SENATE BILL REPORT
SSB 6510
This analysis was prepared by non-partisan legislative staff for the use of legislative members in their deliberations. This analysis is not a part of the legislation nor does it constitute a statement of legislative intent. |
As Passed Senate, February 16, 2010
Title: An act relating to the extension of state route number 166.
Brief Description: Extending state route number 166.
Sponsors: Senate Committee on Transportation (originally sponsored by Senators Kilmer and Sheldon).
Brief History:
Committee Activity: Transportation: 2/01/10, 2/08/10 [DPS].
Passed Senate: 2/16/10, 48-0.
SENATE COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION |
Majority Report: That Substitute Senate Bill No. 6510 be substituted therefor, and the substitute bill do pass.
Signed by Senators Haugen, Chair; Marr, Vice Chair; Swecker, Ranking Minority Member; Becker, Benton, Berkey, Delvin, Eide, Hatfield, Jacobsen, Kastama, Kauffman, Kilmer, King, Ranker and Sheldon.
Staff: Hayley Gamble (786-7452)
Background: Legislation passed in 2009 transferred the responsibility for reviewing route jurisdiction transfers from the Transportation Improvement Board to the Washington State Transportation Commission (Commission). Recommendations for transfers must be approved by the Legislature and can be generated directly through legislation, rather than by recommendation from the Commission. Criteria for making additions and subtractions to the highway system are listed in statute and include consideration of the connections a route provides and the populations they serve.
State Route (SR) 166 is currently established as running from SR 16 northeasterly to the eastern city limits of Port Orchard.
Summary of Substitute Bill: SR 166 is extended to run from SR 16 to the eastern Port Orchard city limits as they exist on the effective date of this act.
Appropriation: None.
Fiscal Note: Requested on January 31, 2010.
Committee/Commission/Task Force Created: No.
Effective Date: Ninety days after adjournment of session in which bill is passed.
Staff Summary of Public Testimony on Original Bill: PRO: This proposed 8 mile section of SR 166 will reestablish connectivity to various facilities in the area. The Growth Management Act contains conflicting applicable information.
CON: This transfer would cost WSDOT approximately $200,000 per biennium to maintain the additional portions of highway. These sections of roadway do not meet the criteria in statute for being considered a state highway.
Persons Testifying: PRO: Mark Dorsey, City of Port Orchard.
CON: Kevin Dayton, WSDOT.