"_50":51,"_52":53,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":59,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":65,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":67,"_71":55,"_72":55},"mediaId",6604651,"mediaKeyId","2987486-2b1abc5b55d85b424879079f9615963d","parentId",2987486,"title","Caltrans updates: 101/25 interchange funding, median barrier timeline and new safety/environmental projects","audioSeconds",0,"startMs",3255000,"endMs","viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2987486-2b1abc5b55d85b424879079f9615963d&start=3255&end=3255","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2987486-2b1abc5b55d85b424879079f9615963d/thumbnail_3255000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6604651/San-Benito-County/California/Caltrans-updates-10125-interchange-funding-median-barrier-timeline-and-new-safetyenvironmental-projects","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6604651-9ba114a12558f5b16cfcbefd7f9ae0f9/orig.mp4?Expires=1771148987&Signature=aYpCJSl-5gcyFhA7B43qRRCcEh34BfiqrF~nzkOkeXZg7lkbm7H3FkzuDoevqOTSIoiRoYb9xTVWfpKt0~Z1oDtVpML2Pd8TJCLhKYyZDU7haFLTzQHfvxgB1JtXet9AChnQLE-sW-DS7RhYGzmpH0I838FQRoeatP4bGYBjA5umQu3KzMUNFk~-fdLm8uvx3NDobw5tOhI3JRW88qc22As-wbybvhODEeOSj71IqAj8eqwb1e-ASmjLx6AcBMMACF6AETOtrVYlQO9kUa97mhqj9e9nHjPzrBqA4s-1VKvFeQtdlcl8WK4kR43dQHJIVBwV~~qYWlSIH9oh93EYcw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","","date","2025-04-15T05:20:38.75Z","article","Caltrans District 5 gave a multi‑project briefing at the Council of Governments meeting on March 20 covering projects that affect San Benito County and neighboring jurisdictions.

Key items:

- 101/25 interchange (VTA lead). The first phase is under construction with a total phase‑one budget of $136,000,000: $77,000,000 from Santa Clara Measure B and $59,000,000 from a Senate Bill 1 competitive grant, Caltrans staff said. Construction is expected to continue through fall 2027.

- US‑101 Rocks Road wildlife connectivity. Environmental studies are underway and early design work has begun.

- Polyester median barrier project. Caltrans completed a project initiation document and is entering the design phase; construction is tentatively planned for 2027.

- US‑101 pavement rehabilitation. Caltrans added a new county‑wide pavement rehabilitation project to the update covering roughly 30 lane miles; the effort includes pavement work plus associated guardrail, drainage and safety enhancements and is in early environmental and preliminary design phases.

Caltrans staff said district funding priorities and statewide competition for interregional improvement funds mean many large‑capacity projects must find regional or external partners to proceed. The district reiterated openness to partnerships but cautioned that realistic funding paths are required for projects to be programmed.

Ending: Caltrans said project fact sheets and additional contact information will be circulated; the agency encouraged jurisdictions to coordinate regionally on priorities and funding strategies.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","San Benito County Council of Governments Regular Meeting - March 20, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","Caltrans briefed the COG on several projects: the VTA‑led 101/25 interchange is in construction with $136 million for phase one, Rocks Road wildlife connectivity and a polyester median barrier project are in design/environmental phases, and a new US‑101 pavement rehabilitation project is beginning study.","taxTitle","San Benito County, California","taxId",26838,"location","headline","shortSummary",{"_33":74,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":75,"_41":76,"_43":77,"_45":78,"_46":79,"_48":80,"_50":81,"_52":82,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":83,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":84,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":67,"_71":55,"_72":55},6604654,"Highway 25 corridor plan draws sustained public concern; COG says committee will decide next steps",565,2765000,3330000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2987486-2b1abc5b55d85b424879079f9615963d&start=2765&end=3330","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2987486-2b1abc5b55d85b424879079f9615963d/thumbnail_2765000.jpg","/articles/6604654/San-Benito-County/California/Highway-25-corridor-plan-draws-sustained-public-concern-COG-says-committee-will-decide-next-steps","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6604654-d8f03d968eb0dbfe469f46cd71cc2812/orig.mp4?Expires=1771148987&Signature=i~wjHocyTX5lCaqE~cuzIuKV2AGQXdLRIH5Q203WCdrpPaGWvdLqMB9cFIxjMtBcww8LdCz8dLWyDhbGGWdNzGj6IFAaSF7R7mqn0HsZ4TSrHFlHWifefhVJmjIKvZ0lwsAH36TyCpnOhXaL5yUR0O3bgKfYIwBN2h5tPAWZgNaE8EUaUHl7zHAiG2KOx3D3AgDJdC-g4WE1oCo0SBiLEJ0LWsbhjaJkUyU7yNDvo9ai3moRW8veuu2ESvKJfVZMjlU1Xh4fGtcjIAZwDiyrx4-JbxMxUZ4RSPQJx2g~AA-o5xwWjUVwtymuqj7Oi0oY~CWA-uynUAhVm4gF3-lCIg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Residents, landowners and multiple board members told Caltrans and the San Benito County Council of Governments on March 20 that they remain unclear about why a specific Highway 25 alignment was chosen and raised concerns about prime farmland, safety and the level of public engagement.

Board members recalled a March 12 workshop on Highway 25 that included Caltrans, county and city staff and a California Transportation Commission commissioner. Directors said they left the workshop wanting clearer explanations for the project’s route selection and design choices.

Executive Director Abraham (identified in public comment and board discussion as the COG executive) told the board the agency will take a step back and develop materials to answer the \"why\" questions and to support informed decision‑making. \"Pencils down — let's just think through this,\" Abraham said, describing plans to bring more detailed analysis and options to the board in the coming months.

Several public speakers urged the COG to prioritize farmland preservation. Marie Hoffman described U.S. Department of Agriculture soil‑rating maps and asked the board to review them before finalizing any alignment. \"Everything that you see in green is rated 1a, which is the highest rating given to soil in the state of California,\" Hoffman said, adding she would email the maps to the COG.

Directors and members of the public also discussed near‑term safety improvements for Highway 25. Caltrans said a safety analysis led by district and headquarters safety teams is nearing completion and that short‑term safety measures could be implemented while environmental and corridor design work continues.

The meeting included a procedural clarification about authority. Board Chair Velasquez and several directors emphasized that the COG and its corridor committee will make the policy recommendation to Caltrans; committee chair remarks reiterated that the committee will decide whether to pursue the existing route adoption or an alternate alignment and will present clear recommendations to the full board in the next two to three months.

Ending: Caltrans will complete and share its safety analysis; the COG said its corridor committee will revisit route choices and produce a set of recommendations and information — including the rationale for alignments and tradeoffs — so the board and public can evaluate alternatives before the project proceeds further.","Public speakers and board members pressed Caltrans about Highway 25 alignment, farmland loss and safety; the COG said the corridor committee will re‑examine the route adoption and bring recommendations back to the board.",{"_33":86,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":87,"_41":88,"_43":89,"_45":90,"_46":91,"_48":92,"_50":93,"_52":94,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":95,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":96,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":67,"_71":55,"_72":55},6604658,"Caltrans says Highway 156 project on schedule; paving waits on rubberized asphalt availability",271,2193000,2464000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2987486-2b1abc5b55d85b424879079f9615963d&start=2193&end=2464","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2987486-2b1abc5b55d85b424879079f9615963d/thumbnail_2193000.jpg","/articles/6604658/San-Benito-County/California/Caltrans-says-Highway-156-project-on-schedule-paving-waits-on-rubberized-asphalt-availability","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6604658-fbad47bc566abdd28b16178896da5d33/orig.mp4?Expires=1771148987&Signature=oqUc9MLx2i4DzS6bWOCdXw9Cln~fNSHaRfr05dsml9~b9F67S6YMlTnkZAtME0bnNWRa-Q30qqtYDbPjvMdIfjyDIWsDUN7PUg~5-m95hy4GKrosNbATQEh-RgfLctjx5QHVEBjTMCymLaNk0aSz~4nE5Zvyy-vUNOw4gxxdg0~fEfK6gkkWJbGVztVIS-G3Jb~tJPhc9G0iL06V76nqPPjgXizecmhBksblbRGNhqTcu0APyBBRr4tOsFVPNeeTFE5RnQIlnf3MwfuMI5eUjQUBAOzrZAA31Lrs2WwCVOS5lFy7pn~4tBp03K8QuP--xaIRZMWVss5BptPq5RGJtA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Caltrans told the San Benito County Council of Governments on March 20 that the Highway 156 improvement project remains on schedule and will move traffic to the final four‑lane configuration this summer, with all major work anticipated to finish in fall 2025.

Kelly McClendon, senior planner with Caltrans District 5, reviewed recent milestones and near‑term work. Caltrans shifted traffic onto new eastbound lanes on Oct. 24 and opened the Bixby roundabout and sections of the Union Road intersection. Contractor Tyker Construction has kept the overall schedule, McClendon said.

The agency said the next critical construction activity is placement of rubberized hot‑mix asphalt (RHMA). Caltrans staff explained that manufacturers do not begin production until late April, and temperature requirements prevent paving until May; the project team intends to use the summer months to complete final signage and pavement delineation, then switch traffic into the permanent four‑lane configuration. \"We anticipate finishing the project in fall of 2025,\" McClendon said.

Caltrans also told the board it will begin heavier work on the project frontage road in late May to prepare the road for relinquishment to San Benito County. That frontage work will use lane closures, flagging and traffic control; Caltrans said the frontage road will remain open during the repairs.

Directors raised localized safety and wayfinding concerns. One director asked the engineering team to reassess signage and delineation through the Bixby roundabout. Another director thanked Caltrans for responsive drainage repairs at a site near Mission Farms and asked whether frontage‑road repairs could be coordinated with the opening of the final four‑lane alignment; Caltrans said coordination efforts were planned and the frontage road will remain open during work.

Ending: Caltrans said it will provide additional communications and a public contact for questions; paving is contingent on seasonal RHMA availability and so the agency plans to complete preparatory work this spring before final paving and the traffic‑switchover in summer 2025.","Caltrans reported the Highway 156 improvement project is on track for fall 2025 completion but final rubberized asphalt paving must wait until May; the agency plans heavy frontage‑road work in late May in preparation for county relinquishment.",{"_33":98,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":99,"_41":100,"_43":101,"_45":102,"_46":103,"_48":104,"_50":105,"_52":106,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":107,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":108,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":67,"_71":55,"_72":55},6604660,"Caltrans: ramp meter would smooth US‑101 but not cut traffic on SR‑156; county officials question who should pay",754,423000,1177000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2987486-2b1abc5b55d85b424879079f9615963d&start=423&end=1177","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2987486-2b1abc5b55d85b424879079f9615963d/thumbnail_423000.jpg","/articles/6604660/San-Benito-County/California/Caltrans-ramp-meter-would-smooth-US101-but-not-cut-traffic-on-SR156-county-officials-question-who-should-pay","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6604660-56eb38346d763e9398c2c791958ba8d1/orig.mp4?Expires=1771148987&Signature=PK4IR2o5D0drOB0-256sz9j7wdqfcDk6pXuS5UriRUOYAgzE3-vOYCTYNFKDTB2glcZbZrHeNXnfjra7NTsoisHLeOgmYZcnUwp94AshDnRK-eqA8IRAiK-PzjbVuU9I-RX7GTbiQZowX4Q6JIRRv4EFWTm3qhcbNSFyQxXaIvsMBh4TbmHQ5fHlzBcIDHm3vz97Eh0Gy4qmnGprFvD6PwJsXZcKX7QO979YIwB-0YBi-DsnsCHPdlkJTAKZY4HgSeklk3u2oNCCKCgFDQwUs5mokyOykxUM7HdqXxmK8HbK8pQ1EJb9V-IDC9xJMUOXCTG6NbxGuQwnGzXZOoYOCw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Terry Thompson, a Caltrans presenter, told the San Benito County Council of Governments on March 20 that a ramp meter at the SR‑156 southbound on‑ramp to U.S. 101 would help smooth traffic on 101 but \"will not serve your purpose of decreasing the traffic flow around 156.\" Thompson said the agency studied reconfiguration options to lengthen the merge taper and reduce turbulence on 101.

Why it matters: The stretch where SR‑156 traffic joins southbound US‑101 is a recurring congestion point for commuters and weekend travelers to the coast. Caltrans officials said engineering work on the ramp could improve 101 flow, but local leaders and residents argued improvements to 101 would not solve backups on SR‑156 and questioned whether county COG funds should pay for a state highway problem.

Caltrans described two primary local partnership options. Thompson said one alternative would add roughly 600 feet of merging taper and would require about $2,550,000 in partner funding; a smaller reconfiguration with about 500 feet of taper was estimated at approximately $1,250,000. Thompson and Caltrans staff emphasized those cost estimates do not include the ramp‑meter hardware, supporting infrastructure, or a maintenance vehicle pullout.

\"Our minor program can support up to $1,250,000,\" Kelly McClendon, senior planner with Caltrans District 5, told the board, noting Caltrans had previously tried to fully fund an earlier concept but that project costs have since risen. She described how most Caltrans funds are prioritized for maintenance and preservation and that larger interregional improvements must compete statewide for roughly 25% of a particular funding pot.

Directors and members of the public said the congestion on SR‑156 often stems from weekend traffic heading to the coast and argued that responsibility should rest with the state. \"Why do we have to pay for a state highway issue?\" asked Director Kosmicki, summarizing a recurring concern from board members. Several directors urged Caltrans and the COG to pursue solutions that address the right‑hand merge behavior and other lower‑cost, short‑term fixes before committing local dollars.

Public commenters offered operational and behavioral ideas as potentially more cost‑effective near‑term measures. Ray Cancino, chief executive officer of Community Bridges, suggested changing lane markings to make the right lane a clearer “no‑cross” zone and adding signage and enforcement: \"Make it a yellow lane only about a thousand feet from the turn off,\" Cancino said, arguing criminal enforcement would deter lane‑crossing. Local trucker Joe Tinashe and others described longer travel times and economic impacts from the backups.

Caltrans staff told the board they had not evaluated every possible interim fix during this study and that some suggestions — such as widening bridges or adding lanes on SR‑156 overcrossings — would likely require substantially larger capital investments. Thompson estimated that expanding the two one‑lane bridges overpass sections would be on the order of tens of millions: \"I would think in this day and moving forward, it would cost at the minimum $55,000,000 to repair both of these, on ramps,\" he said.

The board did not vote on a funding commitment for the ramp work. Directors asked staff to continue seeking community input and to explore lower‑cost operational changes, enforcement and signage options, and the feasibility of leveraging Caltrans minor program support rather than using COG general funds.

Ending: Caltrans said it is willing to contribute its capped minor program amount and to further evaluate short‑term operational fixes; the COG asked staff and Caltrans to return with more analysis of low‑cost deterrents and options that focus on SR‑156 behavior before pursuing a multi‑million‑dollar partnership for ramp reconfiguration.","Caltrans presented two engineering options to ease merging at the SR‑156 to US‑101 southbound on‑ramp but said a ramp meter would not reduce traffic on SR‑156 itself; local officials and residents pushed back on using San Benito County funds for a state highway problem.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Caltrans updates: 101/25 interchange funding, median barrier timeline and new safety/environmental projects

Highway 25 corridor plan draws sustained public concern; COG says committee will decide next steps

Caltrans says Highway 156 project on schedule; paving waits on rubberized asphalt availability

Caltrans: ramp meter would smooth US‑101 but not cut traffic on SR‑156; county officials question who should pay