Print

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

[theroadwayone]

On an unrelated note, anyone notice on the 241, just north of Oso Parkway, how there's something that looks like provisions for a future interchange (one with a SB exit and NB entrance?)

[stevashe]

I have noticed the extra pavement there before, though it didn't occur to me that it could be for a future exit; that's a good point. And actually if you look a bit south there's more stubs for a NB exit and SB entrance as well, I do wonder what it was planned to connect to though...

[theroadwayone]

I have noticed the extra pavement there before, though it didn't occur to me that it could be for a future exit; that's a good point. And actually if you look a bit south there's more stubs for a NB exit and SB entrance as well, I do wonder what it was planned to connect to though...

Oh yeah, I did notice. The only thing I saw in that area is what looks like some access road off Antonio Pkwy. There may be future development planned, but what do I know, anyways?

[sparker]

I have noticed the extra pavement there before, though it didn't occur to me that it could be for a future exit; that's a good point. And actually if you look a bit south there's more stubs for a NB exit and SB entrance as well, I do wonder what it was planned to connect to though...

Oh yeah, I did notice. The only thing I saw in that area is what looks like some access road off Antonio Pkwy. There may be future development planned, but what do I know, anyways?

I have noticed the extra pavement there before, though it didn't occur to me that it could be for a future exit; that's a good point. And actually if you look a bit south there's more stubs for a NB exit and SB entrance as well, I do wonder what it was planned to connect to though...

Oh yeah, I did notice. The only thing I saw in that area is what looks like some access road off Antonio Pkwy. There may be future development planned, but what do I know, anyways?

Even with the rapid growth of housing in the area, it's unlikely that an additional local-service interchange on CA 241 was planned so close to the existing Oso interchange, particularly since OTR machines would have to be installed on those ramps, raising the expense to do so.  And looking at the area -- the only clear path from that "ghost ramp" area down to I-5 would involve snaking a multilane facility down Antonio Creek, intersecting I-5 at about the Mission Viejo/San Juan Capistrano city line (about a mile south of the CA 73 merge).   And unless every environmental group in SoCal would be looking the other way, riparian areas such as that canyon are effectively off-limits.   Trying to fashion a facililty over to I-5 without encountering such opposition -- or simply lack of a place to put much of anything -- doesn't appear to be happening now or in the foreseeable future.   

[Mark68]

There may be a way to have Los Patrones built due south of Cow Camp toward La Pata, following La Pata from about Stallion Ridge (just SE of San Juan Hills HS) to Camino del Rio, then south again to Pico (somewhere between Camino Vera Cruz & Calle Frontera), and then can parallel Pico to I-5.


I haven't been down that way, so I'm not sure how steep the hills are, but eyeball-wise, it looks possible on Google Maps.

[sparker]

There may be a way to have Los Patrones built due south of Cow Camp toward La Pata, following La Pata from about Stallion Ridge (just SE of San Juan Hills HS) to Camino del Rio, then south again to Pico (somewhere between Camino Vera Cruz & Calle Frontera), and then can parallel Pico to I-5.


I haven't been down that way, so I'm not sure how steep the hills are, but eyeball-wise, it looks possible on Google Maps.

The problem is that once you get down to San Clemente's more developed areas flanking I-5, the opposition, whether from an environmental or simply NIMBY standpoint would likely be deafeningly loud, blunting any momentum toward completion of the basic 241 corridor concept, regardless of actual specific format.   That's part & parcel of the reason the corridor was truncated in the first place; "joisting" it off parallel to an existing uphill arterial probably won't fare any better than the original plan.

[Plutonic Panda]

This is why we need laws to stop these lawsuit happy NIMBYs. There are valid concerns and residents should absolutely have a voice. We just have to moved too far to the extreme allowing these projects to be delayed or even halted. I wonder what the chance of 241 ever reaching the 5 really is.

I see projects like extending the 55 freeway to PCH and Irvine Corona Tunnel on OCTA website and both of those are sorely needed yet don't stand a chance in today's political climate. Hopefully that changes towards the end of this decade.

[X99]

There may be a way to have Los Patrones built due south of Cow Camp toward La Pata, following La Pata from about Stallion Ridge (just SE of San Juan Hills HS) to Camino del Rio, then south again to Pico (somewhere between Camino Vera Cruz & Calle Frontera), and then can parallel Pico to I-5.


I haven't been down that way, so I'm not sure how steep the hills are, but eyeball-wise, it looks possible on Google Maps.

The problem is that once you get down to San Clemente's more developed areas flanking I-5, the opposition, whether from an environmental or simply NIMBY standpoint would likely be deafeningly loud, blunting any momentum toward completion of the basic 241 corridor concept, regardless of actual specific format.   That's part & parcel of the reason the corridor was truncated in the first place; "joisting" it off parallel to an existing uphill arterial probably won't fare any better than the original plan.

In that case, Mark's plan looks like it would work just fine until it got to Pico. Here's my solution- continue the route across Pico just north of the Calle del Cerro intersecion and run it between the neighborhoods to Cristianitos Road, then parallel that road to the east until it reaches I-5.

[SeriesE]

I wonder how much of the opposition is "I don't want a tolled freeway" vs. "I don't want a freeway period."

[sparker]

I wonder how much of the opposition is "I don't want a tolled freeway" vs. "I don't want a freeway period."

Pretty much the latter; although OC's political history would indicate otherwise, it (or at least its official public transportation body, OCTA) readily signed on to the tolled network in the late '80's after it was clear that (a) a limited-access network along the eastern hills wouldn't be financially feasible without tolls, and (b) without said network, the potential for developing the uphill areas like Rancho Santa Margarita and Coto de Caza was effectively nil.  So, like most OC activity, the developers drove the concept, eventually overcoming the "we're getting taxed twice" (i.e. gas tax + tolls) opposition.   The whole network was built out by 1998 -- except 241 south of Mission Viejo.  That was effectively nixed by a combination of environmental activists (the southern end connecting to I-5 was routed right down a riparian creek bed, which incited much of the opposition from that quarter) as well as NIMBY's from the San Clemente area.   That opposition would have emerged -- and prevailed -- regardless of whether the facility was tolled or not.     

[kendancy66]

On an unrelated note, anyone notice on the 241, just north of Oso Parkway, how there's something that looks like provisions for a future interchange (one with a SB exit and NB entrance?)

There has been a small stub where Crown Valley ends at Antonio Pkwy for a long time.  That would be perpendicular to CA-241 toll road.  But that would be south of Oso Pkwy not north

[kendancy66]

There may be a way to have Los Patrones built due south of Cow Camp toward La Pata, following La Pata from about Stallion Ridge (just SE of San Juan Hills HS) to Camino del Rio, then south again to Pico (somewhere between Camino Vera Cruz & Calle Frontera), and then can parallel Pico to I-5.


I haven't been down that way, so I'm not sure how steep the hills are, but eyeball-wise, it looks possible on Google Maps.

I agree with that, or it could also end at Ortega Hwy

[theroadwayone]

On an unrelated note, anyone notice on the 241, just north of Oso Parkway, how there's something that looks like provisions for a future interchange (one with a SB exit and NB entrance?)

There has been a small stub where Crown Valley ends at Antonio Pkwy for a long time.  That would be perpendicular to CA-241 toll road.  But that would be south of Oso Pkwy not north

There may have been a plan to build it to the 241 as Exit 12 or 13, near where they would have had the toll plaza.

[djsekani]

There may be a way to have Los Patrones built due south of Cow Camp toward La Pata, following La Pata from about Stallion Ridge (just SE of San Juan Hills HS) to Camino del Rio, then south again to Pico (somewhere between Camino Vera Cruz & Calle Frontera), and then can parallel Pico to I-5.


I haven't been down that way, so I'm not sure how steep the hills are, but eyeball-wise, it looks possible on Google Maps.

Technically possible, sure, but these are all highly developed areas (both commercially and residentially) and residents will scream bloody murder at any attempt to route through there.

Honestly unless you want to either route 241 through/around Camp Pendleton in some way the odds of a full freeway connection to I-5 are about 0.0002%.

[sparker]

There may be a way to have Los Patrones built due south of Cow Camp toward La Pata, following La Pata from about Stallion Ridge (just SE of San Juan Hills HS) to Camino del Rio, then south again to Pico (somewhere between Camino Vera Cruz & Calle Frontera), and then can parallel Pico to I-5.


I haven't been down that way, so I'm not sure how steep the hills are, but eyeball-wise, it looks possible on Google Maps.

Technically possible, sure, but these are all highly developed areas (both commercially and residentially) and residents will scream bloody murder at any attempt to route through there.

Honestly unless you want to either route 241 through/around Camp Pendleton in some way the odds of a full freeway connection to I-5 are about 0.0002%.

Since Pendleton extends all the way to the Santa Ana Mountains ridgeline in its northernmost reaches, and the Fallbrook city limits south of there, any extension of CA 241 would have to surmount the range and snake around behind the Marine base to get to a terminus ostensibly along CA 76.  Alternately, running it east around the north end of Fallbrook to I-15 would entail just about the same mileage and effort.  But the route would be out of Orange County by then; the original routing only passed through a mile or two of SD County en route to its merge with I-5 -- which was by design, so OCTA would have functional full control of the facility (the short SD County segment would have been paid for by OCTA, with the first toll-collection facility/device within OC).  But it's doubtful that SD County would readily contribute to 15-20 miles of new-terrain construction in exceptionally difficult topology for a facility that wouldn't really provide much benefit to itself -- even if toll revenue were to be proportioned to provide a revenue/maintenance stream for both jurisdictions.  And running through an active USMC base, particularly one with regularly active ordinance training/testing facilities, is a non-starter as long as the base remains open.  Bottom line -- 241 and its short locally-maintained extension simply peter out where they are, or connect directly with CA 74 if that facility is expanded and/or upgraded (but almost certainly not to limited-access standards).

[jrouse]

Just an observation...I notice references in this thread to TCA and OCTA.   OCTA is the Orange County Transportation Authority, which is responsible for transportation planning for all of Orange County.  The OCTA operates the tolled express lanes on State Route 91.  TCA stands for Transportation Corridor Agencies, which are two joint powers authorities that developed and operate the toll roads in Orange County and are responsible for planning the system, including the extension of State Route 241.  OCTA is not leading or responsible for that planning effort.  Each TCA has their own respective boards of directors but they share common management and staff.  The Foothills/Eastern TCA is responsible for State Routes 241 and 261 and the tolled portion of State Route 133.  The San Joaquin Hills TCA is responsible for the tolled portion of State Route 73. Caltrans owns the toll roads and maintains them.  Some years ago revenues from the two TCAs were consolidated and used to cover expenses for the entire network.  This was because the State Route 73 toll road was not generating enough revenue to cover its costs.

[Plutonic Panda]

The 241 toll road extension is officially dead: https://www.ocregister.com/2020/03/03/241-extension-through-san-clemente-is-dead-assemblyman-says/

So just within the last few years here are some interesting infrastructure developments:

Bullet train cost jumps 20 billion and Newsom declares it dead and backpedals on his comments creating chaos amongst the project.

Purple line extension cost jumps a billion dollars

HDC freeway de facto killed

241 extension dead

710 tunnel dead

710 south improvements essentially killed

So what’s the alternative project now for this toll road being canceled which should have extended to I-5? A surface road?

[X99]

So what’s the alternative project now for this toll road being canceled which should have extended to I-5? A surface road?

I mean, it's better than nothing, right?

[Plutonic Panda]

So what’s the alternative project now for this toll road being canceled which should have extended to I-5? A surface road?

I mean, it's better than nothing, right?

Yeah and selfishly for me I never would understand the need for it less it’s built and I use from traveling from the IE or low desert to Laguna or Carlsbad. I’m happy for the folks in the community that won’t have a roaring freeway in their backyard and I’m disappointed elected officials are doing next to nothing to really fix the traffic situation.

Will another alignment be proposed or is this it for this corridor?

[MarkF]

Today I drove the 241/Los Patrones/Cow Camp/La Pata/Ave Vista Hermosa route to I-5 from Rancho Santa Margarita.  It took 25 minutes to get from 241 at Los Alisos to I-5 at Ave Vista Hermosa in San Clemente, not much different from the time it takes when cutting over to I-5 via Alicia.  The red signal at Antonio/La Pata and Ortega was 2 minutes.

There are now mileage signs south of 241/Antonio showing the Los Patrones exits:


Also, there were warning signs up saying the 241 south of Antonio would be closed for a couple of days at the end of May, most likely to route the mainline under the completed Oso Pkwy bridge. 

Current signage coming up for the 241/Los Patrones transition:

Video of 241 south to I-5 via La Pata:

[sparker]

Today I drove the 241/Los Patrones/Cow Camp/La Pata/Ave Vista Hermosa route to I-5 from Rancho Santa Margarita.  It took 25 minutes to get from 241 at Los Alisos to I-5 at Ave Vista Hermosa in San Clemente, not much different from the time it takes when cutting over to I-5 via Alicia.  The red signal at Antonio/La Pata and Ortega was 2 minutes.

There are now mileage signs south of 241/Antonio showing the Los Patrones exits:


Also, there were warning signs up saying the 241 south of Antonio would be closed for a couple of days at the end of May, most likely to route the mainline under the completed Oso Pkwy bridge. 

Current signage coming up for the 241/Los Patrones transition:

Video of 241 south to I-5 via La Pata:

Except for the right-hand curb, and lack of median shoulders,  it looks a lot like 241 north over the hill to the 261 merge, down to the center K-rail.  I guess that's an example of what, in OCTA terms, distinguishes a "parkway" from the remainder of the tolled system.

[don1991]

Today I drove the 241/Los Patrones/Cow Camp/La Pata/Ave Vista Hermosa route to I-5 from Rancho Santa Margarita.  It took 25 minutes to get from 241 at Los Alisos to I-5 at Ave Vista Hermosa in San Clemente, not much different from the time it takes when cutting over to I-5 via Alicia.  The red signal at Antonio/La Pata and Ortega was 2 minutes.

There are now mileage signs south of 241/Antonio showing the Los Patrones exits:


Also, there were warning signs up saying the 241 south of Antonio would be closed for a couple of days at the end of May, most likely to route the mainline under the completed Oso Pkwy bridge. 

Current signage coming up for the 241/Los Patrones transition:

Video of 241 south to I-5 via La Pata:

Except for the right-hand curb, and lack of median shoulders,  it looks a lot like 241 north over the hill to the 261 merge, down to the center K-rail.  I guess that's an example of what, in OCTA terms, distinguishes a "parkway" from the remainder of the tolled system.

La Pata was never meant to be more than a high functioning arterial.  It will now likely serve as a de facto connector from whatever extension of Los Patrones is allowed down to Pico.  There is the one exit at the landfill but otherwise there will be cross traffic at a few locations.

[don1991]

I wonder how much of the opposition is "I don't want a tolled freeway" vs. "I don't want a freeway period."

Other than from the enviros, the rest of the opposition was more of "I don't want a tolled freeway".  Funny how the Water Agency and most others did not oppose Los Patrones even though it is functionally a freeway.  In California, it takes an act of the legislature to declare a stretch of road as a "freeway", which is why Los Patrones doesn't carry that name.  But from an engineering standpoint, it fully meets the definition.

Very sad that people in California don't embrace toll freeways more.  Its better than no road at all.  In many other states, the concept is accepted, if not embraced, which allows much more freeway building.

Similar to the Richard Nixon Freeway / Parkway.  South of Kellogg, it is a state freeway (Anaheim portion).  North of that portion (Yorba Linda), it carries the name "Parkway" because the state relinquished the roadway to Yorba Linda.  Functionally, however, the road is a freeway from Yorba Linda Blvd. to just north of Orangethorpe Avenue.  South of there to the 91 Freeway, it is a functional expressway, save for the one driveway from the Shell Station south of La Palma Ave.

[don1991]

The Oso Parkway bridge mainlines (on Oso) are now complete and fully open to traffic - all 6 lanes.  Now through October 2020 (the targeted completion date) they will finish tying the 241 into Los Patrones under the bridge, finish ramps, signal work, and other punch list items.  It is getting close.  It will nice to have a functional freeway now continue all the way down to Cow Camp.

[theroadwayone]

If there's anything we can learn from this episode, what is it?