Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[TheStranger]

Great blast from the past, when we had real numbers and real button copy with real names for the Southland freeways. Gorgeous!

Rick

The amusing aspect of that particular sign:

The patched greenout, NOT the original sign, had the freeway name on it!  (Albeit, the original sign did not have any button copy, while the patch with the I-5 Golden State Freeway text did)

I do recall seeing some 1950s Golden State Freeway/US 6/US 99 signs existing prior to the designation of I-5, in fact the example below from the AARoads Shield Gallery is about 1 mile south of the currently revealed 99 sign!  (This one I think is specifically at the junction of the Golden State Freeway with the old Colorado Street Freeway adjacent to Glendale, the very next exit after the 134/5 junction in the recent photos - that freeway spur still exists to this day, too)
https://www.aaroads.com/shields/show.php?image=CA19550061

[ClassicHasClass]

US 99 shield suddenly appeared on the Ventura Freway/Route 134 eastbound in Griffith Park after a greenout patch fell this week!

Is that still visible?? I might have to go out and nab some shots myself.

[Max Rockatansky]

US 99 shield suddenly appeared on the Ventura Freway/Route 134 eastbound in Griffith Park after a greenout patch fell this week!

Is that still visible?? I might have to go out and nab some shots myself.

Apparently happened yesterday.  I would venture a guess it will be visible for a couple more weeks.  I’m planning on passing by on the 16th to see if I can get photos.

[ClassicHasClass]

Cool. We'll head out on Saturday. My wife wants to do a little road trip anyway.

[jzn110]

(Albeit, the original sign did not have any button copy, while the patch with the I-5 Golden State Freeway text did)

I'm willing to bet that it did, but the buttons were removed so the patch could be installed flat to the original sign.

[TheStranger]

(Albeit, the original sign did not have any button copy, while the patch with the I-5 Golden State Freeway text did)

I'm willing to bet that it did, but the buttons were removed so the patch could be installed flat to the original sign.

Someone mentioned on the Freeways of Los Angeles group that this section of 134 was built in 1962 - I think that was several years before button copy started being applied to what were originally porcelain signs. 

[TheStranger]

Something that used to be super common, but a rarity now since the Van Ness Avenue bus lanes project commenced: a US 101 shield on surface streets in San Francisco!  This one is at Van Ness and Grove Street, northbound towards City Hall.

101 shield near city hall by Chris Sampang, on Flickr

For comparison I took a photo of every 101 shield on Richardson/Lombard/Van Ness back in January 2011, most of which are now gone:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/albums/72157625842961088
DSC_7696 by Chris Sampang, on Flickr

(Vintage poles like these were taken out as part of the bus lanes project, so that may explain why a lot of the shields were taken down too)

[citrus]

Just spotted this in the Caltrans list of highway conditions:

SR 14
[IN THE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA AREA]
A HIGH WIND ADVISORY IS IN EFFECT FROM THE JCT OF US 101 /IN LOS ANGELES/ TO THE JCT OF SR 126 /IN SANTA CLARITA/ (LOS ANGELES CO) - TRAVEL IS NOT RECOMMENDED FOR CAMPERS, TRAILERS, OR PERMIT LOADS

So, high winds along an unconstructed segment.

[Max Rockatansky]

Just spotted this in the Caltrans list of highway conditions:

SR 14
[IN THE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA AREA]
A HIGH WIND ADVISORY IS IN EFFECT FROM THE JCT OF US 101 /IN LOS ANGELES/ TO THE JCT OF SR 126 /IN SANTA CLARITA/ (LOS ANGELES CO) - TRAVEL IS NOT RECOMMENDED FOR CAMPERS, TRAILERS, OR PERMIT LOADS

So, high winds along an unconstructed segment.

With a deleted/unconstructed highway segment referenced in the form of CA 126. 

[Quillz]

Just spotted this in the Caltrans list of highway conditions:

SR 14
[IN THE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA AREA]
A HIGH WIND ADVISORY IS IN EFFECT FROM THE JCT OF US 101 /IN LOS ANGELES/ TO THE JCT OF SR 126 /IN SANTA CLARITA/ (LOS ANGELES CO) - TRAVEL IS NOT RECOMMENDED FOR CAMPERS, TRAILERS, OR PERMIT LOADS

So, high winds along an unconstructed segment.

Depends on what they are referring to. If it's Newhall Avenue (which used to be San Fernando Road), it's fully traversable and was part of CA-14 until 2002 or so. If they're referring to Golden Valley Road, which has never been part of CA-14 but is more or less the unsigned connection, I suppose that's "unconstruted" but only in a technical sense. Either way it's an odd reference. And further demonstrates my belief that relinquishment is a stupid idea and highways should be signed regardless of who maintains them.

[Max Rockatansky]

CA 180 to Grant Grove reopened a week early after slide repairs:

https://www.yourcentralvalley.com/news/local-news/update-sequoia-and-kings-canyon-national-park-reopening/

[cl94]

(Albeit, the original sign did not have any button copy, while the patch with the I-5 Golden State Freeway text did)

I'm willing to bet that it did, but the buttons were removed so the patch could be installed flat to the original sign.

Someone mentioned on the Freeways of Los Angeles group that this section of 134 was built in 1962 - I think that was several years before button copy started being applied to what were originally porcelain signs.

Yeah, the sign is old enough to predate button copy in California. Many of the older signs had button copy applied to make them reflective.

[citrus]

Just spotted this in the Caltrans list of highway conditions:

SR 14
[IN THE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA AREA]
A HIGH WIND ADVISORY IS IN EFFECT FROM THE JCT OF US 101 /IN LOS ANGELES/ TO THE JCT OF SR 126 /IN SANTA CLARITA/ (LOS ANGELES CO) - TRAVEL IS NOT RECOMMENDED FOR CAMPERS, TRAILERS, OR PERMIT LOADS

So, high winds along an unconstructed segment.

Depends on what they are referring to. If it's Newhall Avenue (which used to be San Fernando Road), it's fully traversable and was part of CA-14 until 2002 or so. If they're referring to Golden Valley Road, which has never been part of CA-14 but is more or less the unsigned connection, I suppose that's "unconstruted" but only in a technical sense. Either way it's an odd reference. And further demonstrates my belief that relinquishment is a stupid idea and highways should be signed regardless of who maintains them.

Neither of those make it anywhere near US-101, though!

[Quillz]

Strange reference to the 101 junction that is traversable via I-5/Rinaldi/Reseda. Not sure why they did that. Should have just set it to I-5.

From there 14 was supposed to follow Reseda to Mulholland to Temescal and PCH. None of that is paved except the latter.

[ClassicHasClass]

Went to look at the US 99 at the CA 134-I-5 interchange with my wife yesterday. Fabulous, well preserved. Hopefully someone kind at Caltrans will deprioritize the sign replacement for awhile.

[bing101]

Mike Ballard has video clip of the US-99 sign at the CA-134@ I-5 interchange.

[Max Rockatansky]

Looks like everyone is parking on the shoulder of Zoo Drive and taking photos from Main Trail.

[Occidental Tourist]

That Camry with the hood up is a front for a roadgeek taking photos. 

[Quillz]

Who would have thought most people at this point in time are even aware of US 99? That’s neat how much attention this is getting.

[Max Rockatansky]

On the forum it doesn’t surprise me at all.  I haven’t seen anything mainstream report on the appearance of a US 99 sign.

[SeriesE]

Mike Ballard has video clip of the US-99 sign at the CA-134@ I-5 interchange.

I learned something new today: how CA-134 was routed before to link to that short Colorado Street freeway.

Also answered my question why the ramps from I-5 to CA-134 merges to the left

[jdbx]

(Albeit, the original sign did not have any button copy, while the patch with the I-5 Golden State Freeway text did)

I'm willing to bet that it did, but the buttons were removed so the patch could be installed flat to the original sign.

Someone mentioned on the Freeways of Los Angeles group that this section of 134 was built in 1962 - I think that was several years before button copy started being applied to what were originally porcelain signs.

Yeah, the sign is old enough to predate button copy in California. Many of the older signs had button copy applied to make them reflective.

I have read several times before that reflector buttons were epoxied onto the old porcelain signs in the early 1980's. I'm only 44, so I was a little too young to observe that transition, but I have wondered how exactly that was accomplished.  Were people going up onto the signs and applying those dot-by-dot?  That seems like an unimaginable amount of manual labor.  Anybody who was around then or with some insider knowledge who can elaborate onto how it was accomplished?

[TheStranger]

Reddit thread on the US 99 sign on 134 east:
https://www.reddit.com/r/LosAngeles/comments/12i5mpd/spotted_near_burbank_a_portion_of_this_sign_fell/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=ioscss&utm_content=1&utm_term=1

[Max Rockatansky]

That thread reads like “when non-road people discover US 66 wasn’t the only US Route.”

[bing101]

Reddit thread on the US 99 sign on 134 east:
https://www.reddit.com/r/LosAngeles/comments/12i5mpd/spotted_near_burbank_a_portion_of_this_sign_fell/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=ioscss&utm_content=1&utm_term=1

The Last time we talked about US-99 was because Caltrans accidentally put a US-99 Sign at the US-50 @ CA-51, CA-99 Interchange in Sacramento.  This was when US-50/I-305 and CA-51/Business 80 was going through a maintenance project in the area. In Sacramento there is a CA-99 that has been rumored to be I-7 or I-9 for some time.