AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: New use of county route shields in California  (Read 1091 times)

pderocco

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 493
  • Two wrongs don't make a right--but three lefts do.

  • Age: 70
  • Location: El Cajon, CA
  • Last Login: Today at 09:45:54 PM
New use of county route shields in California
« on: October 25, 2022, 01:36:37 AM »

I've been up in NE California sightseeing. Today, I noticed in both Lassen and Modoc county several new blue and yellow pentagonal county route shields that are not part of the County Sign Route program. They just have 3-digit numbers on them. Modoc doesn't even participate in that program. For all I know,  there are lots of them in other places too. I'm wondering if there is now a move to sign lots more county routes, since so many counties have their own numbered routes having nothing to do with the County Sign Route program.
Logged
Ciao,
Paul

Max Rockatansky

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 22573
  • Age: 40
  • Location: Route 9, Sector 26
  • Last Login: Today at 10:40:23 PM
    • Gribblenation
Re: New use of county route shields in California
« Reply #1 on: October 25, 2022, 08:04:14 AM »

Itís probably more a case of that there really isnít anyone left on the state level maintaining the Lettered County Route program to care.  Iíve also seen similar County Route shields in Sierra County which have nothing to do with the letter route program. 

Some participating counties seem to be doing their own thing with the Letter County Route program.  Monterey County is putting up replacement county shields which omit the letter.  Tulare County pulled all their letter county route  shields aside J37 for reasons unknown. 
Logged

ClassicHasClass

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 743
  • 0-60 in 59.999997 years

  • Location: sunny So Cal
  • Last Login: Today at 08:23:40 PM
    • Floodgap Roadgap
Re: New use of county route shields in California
« Reply #2 on: October 25, 2022, 10:46:45 AM »

Very interesting, because Lassen used to use their own shields for that ( example in Doyle: http://www.floodgap.com/roadgap/395/u15/#img_30 ) and Modoc didn't sign them at all, just putting them on street sign blades ( http://www.floodgap.com/roadgap/395/u17/#img_1 ).
Logged

Max Rockatansky

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 22573
  • Age: 40
  • Location: Route 9, Sector 26
  • Last Login: Today at 10:40:23 PM
    • Gribblenation
Re: New use of county route shields in California
« Reply #3 on: October 25, 2022, 11:09:48 AM »

I grabbed pictures of quite a few of the Modoc County Route shields in this album for CA 139:

https://www.flickr.com/gp/151828809@N08/o1PTsvP83v
Logged

DTComposer

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1125
  • Location: San Jose
  • Last Login: June 04, 2023, 07:10:18 PM
Re: New use of county route shields in California
« Reply #4 on: October 25, 2022, 02:25:50 PM »

Itís probably more a case of that there really isnít anyone left on the state level maintaining the Lettered County Route program to care.  Iíve also seen similar County Route shields in Sierra County which have nothing to do with the letter route program. 

Some participating counties seem to be doing their own thing with the Letter County Route program.  Monterey County is putting up replacement county shields which omit the letter.  Tulare County pulled all their letter county route  shields aside J37 for reasons unknown. 

I'm guessing it's the county, not the state, but in the last couple of years I've noticed a marked increase in new county route shields in Santa Clara County, especially along G2 (Lawrence Expressway), G10 (Blossom Hill Road), and G8 (Almaden Expressway/McKean Road). For decades, the signage was deprecating, if it still existed at all.

Of particular note is the G2 shield being featured on new BGS's at the Lawrence/Stevens Creek/I-280 interchange - not on I-280 itself, but on off-ramps and along the surface routes:
https://www.google.com/maps/@37.3204,-121.9940372,3a,75y,333.95h,67.05t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1shijBhZfWb_J9H1JVgqsRdQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
« Last Edit: October 25, 2022, 02:30:07 PM by DTComposer »
Logged

Max Rockatansky

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 22573
  • Age: 40
  • Location: Route 9, Sector 26
  • Last Login: Today at 10:40:23 PM
    • Gribblenation
Re: New use of county route shields in California
« Reply #5 on: October 25, 2022, 02:33:39 PM »

Itís probably more a case of that there really isnít anyone left on the state level maintaining the Lettered County Route program to care.  Iíve also seen similar County Route shields in Sierra County which have nothing to do with the letter route program. 

Some participating counties seem to be doing their own thing with the Letter County Route program.  Monterey County is putting up replacement county shields which omit the letter.  Tulare County pulled all their letter county route  shields aside J37 for reasons unknown. 

I'm guessing it's the county, not the state, but in the last couple of years I've noticed a marked increase in new county route shields in Santa Clara County, especially along G2 (Lawrence Expressway), G10 (Blossom Hill Road), and G8 (Almaden Expressway/McKean Road). For decades, the signage was deprecating, if it still existed at all.

The background the Letter County Route program IMO is unnecessarily complicated:

https://www.cahighways.org/cnty13.html

The counties IMO should have autonomy regarding adding/deleting Sign County Routes.  I suspect in the case of Modoc County they opted to do their own thing rather than participate in the Letter County Route program.  Program points 7-9 alone made the Letter County Route a victim of apathy in modern times.
Logged

ClassicHasClass

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 743
  • 0-60 in 59.999997 years

  • Location: sunny So Cal
  • Last Login: Today at 08:23:40 PM
    • Floodgap Roadgap
Re: New use of county route shields in California
« Reply #6 on: October 26, 2022, 10:13:46 PM »

I grabbed pictures of quite a few of the Modoc County Route shields in this album for CA 139:

https://www.flickr.com/gp/151828809@N08/o1PTsvP83v

I'm wondering if the ones you picked up were anomalies. There are a lot of county roads in Modoc, almost all of them with a number, but I only counted two discrete routes in your photos (unless you know there were more).
Logged

Max Rockatansky

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 22573
  • Age: 40
  • Location: Route 9, Sector 26
  • Last Login: Today at 10:40:23 PM
    • Gribblenation
Re: New use of county route shields in California
« Reply #7 on: October 26, 2022, 10:47:11 PM »

I grabbed pictures of quite a few of the Modoc County Route shields in this album for CA 139:

https://www.flickr.com/gp/151828809@N08/o1PTsvP83v

I'm wondering if the ones you picked up were anomalies. There are a lot of county roads in Modoc, almost all of them with a number, but I only counted two discrete routes in your photos (unless you know there were more).

There was at least four that I saw scanning through the blog I did on CA 139.  The trouble I have is getting solid county route shields pictures at speed unless lightning conditions are nearly perfect.  Daniel witnessed the same thing when he was coming back from Klamath Falls a couple years ago. 

https://www.gribblenation.org/2021/09/oregon-route-39-and-california-state.html?m=1

Logged

bootmii

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 83
  • Just beat it.

  • Location: Montara, CA,
  • Last Login: March 18, 2023, 10:26:41 PM
Re: New use of county route shields in California
« Reply #8 on: December 04, 2022, 03:09:43 PM »

Itís probably more a case of that there really isnít anyone left on the state level maintaining the Lettered County Route program to care.  Iíve also seen similar County Route shields in Sierra County which have nothing to do with the letter route program. 

Some participating counties seem to be doing their own thing with the Letter County Route program.  Monterey County is putting up replacement county shields which omit the letter.  Tulare County pulled all their letter county route  shields aside J37 for reasons unknown.
In your opinion, is San Mateo a G county, J county, or E county?
Logged
Born again roadgeek from California.

skluth

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3162
  • Age: 66
  • Location: Palm Springs, CA
  • Last Login: Today at 06:06:01 PM
Re: New use of county route shields in California
« Reply #9 on: December 04, 2022, 03:43:37 PM »

I don't think Riverside County even has county routes. OTOH, San Diego and Imperial Counties share a decent county route in S22 which goes through Borrego Springs.
Logged

Max Rockatansky

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 22573
  • Age: 40
  • Location: Route 9, Sector 26
  • Last Login: Today at 10:40:23 PM
    • Gribblenation
Re: New use of county route shields in California
« Reply #10 on: December 04, 2022, 04:14:52 PM »

^^^

Riverside is in the R range.  CA 243 used to be Riverside County R1 as an example.  R2 (Kaiser Road) and R3 (former CA 83) both are still on the books as being defined but Iíve never seen signage.

Itís probably more a case of that there really isnít anyone left on the state level maintaining the Lettered County Route program to care.  Iíve also seen similar County Route shields in Sierra County which have nothing to do with the letter route program. 

Some participating counties seem to be doing their own thing with the Letter County Route program.  Monterey County is putting up replacement county shields which omit the letter.  Tulare County pulled all their letter county route  shields aside J37 for reasons unknown.
In your opinion, is San Mateo a G county, J county, or E county?

G since San Mateo is the Central Coast grouping.
« Last Edit: December 04, 2022, 04:17:10 PM by Max Rockatansky »
Logged

ClassicHasClass

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 743
  • 0-60 in 59.999997 years

  • Location: sunny So Cal
  • Last Login: Today at 08:23:40 PM
    • Floodgap Roadgap
Re: New use of county route shields in California
« Reply #11 on: December 04, 2022, 08:07:19 PM »

R3 is signed: http://www.floodgap.com/roadgap/371/#sec_50

Riverside is the only county in zone R, which may explain the poor signage, since there's no interjurisdictional need. At one time there was supposed to be a continuation of SDCo S16 but I don't know if that was ever signed.
Logged

Max Rockatansky

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 22573
  • Age: 40
  • Location: Route 9, Sector 26
  • Last Login: Today at 10:40:23 PM
    • Gribblenation
Re: New use of county route shields in California
« Reply #12 on: December 04, 2022, 08:25:35 PM »

R3 is signed: http://www.floodgap.com/roadgap/371/#sec_50

Riverside is the only county in zone R, which may explain the poor signage, since there's no interjurisdictional need. At one time there was supposed to be a continuation of SDCo S16 but I don't know if that was ever signed.

That R3 from CA 79 was gone when I drove the corridor in 2019.  Regarding R2 I donít recall it being signed when I drove it in 2011, but I was more focused on Eagle Mountain and ghost towns versus highway signage at the time.
Logged

cl94

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6495
  • Helping to break everyone's Sierra clinches

  • Age: 28
  • Location: Northern Nevada
  • Last Login: Today at 10:29:32 PM
Re: New use of county route shields in California
« Reply #13 on: December 04, 2022, 08:54:46 PM »

"New" is relative. I've seen some other 3 digit shields in that part of the state that are faded. See this shield in Boca, Nevada County. Lassen County historically used white on green squares for CRs, but they've been moving to pentagons.
Logged
Please note: All posts represent my personal opinions and do not represent those of my employer or any of its partner agencies.

Travel Mapping (updated weekly)

ClassicHasClass

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 743
  • 0-60 in 59.999997 years

  • Location: sunny So Cal
  • Last Login: Today at 08:23:40 PM
    • Floodgap Roadgap
Re: New use of county route shields in California
« Reply #14 on: December 07, 2022, 10:30:17 PM »

Lassen used to have both (pentagons for zoned routes and squares for, I guess, secondary routes). Some of the secondary routes even had names. I suppose they're just switching everything over now.
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.