AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

New rules to ensure post quality. See this thread for details.

Author Topic: 🛣 Headlines About California Highways – July 2021  (Read 4757 times)

cahwyguy

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 549
  • California Highway Guy

  • Age: 61
  • Location: Northridge, CA
  • Last Login: December 06, 2021, 05:26:44 PM
    • California Highways
🛣 Headlines About California Highways – July 2021
« on: July 31, 2021, 07:50:21 PM »

It's that time of the month. No, not that time of the month, but the time where I post headlines about California Highways. Here's what I found of interest over the month. As always, ready, set, discuss.

https://cahighways.org/wordpress/?p=16122

Logged
Daniel - California Highway Guy ● Highway Site: http://www.cahighways.org/ ●  Blog: http://blog.cahighways.org/ ● Follow California Highways on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/cahighways

Max Rockatansky

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 16813
  • Age: 39
  • Location: Route 9, Sector 26
  • Last Login: Today at 12:13:27 PM
    • Gribblenation
Re: 🛣 Headlines About California Highways – July 2021
« Reply #1 on: August 01, 2021, 12:31:08 AM »

That detour of CA 4 through the San Joaquin River Delta onto Byron Highway is going to make a brutal commuting drive all the more brutal.  Both highways are far beyond obsolete at this point and need substantial expansion to contend with traffic loads.

Amusingly a lot of us were talking about I-15 and the new agriculture station backups on Facebook.  The old station at minimum could be bypassed by way of Old US 91/466 on Yermo Road.  I'm to understand a lot of people now take US 95 and I-40 to avoid the traffic backups on weekends on I-15 at the new agriculture station in Primm.  I've personally found taking NV 160, State Line Road, CA 127, CA 190, Trona-Wildrose Road and CA 178 to be an easier route back over I-15/CA 58 back to San Joaquin Valley.

I'm finding myself disappointed that AZ 30 isn't numbered AZ 404 to keep some continuity with the Loop Freeways.  Granted AZ 143 and AZ 24 are numbers plucked out of thin air also.  Kind of a shame considering that Arizona used to have really orderly State Highway Numbering conventions.

I'm not surprised that CHP wasn't going to allow a detour of the Bixby Bridge down Old Coast Road.  The locals absolutely hate when people pass through Old Coast Road and park along the ledges above Bixby Creek.  I've driven it a couple times myself, at times it can be in good repair but the grade an erode heavily in the winter.

Logged

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 8495
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: September 12, 2021, 12:44:33 AM
Re: 🛣 Headlines About California Highways – July 2021
« Reply #2 on: August 01, 2021, 01:59:01 AM »

Well, well, well........something I predicted two years ago is happening, or, more precisely, trying to happen.  When the HDC's (High Desert Corridor) freeway component was cancelled in 2019, I said that that move would probably precipitate a corresponding move to raise CA 138 and CA 18 between Palmdale and Victorville to freeway standard as a stand-alone project.  Now it looks like Metro is taking the rather ballsy move of trying to shunt part of the budget for the original corridor, which still exists as a future rail and non-vehicular facility, to the development of that parallel freeway.  As would be expected, the critics of freeway development and their frequent media outlet, Streetsblog, aren't terribly thrilled with this prospect.  But knowing L.A.'s Metro, they'll retort with an assertation that the freeway wasn't fully deleted under the previous agreement, merely shelved -- and they simply took it down from the shelf!  Nevertheless, it's likely that a move such as this one will provoke protracted litigation.  As a former resident of the eastern portion of the affected area here, I would not at all be surprised if the CA 18 portion of this project, if actually developed, curves north west of Victorville and at some point merges with the corresponding eastern end of the original HDC in order to avoid residential zones in western Victorville and southern Adelanto as well as tie in to the Apple Valley CA 18 bypass expressway -- something that would really tweak the noses of the roadway project's more vocal critics.  As the old cinema dialogue once said: "fasten your seatbelts; it's going to be a bumpy ride!"       
Logged

cahwyguy

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 549
  • California Highway Guy

  • Age: 61
  • Location: Northridge, CA
  • Last Login: December 06, 2021, 05:26:44 PM
    • California Highways
Re: 🛣 Headlines About California Highways – July 2021
« Reply #3 on: August 01, 2021, 09:04:01 AM »

Well, well, well........something I predicted two years ago is happening, or, more precisely, trying to happen.  When the HDC's (High Desert Corridor) freeway component was cancelled in 2019, I said that that move would probably precipitate a corresponding move to raise CA 138 and CA 18 between Palmdale and Victorville to freeway standard as a stand-alone project.  [...] As the old cinema dialogue once said: "fasten your seatbelts; it's going to be a bumpy ride!"       

Although then again, if they diverts some of the funds to actually improve Route 18 between 138 and I-15, that would be great. It currently is a *really* bumpy ride -- so bumpy in fact that my wife prefers to either us I-15 to the 210 to the 118, or across the 58 to the 14 and down, when we drive back from Vegas, after she gets shaken, not stirred, taking 138 and 18 when we go out (we live in the Valley, and I tend to hate going across 210/Cajon Pass when there is the nice uncrowded Pearblossom Hwy awaiting).
Logged
Daniel - California Highway Guy ● Highway Site: http://www.cahighways.org/ ●  Blog: http://blog.cahighways.org/ ● Follow California Highways on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/cahighways

TheStranger

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 4449
  • Last Login: December 07, 2021, 07:08:02 AM
Re: 🛣 Headlines About California Highways – July 2021
« Reply #4 on: August 01, 2021, 01:03:28 PM »

I see that the I-80/Yolo Causeway project got mentioned a ton in this set of updates (with multiple articles)...I have way too many memories of driving through there and getting stuck in traffic back when I lived in Sacramento.  During the time I worked in Rancho Cordova I would almost always bypass it on Fridays via the 160 corridor en route to the Bay Area.

Logged
Chris Sampang

M3100

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 254
  • Location: Los Angeles County, CA
  • Last Login: December 04, 2021, 07:04:18 PM
Re: 🛣 Headlines About California Highways – July 2021
« Reply #5 on: August 01, 2021, 05:16:18 PM »

Interesting to see articles on two 'wildlife corridor crossings', to be constructed across CA 17 and US 101.  If it helps in reducing vehicle-wildlife collisions, all the better...
Logged

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 8495
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: September 12, 2021, 12:44:33 AM
Re: 🛣 Headlines About California Highways – July 2021
« Reply #6 on: August 01, 2021, 05:26:15 PM »

Well, well, well........something I predicted two years ago is happening, or, more precisely, trying to happen.  When the HDC's (High Desert Corridor) freeway component was cancelled in 2019, I said that that move would probably precipitate a corresponding move to raise CA 138 and CA 18 between Palmdale and Victorville to freeway standard as a stand-alone project.  [...] As the old cinema dialogue once said: "fasten your seatbelts; it's going to be a bumpy ride!"       

Although then again, if they diverts some of the funds to actually improve Route 18 between 138 and I-15, that would be great. It currently is a *really* bumpy ride -- so bumpy in fact that my wife prefers to either us I-15 to the 210 to the 118, or across the 58 to the 14 and down, when we drive back from Vegas, after she gets shaken, not stirred, taking 138 and 18 when we go out (we live in the Valley, and I tend to hate going across 210/Cajon Pass when there is the nice uncrowded Pearblossom Hwy awaiting).


When I was a kid living in Glendale, and we were visiting my mom's niece in Las Vegas (early/mid-'60's), my dad always went out via what was then Newhall and out 138 through Pearblossom and then heading straight toward Victorville on what would be signed as CA 18 by 1968.  Even though I-10 to (then) I-15 at Colton then north had no stop signs or signals, being all freeway or expressway, he preferred the cross-desert trip just because it was less crowded.  Never saw much; both coming and going happened at night through that area -- but it stuck with me, and for years afterward if my trip began anywhere near or west of central L.A., I'd head out 14, Pearblossom, and 138.  But it seems a shame that Metro has to go through major convolutions just to get improvements out in the desert (although they're heads above their Bay Area counterparts in even considering major road projects) -- and the project critics should have seen something like the potential funding shift coming when they managed to shut down the freeway segment of the original HDC.  Maybe in the back of their minds they think that if regional needs go unaddressed, they'll somehow just go away -- or that the area residents will suddenly clamor for vastly expanded public transit in an area where that wouldn't be efficient.  Or maybe they're hoping against hope that folks will move back over the hill and let the desert revert back to its pre-WWII state.  But of course, that just isn't going to happen; the Victorville/etc. high desert region is already starting to "infill" with more dense development near I-15 and US 395, gradually resembling more traditional city structure.  For better or worse, the inverse equation regarding commute distance and housing cost persists; as long as it does, the area will grow -- but not necessarily expand at its perimeters, since services and amenities do have their linear limitations.   
Logged

cahwyguy

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 549
  • California Highway Guy

  • Age: 61
  • Location: Northridge, CA
  • Last Login: December 06, 2021, 05:26:44 PM
    • California Highways
Re: 🛣 Headlines About California Highways – July 2021
« Reply #7 on: August 01, 2021, 06:27:36 PM »

Interesting to see articles on two 'wildlife corridor crossings', to be constructed across CA 17 and US 101.  If it helps in reducing vehicle-wildlife collisions, all the better...

There have also been articles in the past months on crossings, using modified culverts, on both Route 118 and on Route 60 through the badlands.
Logged
Daniel - California Highway Guy ● Highway Site: http://www.cahighways.org/ ●  Blog: http://blog.cahighways.org/ ● Follow California Highways on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/cahighways

pderocco

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 144
  • Two wrongs don't make a right--but three lefts do.

  • Age: 68
  • Location: El Cajon, CA
  • Last Login: December 06, 2021, 12:39:40 AM
Re: 🛣 Headlines About California Highways – July 2021
« Reply #8 on: August 02, 2021, 02:15:37 AM »

When I was a kid living in Glendale, and we were visiting my mom's niece in Las Vegas (early/mid-'60's), my dad always went out via what was then Newhall and out 138 through Pearblossom and then heading straight toward Victorville on what would be signed as CA 18 by 1968.  Even though I-10 to (then) I-15 at Colton then north had no stop signs or signals, being all freeway or expressway, he preferred the cross-desert trip just because it was less crowded.  Never saw much; both coming and going happened at night through that area -- but it stuck with me, and for years afterward if my trip began anywhere near or west of central L.A., I'd head out 14, Pearblossom, and 138.

My preference has always been for Pearblossom to Ave T, up to Palmdale Blvd, then up to El Mirage Rd, then down to Air Expwy, pretty close to the HDC alignment. I've probably driven that 100 times in reverse, on my way home from the desert to L.A., and it's always blissfully empty.
Logged
Ciao,
Paul

pderocco

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 144
  • Two wrongs don't make a right--but three lefts do.

  • Age: 68
  • Location: El Cajon, CA
  • Last Login: December 06, 2021, 12:39:40 AM
Re: 🛣 Headlines About California Highways – July 2021
« Reply #9 on: August 02, 2021, 02:37:11 AM »

Re: 71/91 Interchange Improvement Project -- no mention of widening the last few miles of 71. They've widened the rest, but the widening from Central Ave to CA-83 is just wasted pavement until they can have six lanes all the way to 91.
Logged
Ciao,
Paul

pderocco

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 144
  • Two wrongs don't make a right--but three lefts do.

  • Age: 68
  • Location: El Cajon, CA
  • Last Login: December 06, 2021, 12:39:40 AM
Re: 🛣 Headlines About California Highways – July 2021
« Reply #10 on: August 02, 2021, 02:49:14 AM »

Re: Ridge Route Preservation Organization newsletter. Calling US-99 or I-5 over the mountains the "Ridge Route" makes no sense because it doesn't follow the ridge the way the original road did. And calling it all the "Grapevine" is pointless, because you don't really need a name for the whole thing. Lots of people think the "Grapevine" is the 5-mile grade north of Castaic, and have no idea of what it originally referred to. Although in fairness, there aren't very many grapes left in Grapevine Canyon.
Logged
Ciao,
Paul

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 8495
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: September 12, 2021, 12:44:33 AM
Re: 🛣 Headlines About California Highways – July 2021
« Reply #11 on: August 02, 2021, 03:20:21 AM »

When I was a kid living in Glendale, and we were visiting my mom's niece in Las Vegas (early/mid-'60's), my dad always went out via what was then Newhall and out 138 through Pearblossom and then heading straight toward Victorville on what would be signed as CA 18 by 1968.  Even though I-10 to (then) I-15 at Colton then north had no stop signs or signals, being all freeway or expressway, he preferred the cross-desert trip just because it was less crowded.  Never saw much; both coming and going happened at night through that area -- but it stuck with me, and for years afterward if my trip began anywhere near or west of central L.A., I'd head out 14, Pearblossom, and 138.

My preference has always been for Pearblossom to Ave T, up to Palmdale Blvd, then up to El Mirage Rd, then down to Air Expwy, pretty close to the HDC alignment. I've probably driven that 100 times in reverse, on my way home from the desert to L.A., and it's always blissfully empty.

Yeah -- if there's road work on 18 and/or 138, El Mirage is a decent alternative, even if the pavement's a bit sketchy, particularly in SB County.  A few odd "jogs" along the way, but if you have GPS or even a decent Auto Club regional map, it's not difficult to navigate. 
Re: 71/91 Interchange Improvement Project -- no mention of widening the last few miles of 71. They've widened the rest, but the widening from Central Ave to CA-83 is just wasted pavement until they can have six lanes all the way to 91.

Speaking of the 71/91 interchange; hopefully they'll be able to make use of the bridge bents that have been in the Santa Ana river channel for the past 30 years!  Carving out 6 lanes along 71 north of there won't be easy; it was difficult enough getting 4 lanes out of it back in 2001 when the last widening occurred.  It's D8 territory, so it might actually be done given time; but the chances are that it won't be prioritized unless congestion starts occurring outside peak commute hours. 
Logged

Max Rockatansky

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 16813
  • Age: 39
  • Location: Route 9, Sector 26
  • Last Login: Today at 12:13:27 PM
    • Gribblenation
Re: 🛣 Headlines About California Highways – July 2021
« Reply #12 on: August 02, 2021, 08:35:51 AM »

Re: Ridge Route Preservation Organization newsletter. Calling US-99 or I-5 over the mountains the "Ridge Route" makes no sense because it doesn't follow the ridge the way the original road did. And calling it all the "Grapevine" is pointless, because you don't really need a name for the whole thing. Lots of people think the "Grapevine" is the 5-mile grade north of Castaic, and have no idea of what it originally referred to. Although in fairness, there aren't very many grapes left in Grapevine Canyon.

For that matter calling the alignment of US 99 through Piru Gorge Ridge Route Alternate didn’t make much sense either.  I guess it is accurate in that it was an alternative to the Old Ridge Route when it opened.  The Piru Gorge alignment straddled even less ridges than Interstate 5 does today.  Most CHPW materials refer anything north of Tejon Pass to San Joaquin Valley via Grapevine Canyon as the “Grapevine Grade.”  That likely is the origin of the term “The Grapevine” came to be and somehow ended up being bastardized into referring to I-5 north of Castaic. 
Logged

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 8495
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: September 12, 2021, 12:44:33 AM
Re: 🛣 Headlines About California Highways – July 2021
« Reply #13 on: August 02, 2021, 09:09:22 PM »

Re: Ridge Route Preservation Organization newsletter. Calling US-99 or I-5 over the mountains the "Ridge Route" makes no sense because it doesn't follow the ridge the way the original road did. And calling it all the "Grapevine" is pointless, because you don't really need a name for the whole thing. Lots of people think the "Grapevine" is the 5-mile grade north of Castaic, and have no idea of what it originally referred to. Although in fairness, there aren't very many grapes left in Grapevine Canyon.

For that matter calling the alignment of US 99 through Piru Gorge Ridge Route Alternate didn’t make much sense either.  I guess it is accurate in that it was an alternative to the Old Ridge Route when it opened.  The Piru Gorge alignment straddled even less ridges than Interstate 5 does today.  Most CHPW materials refer anything north of Tejon Pass to San Joaquin Valley via Grapevine Canyon as the “Grapevine Grade.”  That likely is the origin of the term “The Grapevine” came to be and somehow ended up being bastardized into referring to I-5 north of Castaic. 

Back when I was very young, my dad referred to pretty much all of US 99 from Castaic north over the top and down into the valley as the "grapevine" -- not so much as a reference to the town/canyon at the north end but because of its curving configuration -- not much in the way of any lengthy straight sections until (NB) a few miles south of Gorman -- which was also my impression as a kid.  But what impressed me later on was the way that I-5 was pushed through the mountains -- both carriageway-separated sections -- the one north of Castaic and the northernmost section bracketing Grapevine itself -- utilized the original 4-lane alignment as one of the directions (NB on the grade out of Castaic and SB out of the Valley) with new-terrain construction constituting the opposite direction, with optimal configuration for downhill high-speed travel, including truck provisions.  Of course the Piru Gorge section was an exception, since much of it was slated to be inundated when the dam/reservoir was constructed (as part of the California Aqueduct project).  Even so, my dad still referred to the mountain crossing -- even at 8 lanes -- as the "grapevine".  I guess old habits just tend to stick around! 
Logged

jdbx

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 116
  • Location: Pleasant Hill, CA
  • Last Login: Today at 01:47:36 PM
Re: 🛣 Headlines About California Highways – July 2021
« Reply #14 on: August 03, 2021, 01:10:24 PM »

I think that most of the people you talk to in the Bay Area would be confused if you talked about "driving over Tejon Pass", "taking the Ridge Route", or any other terms like that which make perfect sense to us roadgeeks.  As noted before, most lay people refer to that entire 50 mile stretch of I-5 between Wheeler Ridge and Castaic as "the Grapevine".
Logged

Max Rockatansky

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 16813
  • Age: 39
  • Location: Route 9, Sector 26
  • Last Login: Today at 12:13:27 PM
    • Gribblenation
Re: 🛣 Headlines About California Highways – July 2021
« Reply #15 on: August 03, 2021, 01:26:16 PM »

I think that most of the people you talk to in the Bay Area would be confused if you talked about "driving over Tejon Pass", "taking the Ridge Route", or any other terms like that which make perfect sense to us roadgeeks.  As noted before, most lay people refer to that entire 50 mile stretch of I-5 between Wheeler Ridge and Castaic as "the Grapevine".

Which is odd because that’s SoCal slang to say “The Phrase.”
Logged

ClassicHasClass

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 505
  • 0-60 in 59.999997 years

  • Location: sunny So Cal
  • Last Login: December 07, 2021, 12:15:19 PM
    • Floodgap Roadgap
Re: 🛣 Headlines About California Highways – July 2021
« Reply #16 on: August 04, 2021, 11:55:04 PM »

The heck you say.
Logged

skluth

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1508
  • Age: 65
  • Location: Palm Springs, CA
  • Last Login: December 07, 2021, 08:28:01 PM
Re: 🛣 Headlines About California Highways – July 2021
« Reply #17 on: August 05, 2021, 02:38:10 PM »

Re: Ridge Route Preservation Organization newsletter. Calling US-99 or I-5 over the mountains the "Ridge Route" makes no sense because it doesn't follow the ridge the way the original road did. And calling it all the "Grapevine" is pointless, because you don't really need a name for the whole thing. Lots of people think the "Grapevine" is the 5-mile grade north of Castaic, and have no idea of what it originally referred to. Although in fairness, there aren't very many grapes left in Grapevine Canyon.

For that matter calling the alignment of US 99 through Piru Gorge Ridge Route Alternate didn’t make much sense either.  I guess it is accurate in that it was an alternative to the Old Ridge Route when it opened.  The Piru Gorge alignment straddled even less ridges than Interstate 5 does today.  Most CHPW materials refer anything north of Tejon Pass to San Joaquin Valley via Grapevine Canyon as the “Grapevine Grade.”  That likely is the origin of the term “The Grapevine” came to be and somehow ended up being bastardized into referring to I-5 north of Castaic. 

Back when I was very young, my dad referred to pretty much all of US 99 from Castaic north over the top and down into the valley as the "grapevine" -- not so much as a reference to the town/canyon at the north end but because of its curving configuration -- not much in the way of any lengthy straight sections until (NB) a few miles south of Gorman -- which was also my impression as a kid.  But what impressed me later on was the way that I-5 was pushed through the mountains -- both carriageway-separated sections -- the one north of Castaic and the northernmost section bracketing Grapevine itself -- utilized the original 4-lane alignment as one of the directions (NB on the grade out of Castaic and SB out of the Valley) with new-terrain construction constituting the opposite direction, with optimal configuration for downhill high-speed travel, including truck provisions.  Of course the Piru Gorge section was an exception, since much of it was slated to be inundated when the dam/reservoir was constructed (as part of the California Aqueduct project).  Even so, my dad still referred to the mountain crossing -- even at 8 lanes -- as the "grapevine".  I guess old habits just tend to stick around!

This history was very interesting. As a recent immigrant to So Cal, I had no idea there was a historical Grapevine Canyon. I had thought the name's origin was similar to Spaghetti Junction (in a number of places) or the DC Beltline's Mixing Bowl. I had also thought that the Grapevine was everything on I-5 north of the Antelope Valley Freeway exit. Thanks for the background.
Logged

Max Rockatansky

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 16813
  • Age: 39
  • Location: Route 9, Sector 26
  • Last Login: Today at 12:13:27 PM
    • Gribblenation
Re: 🛣 Headlines About California Highways – July 2021
« Reply #18 on: August 05, 2021, 04:04:23 PM »

Re: Ridge Route Preservation Organization newsletter. Calling US-99 or I-5 over the mountains the "Ridge Route" makes no sense because it doesn't follow the ridge the way the original road did. And calling it all the "Grapevine" is pointless, because you don't really need a name for the whole thing. Lots of people think the "Grapevine" is the 5-mile grade north of Castaic, and have no idea of what it originally referred to. Although in fairness, there aren't very many grapes left in Grapevine Canyon.

For that matter calling the alignment of US 99 through Piru Gorge Ridge Route Alternate didn’t make much sense either.  I guess it is accurate in that it was an alternative to the Old Ridge Route when it opened.  The Piru Gorge alignment straddled even less ridges than Interstate 5 does today.  Most CHPW materials refer anything north of Tejon Pass to San Joaquin Valley via Grapevine Canyon as the “Grapevine Grade.”  That likely is the origin of the term “The Grapevine” came to be and somehow ended up being bastardized into referring to I-5 north of Castaic. 

Back when I was very young, my dad referred to pretty much all of US 99 from Castaic north over the top and down into the valley as the "grapevine" -- not so much as a reference to the town/canyon at the north end but because of its curving configuration -- not much in the way of any lengthy straight sections until (NB) a few miles south of Gorman -- which was also my impression as a kid.  But what impressed me later on was the way that I-5 was pushed through the mountains -- both carriageway-separated sections -- the one north of Castaic and the northernmost section bracketing Grapevine itself -- utilized the original 4-lane alignment as one of the directions (NB on the grade out of Castaic and SB out of the Valley) with new-terrain construction constituting the opposite direction, with optimal configuration for downhill high-speed travel, including truck provisions.  Of course the Piru Gorge section was an exception, since much of it was slated to be inundated when the dam/reservoir was constructed (as part of the California Aqueduct project).  Even so, my dad still referred to the mountain crossing -- even at 8 lanes -- as the "grapevine".  I guess old habits just tend to stick around!

This history was very interesting. As a recent immigrant to So Cal, I had no idea there was a historical Grapevine Canyon. I had thought the name's origin was similar to Spaghetti Junction (in a number of places) or the DC Beltline's Mixing Bowl. I had also thought that the Grapevine was everything on I-5 north of the Antelope Valley Freeway exit. Thanks for the background.

What will get you is how much the name "Tejon Pass" has shifted around.  The original Tejon Pass was located to the east and was the original path of the Stockton-Los Angeles Road (a precursor to the Old Ridge Route).  When Fort Tejon was built n 1854 the main path of the Stockton-Los Angeles Road was rerouted pass through Grapevine Canyon towards the so called "Fort Tejon Pass."  Fort Tejon Pass has been since renamed to Tejon Pass and the original pass to carry the name is now Old Tejon Pass.
Logged

pderocco

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 144
  • Two wrongs don't make a right--but three lefts do.

  • Age: 68
  • Location: El Cajon, CA
  • Last Login: December 06, 2021, 12:39:40 AM
Re: 🛣 Headlines About California Highways – July 2021
« Reply #19 on: August 05, 2021, 11:56:58 PM »

What will get you is how much the name "Tejon Pass" has shifted around.  The original Tejon Pass was located to the east and was the original path of the Stockton-Los Angeles Road (a precursor to the Old Ridge Route).  When Fort Tejon was built n 1854 the main path of the Stockton-Los Angeles Road was rerouted pass through Grapevine Canyon towards the so called "Fort Tejon Pass."  Fort Tejon Pass has been since renamed to Tejon Pass and the original pass to carry the name is now Old Tejon Pass.
I've noticed that in various old maps on Rumsey. It's about 1000 feet higher than the new pass, but I guess they were more interested in grade than in absolute elevation.
Logged
Ciao,
Paul

Max Rockatansky

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 16813
  • Age: 39
  • Location: Route 9, Sector 26
  • Last Login: Today at 12:13:27 PM
    • Gribblenation
Re: 🛣 Headlines About California Highways – July 2021
« Reply #20 on: August 06, 2021, 12:43:39 AM »

What will get you is how much the name "Tejon Pass" has shifted around.  The original Tejon Pass was located to the east and was the original path of the Stockton-Los Angeles Road (a precursor to the Old Ridge Route).  When Fort Tejon was built n 1854 the main path of the Stockton-Los Angeles Road was rerouted pass through Grapevine Canyon towards the so called "Fort Tejon Pass."  Fort Tejon Pass has been since renamed to Tejon Pass and the original pass to carry the name is now Old Tejon Pass.
I've noticed that in various old maps on Rumsey. It's about 1000 feet higher than the new pass, but I guess they were more interested in grade than in absolute elevation.

Old Tejon Pass was a much straighter shot to San Francisquito Canyon and San Fernando Valley than modern Tejon Pass.  Fort Tejon was laid to keep the local Emigdiano population settlements in southern San Joaquin Valley in check (probably as ugly of a history as it sounds given I believe this was also forced resettlement).  The location of Fort Tejon in Grapevine Canyon was strategically important and drew a lot of travelers who wanted projection on the Stockton-Los Angeles Road.  The U.S. Army Calvary was charge of development of protection of travelers on wagon roads in much of Southern California at the time.  That being the case the Stockton-Los Angeles Road shares a common history with the development of the Mojave Road. 
Logged

kernals12

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1830
  • Love highways and cars. Hate public transit.

  • Location: Suburban Boston
  • Last Login: Today at 01:26:08 PM
Re: 🛣 Headlines About California Highways – July 2021
« Reply #21 on: August 08, 2021, 12:33:20 PM »

That detour of CA 4 through the San Joaquin River Delta onto Byron Highway is going to make a brutal commuting drive all the more brutal.  Both highways are far beyond obsolete at this point and need substantial expansion to contend with traffic loads.

Amusingly a lot of us were talking about I-15 and the new agriculture station backups on Facebook.  The old station at minimum could be bypassed by way of Old US 91/466 on Yermo Road.  I'm to understand a lot of people now take US 95 and I-40 to avoid the traffic backups on weekends on I-15 at the new agriculture station in Primm.  I've personally found taking NV 160, State Line Road, CA 127, CA 190, Trona-Wildrose Road and CA 178 to be an easier route back over I-15/CA 58 back to San Joaquin Valley.

I'm finding myself disappointed that AZ 30 isn't numbered AZ 404 to keep some continuity with the Loop Freeways.  Granted AZ 143 and AZ 24 are numbers plucked out of thin air also.  Kind of a shame considering that Arizona used to have really orderly State Highway Numbering conventions.

I'm not surprised that CHP wasn't going to allow a detour of the Bixby Bridge down Old Coast Road.  The locals absolutely hate when people pass through Old Coast Road and park along the ledges above Bixby Creek.  I've driven it a couple times myself, at times it can be in good repair but the grade an erode heavily in the winter.

Be realistic dude, that'll never happen.
Logged

Max Rockatansky

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 16813
  • Age: 39
  • Location: Route 9, Sector 26
  • Last Login: Today at 12:13:27 PM
    • Gribblenation
Re: 🛣 Headlines About California Highways – July 2021
« Reply #22 on: August 08, 2021, 12:49:08 PM »

That detour of CA 4 through the San Joaquin River Delta onto Byron Highway is going to make a brutal commuting drive all the more brutal.  Both highways are far beyond obsolete at this point and need substantial expansion to contend with traffic loads.

Amusingly a lot of us were talking about I-15 and the new agriculture station backups on Facebook.  The old station at minimum could be bypassed by way of Old US 91/466 on Yermo Road.  I'm to understand a lot of people now take US 95 and I-40 to avoid the traffic backups on weekends on I-15 at the new agriculture station in Primm.  I've personally found taking NV 160, State Line Road, CA 127, CA 190, Trona-Wildrose Road and CA 178 to be an easier route back over I-15/CA 58 back to San Joaquin Valley.

I'm finding myself disappointed that AZ 30 isn't numbered AZ 404 to keep some continuity with the Loop Freeways.  Granted AZ 143 and AZ 24 are numbers plucked out of thin air also.  Kind of a shame considering that Arizona used to have really orderly State Highway Numbering conventions.

I'm not surprised that CHP wasn't going to allow a detour of the Bixby Bridge down Old Coast Road.  The locals absolutely hate when people pass through Old Coast Road and park along the ledges above Bixby Creek.  I've driven it a couple times myself, at times it can be in good repair but the grade an erode heavily in the winter.

Be realistic dude, that'll never happen.

With CA 4 that is likely a correct assessment.  Bryon Highway on the other hand is being expanded to four lanes piecemeal.  The biggest issue there is that Bryon Highway spans multiple counties which so far don’t appear be working cooperatively. 
Logged

skluth

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1508
  • Age: 65
  • Location: Palm Springs, CA
  • Last Login: December 07, 2021, 08:28:01 PM
Re: 🛣 Headlines About California Highways – July 2021
« Reply #23 on: August 08, 2021, 01:17:49 PM »

Amusingly a lot of us were talking about I-15 and the new agriculture station backups on Facebook.  The old station at minimum could be bypassed by way of Old US 91/466 on Yermo Road.  I'm to understand a lot of people now take US 95 and I-40 to avoid the traffic backups on weekends on I-15 at the new agriculture station in Primm.  I've personally found taking NV 160, State Line Road, CA 127, CA 190, Trona-Wildrose Road and CA 178 to be an easier route back over I-15/CA 58 back to San Joaquin Valley.

That works for you. I just wish it were south of Nipton Road which is the exit for people crossing the Mojave to the Joshua Tree and the Coachella Valley. I guess now I'll try US 95 and the old US 66 through Goffs to Amboy.
Logged

Max Rockatansky

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 16813
  • Age: 39
  • Location: Route 9, Sector 26
  • Last Login: Today at 12:13:27 PM
    • Gribblenation
Re: 🛣 Headlines About California Highways – July 2021
« Reply #24 on: August 08, 2021, 01:26:03 PM »

Amusingly a lot of us were talking about I-15 and the new agriculture station backups on Facebook.  The old station at minimum could be bypassed by way of Old US 91/466 on Yermo Road.  I'm to understand a lot of people now take US 95 and I-40 to avoid the traffic backups on weekends on I-15 at the new agriculture station in Primm.  I've personally found taking NV 160, State Line Road, CA 127, CA 190, Trona-Wildrose Road and CA 178 to be an easier route back over I-15/CA 58 back to San Joaquin Valley.

That works for you. I just wish it were south of Nipton Road which is the exit for people crossing the Mojave to the Joshua Tree and the Coachella Valley. I guess now I'll try US 95 and the old US 66 through Goffs to Amboy.

Amboy Road isn’t all that bad of a cutoff road.  I used to use it extensively when I worked in Palm Springs and needed to get to Laughlin/Bullhead City somewhat quickly.  I also used to take Kelbaker Road from Palm Springs to Vegas but that doesn’t help now with the new Ag Inspection Station.
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.