AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Congrats to NE2 (again, again) for winning the March 20 trivia night! Of course, that means he hosts next time. In the meantime, come chat with us!

Author Topic: Sign on CA 60 Eb at Gilman Springs Rd  (Read 3681 times)

national highway 1

  • Expressway
  • **
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1064
  • From Down Under

  • Age: 17
  • Location: Carlingford, NSW, Australia
  • Last Login: April 22, 2014, 11:18:10 PM
Sign on CA 60 Eb at Gilman Springs Rd
« on: April 21, 2011, 12:47:32 AM »

I'm wondering why Exit 68 on CA 60 near Beaumont for Gilman Springs Rd has these blank spaces on these guide signs. Was Gilman Springs Rd originally planned to be signed a state route?

Logged

mapman

  • Trafficway
  • ****
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 175
  • Age: 37
  • Location: Gilroy, California
  • Last Login: Today at 09:56:04 PM
Re: Sign on CA 60 Eb at Gilman Springs Rd
« Reply #1 on: April 21, 2011, 01:45:58 AM »

According to cahighways.org, Gilman Springs Road was once CA 79 as well as CA 177.  It hasn't been a state highway since the 1960s.
Logged

Quillz

  • Turnpike
  • ***
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1744
  • Roadgeek

  • Age: 26
  • Location: Los Angeles, CA
  • Last Login: February 11, 2014, 11:40:42 AM
    • Forums
Re: Sign on CA 60 Eb at Gilman Springs Rd
« Reply #2 on: April 21, 2011, 02:52:10 AM »

The road eventually reaches CA-79, so maybe at one point CA-79 was going to be routed northwest of its current northern terminus?
Logged
US Highways: 1 / 6 / 26 / 30 / 50 / 66 / 91 / 93 / 95 / 99 / 101 / 395
Interstate Highways: 5 / 10 / 15 / 17 / 25 / 40 / 45 / 70 / 80 / 84 / 89 / 90 / 93 / 95

national highway 1

  • Expressway
  • **
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1064
  • From Down Under

  • Age: 17
  • Location: Carlingford, NSW, Australia
  • Last Login: April 22, 2014, 11:18:10 PM
Re: Sign on CA 60 Eb at Gilman Springs Rd
« Reply #3 on: April 21, 2011, 04:57:30 AM »

Judging from a map, Gilman Springs Rd acts as a shortcut for those heading to San Jacinto & Hemet from Pomona, Riverside & Moreno Valley wishing to avoid Beaumont. If it was given a SH designation, it could be CA 279.
Logged

Quillz

  • Turnpike
  • ***
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1744
  • Roadgeek

  • Age: 26
  • Location: Los Angeles, CA
  • Last Login: February 11, 2014, 11:40:42 AM
    • Forums
Re: Sign on CA 60 Eb at Gilman Springs Rd
« Reply #4 on: April 22, 2011, 12:40:14 AM »

Isn't 3xx usually used for realigned highways? If it was formerly part of CA-79, then they might prefer CA-379.
Logged
US Highways: 1 / 6 / 26 / 30 / 50 / 66 / 91 / 93 / 95 / 99 / 101 / 395
Interstate Highways: 5 / 10 / 15 / 17 / 25 / 40 / 45 / 70 / 80 / 84 / 89 / 90 / 93 / 95

NE2

  • Interstate
  • *****
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 9398
  • Age: 1000
  • Location: central Florida
  • Last Login: March 27, 2014, 11:22:56 PM
Re: Sign on CA 60 Eb at Gilman Springs Rd
« Reply #5 on: April 22, 2011, 01:36:35 AM »

Isn't 3xx usually used for realigned highways?
No.

national highway 1

  • Expressway
  • **
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1064
  • From Down Under

  • Age: 17
  • Location: Carlingford, NSW, Australia
  • Last Login: April 22, 2014, 11:18:10 PM
Re: Sign on CA 60 Eb at Gilman Springs Rd
« Reply #6 on: April 22, 2011, 02:21:25 AM »

Well, CA 330 was created when CA 30 (now 210) was rerouted south to I-10 onto CA 106 in 1972, and CA 371 was created out of an orphaned CA 71, because it was duplexed with CA 91, I-15 and CA 79.
Logged

agentsteel53

  • invisible hand
  • Site Contributor
  • Likes The Forum Way, Way Too Much
  • **
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 14675
  • long live button copy!

  • Age: 32
  • Location: San Diego, CA
  • Last Login: Today at 03:23:19 PM
    • AARoads Shield Gallery
Logged

Alps

  • Everybody Obeys the Octagon
  • Admin
  • Interstate
  • *****
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 8604
  • Fire Sather! Fire Goodell! Ban Isiah Thomas!

  • Age: 31
  • Location: New Jersey
  • Last Login: Today at 10:07:26 PM
    • Alps' Roads
Logged
~ Steve
http://www.alpsroads.net
I've listened many times, and I still can't figure out what the fox says.

agentsteel53

  • invisible hand
  • Site Contributor
  • Likes The Forum Way, Way Too Much
  • **
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 14675
  • long live button copy!

  • Age: 32
  • Location: San Diego, CA
  • Last Login: Today at 03:23:19 PM
    • AARoads Shield Gallery
Logged

Alps

  • Everybody Obeys the Octagon
  • Admin
  • Interstate
  • *****
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 8604
  • Fire Sather! Fire Goodell! Ban Isiah Thomas!

  • Age: 31
  • Location: New Jersey
  • Last Login: Today at 10:07:26 PM
    • Alps' Roads
Re: Sign on CA 60 Eb at Gilman Springs Rd
« Reply #10 on: April 22, 2011, 07:35:56 PM »

San Diego was fun. Thanks for asking.
Logged
~ Steve
http://www.alpsroads.net
I've listened many times, and I still can't figure out what the fox says.

roadfro

  • Moderator
  • Turnpike
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1709
  • Age: 30
  • Location: Reno, NV
  • Last Login: Today at 01:29:27 AM
Re: Sign on CA 60 Eb at Gilman Springs Rd
« Reply #11 on: April 23, 2011, 03:58:32 AM »

Let's keep the "fixing" to on-topic discussion please...  --roadfro.
Logged
Roadfro - AARoads Pacific Southwest moderator since 2010, Nevada roadgeek since 1983.

Alps

  • Everybody Obeys the Octagon
  • Admin
  • Interstate
  • *****
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 8604
  • Fire Sather! Fire Goodell! Ban Isiah Thomas!

  • Age: 31
  • Location: New Jersey
  • Last Login: Today at 10:07:26 PM
    • Alps' Roads
Re: Sign on CA 60 Eb at Gilman Springs Rd
« Reply #12 on: April 23, 2011, 11:47:29 AM »

Let's keep the "fixing" to on-topic discussion please...  --roadfro.
The topic is a single sign on a single road. I think the discussion has been over for many posts.
Logged
~ Steve
http://www.alpsroads.net
I've listened many times, and I still can't figure out what the fox says.

Interstate Trav

  • County Route
  • *****
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 349
  • Age: 26
  • Last Login: April 22, 2014, 06:43:47 PM
Re: Sign on CA 60 Eb at Gilman Springs Rd
« Reply #13 on: April 25, 2011, 12:07:27 AM »

Removed excessive image quoting

In another thread I noticed that Gilman Springs Road was a State Numbered highway from this map.

  Unknown Proposed Freeways In So Cal?
on: April 20, 2011, 11:51:15 PM Quote  

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I was looking at my 1968 San Bernardino County Thomas Guide which has a LA metro area freeway map with proposed routes included. Some of theses routes I never heard of.

Looking at this map CA 22 was supposed to be extended western to the Harbor Freeway. Does anyone know why it never was finished?

Thomas Bros Map Circa 1968 Los Angeles Metro Freeway Map by bigmikelakers, on Flickr

On this map it has a proposed freeway for US 395 called the Adelanto Freeway. Has anyone heard of this before?
I also see a proposed mountain freeway north of Lake Gregory. I think its CA 138. Maybe its part of the Metro Bypass.
In Lucerne Valley, CA 247 is proposed as a freeway. Where was it planned to go? Twentynine Palms/Yucca Valley?

Thomas Bros Map Circa 1968 Los Angeles Metro Freeway Map  
« Last Edit: April 25, 2011, 07:30:30 PM by AlpsROADS »
Logged

TheStranger

  • Turnpike
  • ***
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2295
  • Last Login: Today at 07:33:19 PM
Re: Sign on CA 60 Eb at Gilman Springs Rd
« Reply #14 on: May 04, 2011, 12:16:42 PM »

On the original topic...

i think it was a pre-1964 Route 79, then was 177 when 79 was given a more direct north-south routing, then removed from the state highway system.  (177 was reused for the road from I-10 to Desert Center)
Logged
Chris Sampang

agentsteel53

  • invisible hand
  • Site Contributor
  • Likes The Forum Way, Way Too Much
  • **
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 14675
  • long live button copy!

  • Age: 32
  • Location: San Diego, CA
  • Last Login: Today at 03:23:19 PM
    • AARoads Shield Gallery
Re: Sign on CA 60 Eb at Gilman Springs Rd
« Reply #15 on: May 04, 2011, 12:19:59 PM »

(177 was reused for the road from I-10 to Desert Center)

that explains.  I was trying to figure out just what kind of continuous routing could've connected the two 177s.  apparently they were separated in space and time.
Logged

TheStranger

  • Turnpike
  • ***
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2295
  • Last Login: Today at 07:33:19 PM
Re: Sign on CA 60 Eb at Gilman Springs Rd
« Reply #16 on: May 04, 2011, 12:22:29 PM »

(177 was reused for the road from I-10 to Desert Center)

that explains.  I was trying to figure out just what kind of continuous routing could've connected the two 177s.  apparently they were separated in space and time.

Looking at Dan Faigin's site...

http://cahighways.org/177-184.html

Gilman Springs Road as 177 existed from 1964-1965 before being removed from the system.  I guess this interchange might be the only evidence it was ever signed (though maybe these were Route 79 gantries that never received 177 signage before its removal?  It's ambiguous from the evidence presented).

Current 177 to Desert Center has existed since 1972.
Logged
Chris Sampang

agentsteel53

  • invisible hand
  • Site Contributor
  • Likes The Forum Way, Way Too Much
  • **
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 14675
  • long live button copy!

  • Age: 32
  • Location: San Diego, CA
  • Last Login: Today at 03:23:19 PM
    • AARoads Shield Gallery
Re: Sign on CA 60 Eb at Gilman Springs Rd
« Reply #17 on: May 04, 2011, 04:09:07 PM »

looks like those guide signs were, at one point, planned to have 177 shields?

had they had 177 shields from the start, greenout would have been required to cover them up, as the green shields were printed directly onto the porcelain, as opposed to being a separate panel like a white US shield.
Logged

TheStranger

  • Turnpike
  • ***
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2295
  • Last Login: Today at 07:33:19 PM
Re: Sign on CA 60 Eb at Gilman Springs Rd
« Reply #18 on: May 04, 2011, 07:23:36 PM »

looks like those guide signs were, at one point, planned to have 177 shields?

had they had 177 shields from the start, greenout would have been required to cover them up, as the green shields were printed directly onto the porcelain, as opposed to being a separate panel like a white US shield.

What I'm wondering out loud: were these guide signs old enough that they might've had 79 shields at one point, or were they new enough that they were either slated to or did have 177 shields only (before the decomissioning)?
Logged
Chris Sampang
 


Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.