AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Thanks to everyone for the feedback on what errors you encountered at https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=33904.0
Corrected several already and appreciate your patience as we work through the rest.

Author Topic: The back way to San Jose; CA 130 over Mount Hamilton  (Read 21129 times)

Max Rockatansky

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 24921
  • Age: 41
  • Location: Route 9, Sector 26
  • Last Login: Today at 11:26:54 PM
    • Gribblenation
The back way to San Jose; CA 130 over Mount Hamilton
« on: December 14, 2016, 08:45:47 PM »

Obvious puns aside it really hasn't been all that long since I was last up in San Jose or the Bay Area...CA 236 and a random family drop-in over the summer time.  There was a rare opportunity was guaranteed non-freezing weather up to up the 4,216 feet on Mount Hamilton where CA 130 peaks out.  Given that tomorrow the weather turns ugly in a really bad way I figured it was time to check out what was my highest road that I'm looking to explore in the Diablo Range this winter.

Getting there though...holy crap I-5 is boring but at least the fog was minimal with the recent warm spell.  At minimum it afforded me an opportunity to capture a CA 165 shield which hasn't made it any of my threads yet:



Speaking of roads in the Diablos.....Pacheco Pass was my bail out route if the weather was really bad.  Thankfully it wasn't and I was able to take my planned route back to San Joaquin Valley.  Good thing too since I absolutely despise CA 152 and Pacheco Pass, I would probably rank it as my least favorite section of rural highway in the state given the glut of traffic on top of substandard routing:



My approach to CA 130 was from the eastern terminus.  That being the case I got off at I-5 at 434 for the Diablo Grande Parkway, managed to grab the J17 shield at the bottom of the ramp:




To reach the eastern terminus of CA 130 you need to take a right off of Diablo Grande and take Del Puerto Canyon Road:




Despite the 35 MPH speed limit and constant warnings I would say rock slides are the biggest obstacle you'll face on Del Puerto Canyon Road.  The road is narrow but always wide enough for two vehicles with adequate paving.  The grade is gentle up to a sudden spike to the Santa Clara County Line:





Logged

Max Rockatansky

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 24921
  • Age: 41
  • Location: Route 9, Sector 26
  • Last Login: Today at 11:26:54 PM
    • Gribblenation
Re: The back way to San Jose; CA 130 over Mount Hamilton
« Reply #1 on: December 14, 2016, 09:02:02 PM »

CA 130 abruptly begins at the Santa Clara County.  The mutant CA 130 apparently is posted by Santa Clara County according to Cahwyguy.  The road surface and quality is a huge step up over Del Puerto Canyon Road:



Traffic is highly discouraged from taking CA 130 over Mount Hamilton with the control cities listed on Mines Road instead:



A weird off color CA 130 on San Antonio Valley Road.  The elevation here is more or less between 2,000-2,200 feet and the road is pretty well populated with ranch homes:





Honestly I was expecting much more of this given the wet seasonal weather but this was the only rockfall on CA 130 I encountered:



It was pretty apparent 3,000 feet and above was going to be a little cloudy.  The hairpins begin but aren't anything too bad yet:



But west of this bridge things get really nuts with the tight turns and the high grades.  The obligatory truck ban sign is right behind the bridge:




From here on out to Mount Hamilton the road is tight, narrow, steep, and pretty much everything else you'd expect from a state maintained mountain route.  Plenty of good opportunities to take panos of the hairpins:


Logged

Max Rockatansky

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 24921
  • Age: 41
  • Location: Route 9, Sector 26
  • Last Login: Today at 11:26:54 PM
    • Gribblenation
Re: The back way to San Jose; CA 130 over Mount Hamilton
« Reply #2 on: December 14, 2016, 09:45:40 PM »

Lots more hairpins on the way to the summit, this was probably the best one.  Too bad about the cloud cover, could have had some nice views:



Not much to see at the summit of CA 130 on Mount Hamilton.  The Lick Observatory was all clouded up and hard to see.  Right before the second photo there is actually Caltrans spec 130 shields but I was getting stink eye from someone in a somewhat official looking vehicle.  At the Observatory I believe that CA 130 officially becomes "Mount Hamilton Road."  Apparently the Lick Observatory is open Thursday through Sunday this time of year...good luck with that tomorrow:




The descent down off the western slop of Mount Hamilton isn't quite as steep as the eastern slope.  Supposedly the average grade is within the 6% range which I say it more often than not is below that.  Really the biggest hazard is the narrow design of the roadway.  Given what I usually do out in the boonies I don't really consider 130 to be that bad considering it is wide enough at all times to have a full two lanes.  This must be one hell of a shock though for anyone who is used to driving in the Bay Area or comes from out of state and got the Lick Observatory as a recommendation for sight seeing:




Finally cracked the cloud cover at about 2,700 feet which definitely opened up the views:





Surprisingly there isn't a single vista point to be had approaching San Jose.  There is all sorts of signs saying "no parking X miles except emergency" all over the place.  I had to take my photos when I was moving, this was the best of the bunch:



Apparently since 2013 CA 130 in San Jose has been relinquished to the city where it turns west off of Mount Hamilton Road to Alum Rock Avenue.  Supposedly the relinquishment agreement stated that the city would maintain signage....which they failed completely to do.  No end point signage and no CA 130 signage to be had westbound at all below the Lick Observatory.  Basically CA 130 ends at US 101:



But I should say that on Mount Hamilton Road there was a ton of CA 130 shields heading eastbound to the summit.  I can't comment what the exits for Alum Rock Avenue say on US 101 and I-680 say since I didn't take them.

Mount Hamilton Road has a interesting back story tied to the Lick Observatory.  Mount Hamilton Road was constructed in 1876 with the Lick Observatory being built from 1876 to 1887.  Supposedly there is 365 curves from the summit down San Jose, I find that claim somewhat dubious since many of them are sweeping and long. 

Obviously CA 130 was part of the 1964 renumbering from the previous unsigned LRN 115 which was the previous designation back to 1934.  According to Cahwyguy the 1963 definition of CA 130 was from US 101 in San Jose to Mount Hamilton but then it jumped eastward to CA 33 in Patterson in 1988.  I find that odd since that seems to imply that CA 130 is continuous to I-5 and CA 33 which Santa Clara County seems to agree with....weird.  Supposedly there was a crazy proposal to build CA 130 as a freeway that bypassed Mount Hamilton.  Rather than keep borrowing of Cahwyguy's page I'll just link the stub here which includes the San Jose relinquishment above:

http://www.cahighways.org/129-136.html

Given the strange nature of CA 130 I figured some maps might clarify the actual end points.  The 1990 map seems to indicate CA 130 ends at Mount Hamilton with a proposed extension shown to Patterson (note: check out of the proposed extension of CA 108):

http://www.davidrumsey.com/luna/servlet/detail/RUMSEY~8~1~239483~5511824:State-Highway-Map,-1990-?sort=Pub_List_No_InitialSort%2CPub_Date%2CPub_List_No%2CSeries_No&qvq=q:caltrans;sort:Pub_List_No_InitialSort%2CPub_Date%2CPub_List_No%2CSeries_No;lc:RUMSEY~8~1&mi=1&trs=86

1988 seems to agree with the end point being Mount Hamilton:

http://www.davidrumsey.com/luna/servlet/detail/RUMSEY~8~1~239488~5511826:State-Highway-Map,-1988-?sort=Pub_List_No_InitialSort%2CPub_Date%2CPub_List_No%2CSeries_No&qvq=q:caltrans;sort:Pub_List_No_InitialSort%2CPub_Date%2CPub_List_No%2CSeries_No;lc:RUMSEY~8~1&mi=3&trs=86

Same thing with 1986 along with the extension to Patterson:

http://www.davidrumsey.com/luna/servlet/detail/RUMSEY~8~1~239491~5511828:State-Highway-Map,-1986-?sort=Pub_List_No_InitialSort%2CPub_Date%2CPub_List_No%2CSeries_No&qvq=q:caltrans;sort:Pub_List_No_InitialSort%2CPub_Date%2CPub_List_No%2CSeries_No;lc:RUMSEY~8~1&mi=5&trs=86

The proposed extension even shows back in 1964 when LRN 115 became CA 130, looks like the paving wasn't complete yet all the way up to Mount Hamilton:

http://www.davidrumsey.com/luna/servlet/detail/RUMSEY~8~1~239525~5511850:State-Highway-Map,-California,-1964?sort=Pub_List_No_InitialSort%2CPub_Date%2CPub_List_No%2CSeries_No&qvq=q:caltrans;sort:Pub_List_No_InitialSort%2CPub_Date%2CPub_List_No%2CSeries_No;lc:RUMSEY~8~1&mi=27&trs=86

Even LRN 115 shows a proposed extension to CA 33 even back in 1963:

http://www.davidrumsey.com/luna/servlet/detail/RUMSEY~8~1~239528~5511852:State-Highway-Map,-California,-1963?sort=Pub_List_No_InitialSort%2CPub_Date%2CPub_List_No%2CSeries_No&qvq=q:caltrans;sort:Pub_List_No_InitialSort%2CPub_Date%2CPub_List_No%2CSeries_No;lc:RUMSEY~8~1&mi=29&trs=86

So....two open questions for anyone who happens to be in the know.  First; when was LRN 115 first proposed to extend to CA 33 or was it always that way?  Second; when was paving completed on CA 130 up to Mount Hamilton?  And I guess a third for anyone who might have some local maps, does CA 130 end at the eastern boundary of Santa Clara County "officially" or is it still Mount Hamilton?

Logged

jrouse

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 303
  • Location: Sacramento, CA
  • Last Login: March 11, 2024, 08:42:28 PM
The back way to San Jose; CA 130 over Mount Hamilton
« Reply #3 on: December 14, 2016, 09:55:03 PM »

Great post, as usual.  I've done this same trek and it really is incredible.  If you ever get a chance to check out the Lick Observatory, it is pretty cool. 

I'll answer the third question.  The legislative description for CA-130 takes it all the way from US-101 in San Jose to CA-33 in Patterson.  However, with the relinquishment to San Jose, the state highway is now basically Alum Rock Avenue from the San Jose city limits and Mount Hamilton Road.  East of there it is county roads and always has been, AFAIK.  There are signs designating it as CA-130 but those were not installed by Caltrans.  They look like county signs.  There are no plans for the state to adopt the county roads into the state highway system.   See page 21 of the Caltrans traversable highway report, http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/tsip/hseb/products/TravHwy02.pdf


iPhone
« Last Edit: December 21, 2016, 03:10:30 PM by jrouse »
Logged

Max Rockatansky

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 24921
  • Age: 41
  • Location: Route 9, Sector 26
  • Last Login: Today at 11:26:54 PM
    • Gribblenation
Re: The back way to San Jose; CA 130 over Mount Hamilton
« Reply #4 on: December 14, 2016, 11:50:09 PM »

Great post, as usual.  I've done this same trek and it really is incredible.  If you ever get a chance to check out the Lick Observatory, it is pretty cool. 

I'll answer the third question.  The legislative description for CA-130 takes it all the way from US-101 in San Jose to CA-33 in Patterson.  However, with the relinquishment to San Jose, the state highway is now basically Alum Rock Avenue from the San Jose city limits and Mount Hamilton Road.  East of there it is county roads and always has been, AFAIK.  There are signs designating it as CA-130 but those were not installed by the Caltrans.  They look like county signs.  There are no plans for the state to adopt the county roads into the state highway system.   See page 21 of the Caltrans traversable highway report, http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/tsip/hseb/products/TravHwy02.pdf


iPhone

Yeah to I'm actually surprised that Santa Clara County didn't just use J130 signs instead and try to petition Stanislaus County to do the same thing.  Part of the "presumed route" in Stanislaus is already J17 and it would be too much of a leap for the county to do something like a J130 given they already have J59 acting as a functional extension of CA 59.  Very weird that Santa Clara County would go through the effort of creating it's own CA 130 spades for it basically just be a county route, more so when the city of San Jose won't even sign the route anymore. 
Logged

NE2

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 14423
  • fuck

  • Age: 1
  • Location: central Florida
  • Last Login: March 11, 2024, 12:16:05 AM
Re: The back way to San Jose; CA 130 over Mount Hamilton
« Reply #5 on: December 15, 2016, 12:00:22 AM »

First; when was LRN 115 first proposed to extend to CA 33 or was it always that way?
1959.
Logged
pre-1945 Florida route log

I accept and respect your identity as long as it's not dumb shit like "identifying as a vaccinated attack helicopter".

NE2

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 14423
  • fuck

  • Age: 1
  • Location: central Florida
  • Last Login: March 11, 2024, 12:16:05 AM
Logged
pre-1945 Florida route log

I accept and respect your identity as long as it's not dumb shit like "identifying as a vaccinated attack helicopter".

myosh_tino

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2809
  • Silicon Valley Roadgeek

  • Age: 50
  • Location: Cupertino, CA
  • Last Login: March 17, 2024, 01:25:52 PM
    • Silicon Valley Roads @ Markyville.com
Re: The back way to San Jose; CA 130 over Mount Hamilton
« Reply #8 on: December 15, 2016, 06:47:27 PM »

Good thing too since I absolutely despise CA 152 and Pacheco Pass, I would probably rank it as my least favorite section of rural highway in the state given the glut of traffic on top of substandard routing:

The only "substandard" section of 152 is between the 152/156 intersection and the old Gilroy Foods.  The rest of 152 is 4-lane expressway.  Compared to what 152 looked like 20+ years ago (2-lane conventional highway), today's road really isn't that bad.
Logged
Quote from: golden eagle
If I owned a dam and decided to donate it to charity, would I be giving a dam? I'm sure that might be a first because no one really gives a dam.

TheStranger

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 4718
  • Last Login: Today at 01:53:58 PM
Re: The back way to San Jose; CA 130 over Mount Hamilton
« Reply #9 on: December 15, 2016, 07:32:42 PM »


The only "substandard" section of 152 is between the 152/156 intersection and the old Gilroy Foods.  The rest of 152 is 4-lane expressway.  Compared to what 152 looked like 20+ years ago (2-lane conventional highway), today's road really isn't that bad.

Since I've never driven the mediocre portion of 152 myself (I've been on 152 from Route 1 to US 101 and from Route 156 to Route 59)...

How effective is bypassing 152 between US 101 and Route 156 by taking Route 25, Shore Road/Fairview Road, and then Route 156?  I know that alternate pathway has been mentioned in threads before but I don't know if anyone has mentioned actually using it.
Logged
Chris Sampang

kkt

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 7887
  • Location: Seattle, Washington
  • Last Login: Today at 10:59:29 PM
Re: The back way to San Jose; CA 130 over Mount Hamilton
« Reply #10 on: December 15, 2016, 07:57:03 PM »

Great photo essay, thanks for posting!
Mt. Hamilton gets snow a couple of times most winters too.  Just another way for lowlanders to get into trouble. :)
Logged

myosh_tino

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2809
  • Silicon Valley Roadgeek

  • Age: 50
  • Location: Cupertino, CA
  • Last Login: March 17, 2024, 01:25:52 PM
    • Silicon Valley Roads @ Markyville.com
Re: The back way to San Jose; CA 130 over Mount Hamilton
« Reply #11 on: December 15, 2016, 08:00:19 PM »


The only "substandard" section of 152 is between the 152/156 intersection and the old Gilroy Foods.  The rest of 152 is 4-lane expressway.  Compared to what 152 looked like 20+ years ago (2-lane conventional highway), today's road really isn't that bad.

Since I've never driven the mediocre portion of 152 myself (I've been on 152 from Route 1 to US 101 and from Route 156 to Route 59)...

How effective is bypassing 152 between US 101 and Route 156 by taking Route 25, Shore Road/Fairview Road, and then Route 156?  I know that alternate pathway has been mentioned in threads before but I don't know if anyone has mentioned actually using it.

I've never used that particular routing to bypass 152 but CA-25 scares me from time to time because it's a pretty straight road and traffic seems to move much faster than the posted 55 MPH speed limit.  It should be noted that the "Blood Alley" designation was associated with that portion of 25 in the past due to frequent head-on collisions.  I believe Gary Richards of the San Jose Mercury News has mentioned CA-25 to CA-156 as a suitable alternative for CA-152.

Great photo essay, thanks for posting!
Mt. Hamilton gets snow a couple of times most winters too.  Just another way for lowlanders to get into trouble. :)

Not really as Caltrans is really good about closing 130 when it snows on Mt Hamilton.
Logged
Quote from: golden eagle
If I owned a dam and decided to donate it to charity, would I be giving a dam? I'm sure that might be a first because no one really gives a dam.

Max Rockatansky

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 24921
  • Age: 41
  • Location: Route 9, Sector 26
  • Last Login: Today at 11:26:54 PM
    • Gribblenation
Re: The back way to San Jose; CA 130 over Mount Hamilton
« Reply #12 on: December 15, 2016, 08:52:22 PM »


The only "substandard" section of 152 is between the 152/156 intersection and the old Gilroy Foods.  The rest of 152 is 4-lane expressway.  Compared to what 152 looked like 20+ years ago (2-lane conventional highway), today's road really isn't that bad.

Since I've never driven the mediocre portion of 152 myself (I've been on 152 from Route 1 to US 101 and from Route 156 to Route 59)...

How effective is bypassing 152 between US 101 and Route 156 by taking Route 25, Shore Road/Fairview Road, and then Route 156?  I know that alternate pathway has been mentioned in threads before but I don't know if anyone has mentioned actually using it.

I've never used that particular routing to bypass 152 but CA-25 scares me from time to time because it's a pretty straight road and traffic seems to move much faster than the posted 55 MPH speed limit.  It should be noted that the "Blood Alley" designation was associated with that portion of 25 in the past due to frequent head-on collisions.  I believe Gary Richards of the San Jose Mercury News has mentioned CA-25 to CA-156 as a suitable alternative for CA-152.

Great photo essay, thanks for posting!
Mt. Hamilton gets snow a couple of times most winters too.  Just another way for lowlanders to get into trouble. :)

Not really as Caltrans is really good about closing 130 when it snows on Mt Hamilton.

This looks all encompassing to reply to everyone:

For me I always found 156 west and 25 to be usually clear in a pinch.  25 is straight but like Myosh said it can be extremely hectic.  There is even some concrete dividers on 25 north of 156 that prevents people from passing and it is posted as a Safety Zone.  Really all three routes; 156, 25, and 152 need to be widened when/if funds ever become available.  156 ends at the 152 expressway from a surface alignment while 152 uses a flyover ramp to continue east...really swapping 152 and 156 west of Pacheco Pass would make some sense from how everything is aligned.  Usually I end up on 152 through Gilroy when I'm in a hurry and for whatever reason I think today will be the day there isn't a back up.  Outside of weird travel hours I can't remember a time when that was the actual case for me personally...granted I'm not a Bay Area resident so I generall find myself fighting traffic at peak times.

But in regards to 152 itself, really it is the only major east/west route available from Fresno.  Los Banos is a slow go and Pacheco Pass has annoyances too.  The summit isn't very high but most truckers struggle on the climb which leads to huge traffic crunches.   CHP loves to patrol Pacheco Pass also because of all the speeders in the down hill left lane.  So really it is meant for moving people and traffic but by no means is a enjoyable experience even still.  180 west would be the perfect in-between compromise from Fresno.  The route would be rural and run through the terrain like 198 but wouldn't require a huge jog out of the way to get to it.  I hit more on that in the J1 thread ironically.

KKT; Mount Hamilton is very much controlled, I would speculate without looking at the Quick Map that it is closed with the storms today if there was even a chance of snow.  There is a ton of warning signage telling you what not to do that I didn't really capture.  I suppose being that close to a city leads to a lot of problems and the road is way too narrow to afford a large margin of error.  At least it really steep though and never dips to a single lane like routes in the Sierras do.

For other similar questions: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_U.S._Roads/California/History/When_each_route_was_added_to_the_state_highway_system

Geeze was AAroads even a thing back 2007? 
« Last Edit: December 15, 2016, 10:27:23 PM by Max Rockatansky »
Logged

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 8487
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: April 30, 2023, 05:42:25 PM
Re: The back way to San Jose; CA 130 over Mount Hamilton
« Reply #13 on: December 15, 2016, 10:16:50 PM »

Since the growth of Hollister as a San Jose exurb, CA 25 between US 101 and that town has been overwhelmed by commute traffic; a good friend recently moved down there but is already regretting the move because of a twice-per-day commute on 25 (and, yes, he's explored the Bloomfield/152/Leavesley option, but had trouble with 152 traffic).  Off-peak, it's not too bad -- but with many Silicon Valley operations running flex-time employee hours (and Hollister still maintaining the lowest-per-square-foot home prices in the region) off-peak doesn't cover too much territory (like late at night and weekends).  25 needs expansion; a 4-lane channelized expressway would do nicely, IMO.  Just a matter of $$ allocation -- and it does cross a county line (San Benito/Santa Clara), so coordinating local MPO's may pose an additional obstacle to expansion.   
Logged

Max Rockatansky

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 24921
  • Age: 41
  • Location: Route 9, Sector 26
  • Last Login: Today at 11:26:54 PM
    • Gribblenation
Re: The back way to San Jose; CA 130 over Mount Hamilton
« Reply #14 on: December 15, 2016, 10:24:54 PM »

Since the growth of Hollister as a San Jose exurb, CA 25 between US 101 and that town has been overwhelmed by commute traffic; a good friend recently moved down there but is already regretting the move because of a twice-per-day commute on 25 (and, yes, he's explored the Bloomfield/152/Leavesley option, but had trouble with 152 traffic).  Off-peak, it's not too bad -- but with many Silicon Valley operations running flex-time employee hours (and Hollister still maintaining the lowest-per-square-foot home prices in the region) off-peak doesn't cover too much territory (like late at night and weekends).  25 needs expansion; a 4-lane channelized expressway would do nicely, IMO.  Just a matter of $$ allocation -- and it does cross a county line (San Benito/Santa Clara), so coordinating local MPO's may pose an additional obstacle to expansion.   

In regards to Santa Clara County I suppose the good news is that very little of 25 is actually in said county.  What about using Fairview and Shore from 156 to reach 25?  I would imagine that might shave off a couple minutes and possibly dodge some of the truckers/passer-bys who don't know that can be used as a cut-off?
Logged

Max Rockatansky

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 24921
  • Age: 41
  • Location: Route 9, Sector 26
  • Last Login: Today at 11:26:54 PM
    • Gribblenation
Re: The back way to San Jose; CA 130 over Mount Hamilton
« Reply #15 on: January 30, 2018, 12:24:15 AM »

I revisited CA 130 today in the clear weather, this attempt was eastbound:

https://flic.kr/s/aHsmesmEFn

CA 130 is signed on US 101 just as Sparker said up thread.   The climb up Mount Hamilton is much more daunting in clear weather with the sheer cliffs visible.  I'd definitely say going westbound is significantly easier since you hug the mountains.  The Santa Clara County sourced CA 130 shields start immediately after the Caltrans section ends at Mount Hamilton.
Logged

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 8487
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: April 30, 2023, 05:42:25 PM
Re: The back way to San Jose; CA 130 over Mount Hamilton
« Reply #16 on: January 30, 2018, 05:46:41 PM »

Obviously Santa Clara county gives more of a rat's ass about the 130 corridor than does either Caltrans (now that it's a functional "orphan") or the City of San Jose ("Highway 130?  What's that?  As far as we know, it's just Alum Rock Avenue!").  If it weren't for the observatory, the state-maintained portion would likely have gone by the wayside as well, given Caltrans' present proclivities. 
Logged

Max Rockatansky

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 24921
  • Age: 41
  • Location: Route 9, Sector 26
  • Last Login: Today at 11:26:54 PM
    • Gribblenation
Re: The back way to San Jose; CA 130 over Mount Hamilton
« Reply #17 on: January 30, 2018, 10:26:51 PM »

Obviously Santa Clara county gives more of a rat's ass about the 130 corridor than does either Caltrans (now that it's a functional "orphan") or the City of San Jose ("Highway 130?  What's that?  As far as we know, it's just Alum Rock Avenue!").  If it weren't for the observatory, the state-maintained portion would likely have gone by the wayside as well, given Caltrans' present proclivities.

The real oddity is the competing interests between the City of San Jose and Santa Clara County.  San Antonio Valley Road was undergoing some improvements east of Mount Hamilton which definitely aren't necessary.  San Jose can't even be bother to sign their relinquished portion of 130.  We're essentially a couple shield thefts away from the only 130s left in the field being on a county maintained road.
Logged

Max Rockatansky

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 24921
  • Age: 41
  • Location: Route 9, Sector 26
  • Last Login: Today at 11:26:54 PM
    • Gribblenation
Re: The back way to San Jose; CA 130 over Mount Hamilton
« Reply #18 on: January 31, 2018, 09:13:31 PM »

Got the blog entry on Sure Why Not Now up for CA 130 and all the implied routes:

http://surewhynotnow.blogspot.com/2018/01/california-state-route-130-and-lick.html
Logged

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 8487
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: April 30, 2023, 05:42:25 PM
Re: The back way to San Jose; CA 130 over Mount Hamilton
« Reply #19 on: February 20, 2018, 12:55:36 AM »

As of today (2/19/18) there is no more reference to CA 130 from US 101; all the original button-copy BGS's dating from the '90s featuring CA 130 shields have been replaced by bright green reflective-sheeting sign material; the advance and exit signs now read "Santa Clara Street/Alum Rock Avenue", sans any shields.   CA 130 is now officially and functionally an "orphan" on Mt. Hamilton Road. 
Logged

Max Rockatansky

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 24921
  • Age: 41
  • Location: Route 9, Sector 26
  • Last Login: Today at 11:26:54 PM
    • Gribblenation
Re: The back way to San Jose; CA 130 over Mount Hamilton
« Reply #20 on: February 20, 2018, 07:40:38 AM »

As of today (2/19/18) there is no more reference to CA 130 from US 101; all the original button-copy BGS's dating from the '90s featuring CA 130 shields have been replaced by bright green reflective-sheeting sign material; the advance and exit signs now read "Santa Clara Street/Alum Rock Avenue", sans any shields.   CA 130 is now officially and functionally an "orphan" on Mt. Hamilton Road.

Well that sucks, makes me glad I got my photos when I did.  I might as well post the photos here since its complete BS that a route that still exists on the books legislatively isn't even signed on a Caltrans maintained roadway like US 101. 

IMG_1915 by Max Rockatansky, on Flickr

IMG_1919 by Max Rockatansky, on Flickr
Logged

mrsman

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 4018
  • Age: 48
  • Location: Silver Spring, MD
  • Last Login: Today at 11:10:21 PM
Re: The back way to San Jose; CA 130 over Mount Hamilton
« Reply #21 on: February 23, 2018, 07:51:12 AM »

Has CA-130 ever been signed off I-680?
Logged

Max Rockatansky

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 24921
  • Age: 41
  • Location: Route 9, Sector 26
  • Last Login: Today at 11:26:54 PM
    • Gribblenation
Re: The back way to San Jose; CA 130 over Mount Hamilton
« Reply #22 on: February 23, 2018, 08:24:22 AM »

Has CA-130 ever been signed off I-680?

I'm sure it was once, but I didn't see anything on 680 while searching the current GSV images.
Logged

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 8487
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: April 30, 2023, 05:42:25 PM
Re: The back way to San Jose; CA 130 over Mount Hamilton
« Reply #23 on: February 23, 2018, 06:42:08 PM »

Has CA-130 ever been signed off I-680?

I'm sure it was once, but I didn't see anything on 680 while searching the current GSV images.

There has never been any CA 130 signage from I-680 save the original small stenciling on the Alum Rock Ave. overpass indicating the separation between state highways.  Next time I'm over that way during the day I'll try to see if even that's been changed due to the relinquishment of Alum Rock.   Knowing D4, it's still there; they take their sweet time about most things around these parts.   
Logged

mrsman

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 4018
  • Age: 48
  • Location: Silver Spring, MD
  • Last Login: Today at 11:10:21 PM
Re: The back way to San Jose; CA 130 over Mount Hamilton
« Reply #24 on: February 24, 2018, 09:47:08 PM »

Has CA-130 ever been signed off I-680?

I'm sure it was once, but I didn't see anything on 680 while searching the current GSV images.

There has never been any CA 130 signage from I-680 save the original small stenciling on the Alum Rock Ave. overpass indicating the separation between state highways.  Next time I'm over that way during the day I'll try to see if even that's been changed due to the relinquishment of Alum Rock.   Knowing D4, it's still there; they take their sweet time about most things around these parts.   

It's certainly weird that CA 130 used to be signed at US 101 but never signed at I-680, given that I-680 is along the middle of the route (and closer to the section connecting to Mt Hamilton).

So now as Max has said that CA 130 is orphaned, and does not connect to any other state highway (including US and State routes).  Are there any other orphaned highways in CA that are not part of the network?
Logged

 


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.