California 99 in Sacramento

[AZDude]

Does anyone know the reason why Caltrans decided to remove the CA 99 shields along the overlap with Interstate 5?  Do they want people to get lost or something? 

[agentsteel53]

laziness?

I have never driven the freeways in Sacramento without a) getting terribly lost or 2) having at least one incidence of having to swerve over at least 4 lanes just to stay on the highway that I'm trying to follow.

also, my GPS really loves the distinction between "80" and "80".

[AZDude]

Lol,

That sucks.  "80" and "80" I forgot about that.  It's hard to call it laziness since the signs where there at one point and were taken down.  Someone had to have come and physically remove them. 

[agentsteel53]

BL80 has to be the dumbest designation for a freeway I've seen in a while.  Why not state 51 as it is postmiled?  Hell, why not 80 and the loop road is 880.  (and the one in the bay is perfectly valid as state 17, as it was for so many years.)

[AZDude]

I like the idea of CA 51.  As for I-80 replacing BUS 80, they would have to upgade it interstate standards first.  Ofcouse I don't see that ever happening. 

[agentsteel53]

there's a lot of Interstates that are nowhere near up to spec.  Ever driven I-278 in Manhattan?  *one* lane northbound.  It doesn't even meet the standards for an average traffic jam!

[Chris]

^^ Brooklyn actually, but you're right, it's nowhere near Interstate standards (as are a lot of expressways in that region).

[TheStranger]

BL80 has to be the dumbest designation for a freeway I've seen in a while.  Why not state 51 as it is postmiled?  Hell, why not 80 and the loop road is 880.  (and the one in the bay is perfectly valid as state 17, as it was for so many years.)

The change from 17 to 880 (and 580) was designed to provide funds for upgrading the route, IIRC by Glenn Anderson (the same guy behind the completion of 105 in Los Angeles).

[tankerdave]

Does anyone know the reason why Caltrans decided to remove the CA 99 shields along the overlap with Interstate 5?  Do they want people to get lost or something? 

But isn't getting lost part of the whole CA driving experience?  After growing up in the Los Angeles area, I can still get lost once in a while.  It is not easy, but it is possible.  If you want a state where getting lost is hrd, you can move out to NV, where other than Las Vegas and Reno, the street system is actually a lot simpler than CA.  Of course, then there is the eternal construction CA roads are always having! 

[roadfro]

If you want a state where getting lost is hrd, you can move out to NV, where other than Las Vegas and Reno, the street system is actually a lot simpler than CA.

I'd argue that street layouts in Las Vegas and Reno are simpler than many areas of CA... Especially in Las Vegas, where the majority of major streets are on a grid system (section-line roads, actually).

[Hellfighter]

Does anyone know the reason why Caltrans decided to remove the CA 99 shields along the overlap with Interstate 5?  Do they want people to get lost or something? 

They didn't have enough money to sign that section with both designations? 

[AZDude]

Well, they could have left the existing ones there.

[Sykotyk]

I-385 in South Carolina isn't up to spec, either. No median berm (just a yellow line and then grass). And the shoulder varies at around 6' wide.

As for BL-80, it should be signed as ANYTHING other than BL-80.

Sykotyk

[Hellfighter]

I have an idea, just drop the BL-80, and leave it US-50.

[J N Winkler]

That wouldn't work--there is a length of "pure" Business 80 between I-80 and US 50.  This is also (I think) the entire length of Calif. 51.

The advantage of a Business 80 designation which overlaps with part of US 50 is that it indicates connectivity with I-80 at both ends.  This would be lost if the Business 80 designation were dropped in lieu of signing Calif. 51.

One other option would be to end US 50 at its interchange with Business 80, and sign the entirety of Business 80 as I-305.  I am not sure whether the hidden I-305 designation applies to the entire length of this road, however.

[TheStranger]

One other option would be to end US 50 at its interchange with Business 80, and sign the entirety of Business 80 as I-305.  I am not sure whether the hidden I-305 designation applies to the entire length of this road, however.

IIRC, I-305 corresponds to the section of Business 80 that is co-routed with US 50 (and partially with Route 99).

[Hellfighter]

That wouldn't work--there is a length of "pure" Business 80 between I-80 and US 50.  This is also (I think) the entire length of Calif. 51.

The advantage of a Business 80 designation which overlaps with part of US 50 is that it indicates connectivity with I-80 at both ends.  This would be lost if the Business 80 designation were dropped in lieu of signing Calif. 51.

One other option would be to end US 50 at its interchange with Business 80, and sign the entirety of Business 80 as I-305.  I am not sure whether the hidden I-305 designation applies to the entire length of this road, however.

WTF is a "pure" business route?

Second, Caltrans does not need to trim anymore US routes.

[J N Winkler]

"Pure" in this context means that there is no other signed designation on the length of Business 80 in question (between I-80 and US 50 in east Sacramento).  It is also Calif. 51, but this is not signed.

[hm insulators]

BL80 has to be the dumbest designation for a freeway I've seen in a while.  Why not state 51 as it is postmiled?  Hell, why not 80 and the loop road is 880.  (and the one in the bay is perfectly valid as state 17, as it was for so many years.)

That's what it used to be many years ago.

[DukeOfURL]

I used to live in Sac, and it took me a month to figure out the freeways there, but when I did I never got lost again.  Locals there call the section of pure Business loop 80 that is north of 99; "cap city" for Capitol City Freeway, it's easier than calling it Biz 80.

It's just weird how 99 south of downtown and 99 north of town don't connect.  Also, people still don't understand how regular 80 bypass of Sac from West Sac to Citrus Heights, and then throw in 50 which actually does connect to 80 before the bypass starts... you just got a huge mess.  Also almost all the freeways have overlapping designations and unmarked designations only to add to the confusion.

This coming from the place where CalTrans is headquartered.

[flowmotion]

Living in the Bay Area, I know numerous people who have been confused by "Green 80".

In my opinion, using a Business Interstate route for a full freeway loop is not obvious for most drivers. Sacramento is one of the few or only cities to use Biz signage this way. (Raleigh NC gave it up rather quickly.) Plus, it doesn't help that the freeway mainline going westbound is US-50 rather than I-80.

This route needs the I-480 designation more than I-238 does.

As for the gap in CA-99, I-9 can't get here soon enough.

[AZDude]

I don't consider it a gap since it does silently merge with U.S. 50 and I-5.  It's just no longer signed.

[Hellfighter]

I repeat, Caltrans, do not kill anymore US routes in California. They are becoming extinct, you wouldn't kill all the moose, so don't kill off US-50, 395, and 95.

[agentsteel53]

395 is hardly in danger of getting killed.  even if the road between Victorville and Reno becomes I-11 or something, the road from Reno to Laurier, WA will retain the US number.

[Hellfighter]

395 is hardly in danger of getting killed.  even if the road between Victorville and Reno becomes I-11 or something, the road from Reno to Laurier, WA will retain the US number.

I was just ranting about how caltrans kills off US routes like we killed the buffalo.