Headlines and Articles about California Highways - September 2019

[cahwyguy]

The start of a new month. The start of a Jewish New Year (L'shanah Tovah to all). The start of a new Fiscal year. For all of this, here's a gift for you: a fresh crop of headlines.

https://cahighways.org/wordpress/?p=15538

Ready, set, discuss.

[Max Rockatansky]

The SF Gate missed a ton of top tier highways like; CA 2 over Angeles Crest, CA 130 to Mount Hamilton, CA 35, CA 25, CA 198 over the Diablo Range, the Generals Highway, CA 180 in Kings Canyon, CA 178 in the Kern River Canyon, CA 33 on the Maricopa Highway, CA 178 west of CA 33, Box Canyon Road and if I sit down to think about it many more.  At least they got the semi-obscure CA 74 Pines to Palms Highway. 

I voted for the Mud Creek Slide repair on the American Transportation Awards.  I had basically a front seat experience watching that slide be repaired and it was way more impressive than anything else listed IMO. 

Ran into the work zone on Pearblossom this past weekend, wasn't fun having to backtrack through downtown Palmdale on CA 138.  At least there will be a better road surface that comes out of the project. 

It would be nice if some of those SB 1 funds could go into building the slide shed on CA 140 or making the detour permanent with two new bridges. 

Regarding the detour route of CA 25 the excuses being given why the new can't be fixed have been laughable at best.  The slide was caused by bad engineering which didn't cut the surrounding dirt enough.  Really the old alignment was fine and should be left as is. 

It was a really light month over on Gribblenation.  I was hoping to get some new stuff for the northern part of the State but there was bad weather this past weekend.  We ended up going to Palm Spring and Joshua Tree National Park instead.  Suffice to say October will be heavily Riverside and San Bernardino County centric. 

[Plutonic Panda]

Finally I can bitch about something else than the 710 cancellation.

Hey 37. It will take 20 years to build an elevated viaduct. 20 years. 20. Years. What the fuck. It took 4 years to build the Golden Gate Bridge that was built a very long time ago. We need to rethink some of our environmental and labor laws. Australia is building one of the most complex underground interchanges in span of 3-4 years. At most a project like this should take 8-10 years.

To add to this disaster, this road should be toll free. There also needs to be at least one toll free bay bridge crossing and I'm eying the next new one to be built. California is messing up!

[skluth]

It may sound like a back-handed compliment, but a lot of landfills and dumps become parks (e.g., Mount Trashmore, Freshkills Park, Green Isle Park in my hometown). Don't know how close to closing this one is. But it will probably lead to a future Barack Obama Park.

[sparker]

It's long been assumed that a full rebuild/expansion of CA 37 through the wetlands between CA 121 and Mare Island would likely require tolls to finance the project.  But adding a roundabout at the 37/121 Sears Point intersection -- unless through traffic on 37 would bypass said roundabout on a bridge -- is one of the most harebrained ideas D4 has come up with yet.  Adding such a configuration to a through connecting route featuring heavy truck usage merely adds to the hazard level of the facility.   Caltrans planners need to start considering the working environment in which they're operating -- slowing traffic down by placing obstacles in the way is often appropriate in a dense urban setting, but not along a rural expressway.   Doing so will merely introduce a new set of problems to an already untenable situation. 

[jeffe]

But adding a roundabout at the 37/121 Sears Point intersection -- unless through traffic on 37 would bypass said roundabout on a bridge -- is one of the most harebrained ideas D4 has come up with yet.

The design for the roundabout can be seen here on page 15:
https://scta.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/20181108_SR37-Program_Final.pdf

It would be a two lane roundabout with a bypass lane for W37-N121 movements.  I saw a different design before that had an option for E37 to bypass the roundabout as well, but it looks like this was dropped to maintain access to Tolay Creek Road to the south of the intersection (which as VERY little traffic).

I agree that a roundabout is a rather strange choice for this intersection. It would probably be the highest volume roundabout in the entire western United States and it is located on a road that functions like a freeway.  Anyone know of any other comparable traffic volume roundabouts on high speed roads in the US that could be used to gauge the feasibility of this?
 

[skluth]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I love roundabouts, but definitely not here. I haven't gone down CA 37 since the 70s (once and IIRC it was two lanes) so I don't know the current conditions. But I've read enough here to realize this would be far too much traffic that is traveling at freeway speeds with freeway mentality drivers. I agree an interchange of some sort, even with Texas freeway style ramps, would be a better option.

[ClassicHasClass]

I don't see an October thread so I'll just put this here:

https://www.pe.com/2019/10/10/travel-through-the-badlands-east-of-moreno-valley-has-long-been-rough/

A nice summary of some of the old US 60 routings through the Badlands east of Mo Val and some of the local roads.

[Max Rockatansky]

I don't see an October thread so I'll just put this here:

https://www.pe.com/2019/10/10/travel-through-the-badlands-east-of-moreno-valley-has-long-been-rough/

A nice summary of some of the old US 60 routings through the Badlands east of Mo Val and some of the local roads.

Ironically I'm working on my own 60 article pertaining to the Moreno Valley Badlands on Monday.  It wasn't just US 60 that was Jack Rabbit Trail but also US 70 for a brief period of time.  I hit on the Badlands on my Original CA 83 article which includes a map showing US 60/70 on Jack Rabbit Trail/Gillman Springs Road:

https://www.gribblenation.org/2019/10/the-mystery-of-original-california.html?m=1

[cahwyguy]

Just note that the October thread goes up, surprisingly, at the end of October. That's why you don't seen an October thread yet.

[ClassicHasClass]

It wasn't just US 60 that was Jack Rabbit Trail but also US 70 for a brief period of time.

At least 1937 near as I can determine, but I wouldn't be surprised if it continued to appear on maps for a few years after.

[Max Rockatansky]

It wasn't just US 60 that was Jack Rabbit Trail but also US 70 for a brief period of time.

At least 1937 near as I can determine, but I wouldn't be surprised if it continued to appear on maps for a few years after.

Usually the Division of Highways maps are pretty accurate compared to the commercial map companies.  The first time that Jack Rabbit Trail clearly wasn't there is on the 1938 edition:

http://www.davidrumsey.com/ll/thumbnailView.html?startUrl=%2F%2Fwww.davidrumsey.com%2Fluna%2Fservlet%2Fas%2Fsearch%3Fos%3D0%26bs%3D10%26lc%3DRUMSEY~8~1%26q%3DCALTRANs%25201938%26sort%3DPub_List_No_InitialSort%2CPub_Date%2CPub_List_No%2CSeries_No#?c=0&m=0&s=0&cv=0&r=0&xywh=7717%2C10554%2C646%2C1145

Interestingly the 1936-37 map is vague on where US 70 was west of Coachella Valley.  I kind of suspect that CA 740 might have been a place holder for US 70 but it ended up being co-signed with US 99:

http://www.davidrumsey.com/ll/thumbnailView.html?startUrl=%2F%2Fwww.davidrumsey.com%2Fluna%2Fservlet%2Fas%2Fsearch%3Fos%3D0%26lc%3DRUMSEY~8~1%26q%3DCALTRANs%201936%26sort%3DPub_List_No_InitialSort%2CPub_Date%2CPub_List_No%2CSeries_No%26bs%3D10#?c=0&m=0&s=0&cv=0&r=0&xywh=5492%2C8591%2C2268%2C4018

[ClassicHasClass]

What makes you think that? I've always thought CA 740 was best thought of as a spur.

[Max Rockatansky]

What makes you think that? I've always thought CA 740 was best thought of as a spur.

It would have made way more sense to sign it as CA 74 from the get go unless there was something more grandiose in mind.  CA 440 was obviously a place holder for when/if US 299 was approved over CA 44.  CA 95 and CA 195 also seem to be somewhat intentionally numbered with the US 95 family in mind.  740 just seems like way too much of a coincidence for there not to be something to it with a US Route.  Besides if US 70 did end up on the route of CA 74/740 it would have terminated between US 60 and US 80 keeping the grid convention intact.  That said, I have absolutely nothing to back that theory up other than my conjecture looking at how the early State Highways tended to have a purpose. 

[sparker]

Fanciful notion regarding the weirdly-designated CA 740:  Rather than a possible alternative route for US 70 (once extended into CA), the numbers could have been jumbled a bit, resulting in US 470.  It would have been a mountain-borne alternative to US 70 much as US 399 was an offshoot of US 99; both routes feature rather breathtaking mountain crossings (2 of them with CA 74 -- the San Jacinto and Santa Ana mountain ridges) and terminate near the coast at what was originally an outskirt town but now just another outer exurb of metro L.A.   For that matter, even a US 499 designation would have fit, since the eastern Indio terminus would have been north of the 60/70-99 split between Indio and Coachella.  Nevertheless, the eventual SSR 74/CA 74 designation fit into the regional state numbering pattern, with the even-numbered 70's commencing south of L.A. metro and increasing southward (appropriately between US 70 & 80).