California state route 138 being renumbered as 48, on Lancaster Road?

[ACSCmapcollector]

Why is the reason that California state route 138 was going to be renumbered as California state route 48 on a 1965 Rand McNally Road Atlas and a 1993 Automobile Club of Southern California state of California map.  Can someone relate or comment on this?

[cahwyguy]

If you look at http://www.cahighways.org/041-048.html#048 , I think it was the result of updated freeway plans in that area, with 138 going to the Metropolitan Bypass (if you've ever taken the 138 exit off the 5, that's why it is that way).  When those freeway plans were dropped in 1996, the 5 to 14 portion became 138 again.

[Quillz]

With the proposed bypass around Palmdale-Lancaster, it's possible that (if built) it might be signed as CA-48, unless the CA-138 designation is moved.

[sparker]

Presently, the legal definition of CA 48 (in Dan we trust!) begins at CA 14 north of Lancaster and extends east to the undefined CA 122 corridor, which itself is a largely diagonal corridor beginning at CA 14 near the Pearblossom Highway interchange, skirting Edwards AFB to the southeast, and finally terminating at CA 58 between Kramer Corners & Hinkley.  Originally defined as CA 48 in 1964, it was part of the network laid out in the High Desert to address prospective development (that never came!).  Neither CA 48 nor CA 122 ever had any portion of their corridors formally adopted as a future facility; it's more than likely that they never will!

[Quillz]

Presently, the legal definition of CA 48 (in Dan we trust!) begins at CA 14 north of Lancaster and extends east to the undefined CA 122 corridor, which itself is a largely diagonal corridor beginning at CA 14 near the Pearblossom Highway interchange, skirting Edwards AFB to the southeast, and finally terminating at CA 58 between Kramer Corners & Hinkley.  Originally defined as CA 48 in 1964, it was part of the network laid out in the High Desert to address prospective development (that never came!).  Neither CA 48 nor CA 122 ever had any portion of their corridors formally adopted as a future facility; it's more than likely that they never will!

I actually just found a 1987 Thomas Bros. map book in my house covering the entire state, and it shows CA-48 as a signed route running both concurrent and north of CA-138. Interesting, given it never existed in practice.

[andy3175]

(in Dan we trust!)

Second that. I am not sure what we California road enthusiasts would do without Daniel's site. I guess it has proven useful in the myriad questions raised by ACSCmapcollector.

[sparker]

Re 48 showing up on a Thomas Guide:  While there was no one better at providing detailed street maps, the Thomas folks did tend to "jump the gun" a bit on signed route deployment.  I remember perusing one of their LA County guides circa 1967 or so, and seeing CA 42 signed on Imperial Highway between Firestone Blvd. in Norwalk and CA 39 in La Habra.  I drove down there to see if that was indeed the case.....but it wasn't.  That same issue showed CA 73 on Main St. in downtown Santa Ana (OK, that was a real designated route), but signage was nowhere to be found.  After that I learned to take their signage indicators with a grain -- if not a shaker -- of salt!  They did lay out the High Desert highways as a series of dotted lines, including 122, which originally terminated not at CA 14 but at CA 249, which was intended to closely follow the Angeles Forest Highway from CA 2 to CA 14 (there was another branch connecting to CA 2 further up the mountain designated CA 196, but that was gone a few years later).  The Thomas folks were certainly as accurate as they could have been with unadopted alignments; they pretty much followed the official Division of Highways maps to the letter re future corridors, including 48 -- with the section west of 14 intact (as a substitute for 138, which was shown as a dotted line curving southeast toward Palmdale from the original route about 1/3 of the way between I-5 and CA 14.)  Of course, that became moot in '96, when the 138 freeway was given its official burial (1994-96 was retrenchment time at Caltrans!).

[sdmichael]

Rte 48 was postmiled for a time as well. I found at least one intact Rte 48 postmile marker on an alignment that was bypassed in the early 1990's near 270th St W.

http://socalregion.com/highways/la_highways/sr-138/

[TheStranger]

I found at least one intact Rte 48 postmile marker on an alignment that was bypassed in the early 1990's near 270th St W.

Nice find!  Is it along this section of Lancaster Road that connects to 269th Street West?

https://www.google.com/maps/place/270th+St+W,+Lancaster,+CA+93536/@34.7803946,-118.6077928,16z/data=!3m1!1e3!4m2!3m1!1s0x80c20b9d4ea7f609:0x53c32e014de42058

[sdmichael]

Yes, that is the section, specifically on Lancaster Road.

[sparker]

The Division of Highways was extremely diligent about deploying postmiles on virtually every legislatively numbered route in the state after the 1964 mass renumbering.  Circa 1968 or so I remember seeing a couple of "248" paddles along East Colorado Blvd. between Pasadena and Arcadia (during construction of the adjacent I-210), as well as some "215" paddles on North Garey Ave. in Pomona (although that particular street had been relinquished at the end of '65, the paddles remained until the street was widened some five years later).  CA 83 and CA 31 (the latter since subsumed by I-15) got their paddles in '64; reassurance shields followed about 3 years later.  Not surprising to see leftover "48" shields out on a previous CA 138 alignment; such things tend to last in the relatively arid desert environment.