AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: CA 262  (Read 3395 times)

Max Rockatansky

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 16246
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Route 9, Sector 26
  • Last Login: Today at 08:01:36 AM
    • Gribblenation
CA 262
« on: February 16, 2019, 10:58:44 PM »

On my recent Bay Area trip I took CA 262 east from I-880 on Mission Boulevard to I-680.  CA 262 is only a mile long and only presently carries one sign on a BGS from I-680 southbound but the route has carried an intriguingly large number of highways.  The segment of CA 262 from I-880 east to Warm Springs Boulevard was once part of CA 17 and CA 9.  The segment of CA 262 east of Warm Springs Boulevard to I-680 was once parts of; US 48, US 101E, CA 21, CA 9, LRN 680 and CA 238.  CA 262 appears to have once been doomed had CA 237 ever been completed to a freeway east of I-880 but appears to be the favored corridor connecting I-880 to I-680 until I-238.

https://surewhynotnow.blogspot.com/2019/02/california-state-route-262.html

My photo set for CA 262 can be found here:

https://flic.kr/s/aHsmAnGmBt
« Last Edit: February 22, 2019, 04:18:26 PM by Max Rockatansky »
Logged

TheStranger

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 4440
  • Last Login: Today at 03:21:49 AM
Re: CA 262
« Reply #1 on: February 17, 2019, 04:41:17 AM »

I actually just drove this a few days ago in the westbound direction!

IIRC in 1964, what is now 262 essentially served as 680 (as noted above) but also as part of a planned Route 17 rerouting that would follow the east side of Milpitas all the way to San Jose.  In 1965, 680 was then moved to that routing and 17 was legislatively restored to the Nimitz Freeway south of 262.  (One could argue that this was a successful attempt to have an existing planned/unbuilt state highway freeway corridor covered under the Interstate program, much like how I-5 was moved off of the US 99 corridor between Bakersfield and Sacramento and onto the West Side Freeway new-terrain corridor paralleling Route 33 instead).

IIRC there are also a couple of other references to 262 on 680 south, along the express lane:
https://www.google.com/maps/@37.5362193,-121.9321432,3a,15.1y,225.3h,94.19t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1slYX-8qVrlBrHKirCoOb6JA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en
Logged
Chris Sampang

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 8495
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: September 12, 2021, 12:44:33 AM
Re: CA 262
« Reply #2 on: February 18, 2019, 02:32:11 AM »

I actually just drove this a few days ago in the westbound direction!

IIRC in 1964, what is now 262 essentially served as 680 (as noted above) but also as part of a planned Route 17 rerouting that would follow the east side of Milpitas all the way to San Jose.  In 1965, 680 was then moved to that routing and 17 was legislatively restored to the Nimitz Freeway south of 262.  (One could argue that this was a successful attempt to have an existing planned/unbuilt state highway freeway corridor covered under the Interstate program, much like how I-5 was moved off of the US 99 corridor between Bakersfield and Sacramento and onto the West Side Freeway new-terrain corridor paralleling Route 33 instead).

IIRC there are also a couple of other references to 262 on 680 south, along the express lane:
https://www.google.com/maps/@37.5362193,-121.9321432,3a,15.1y,225.3h,94.19t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1slYX-8qVrlBrHKirCoOb6JA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en

FYI, the funding of the '65 rerouting of I-280 & I-680 in San Jose was an intra-D4 transfer of funds previously marked for the original Interstate freeway routings in S.F. -- particularly the I-80 extension west of the Central Freeway (the part that was to pass through the G.G. Park "Panhandle" north of the Haight-Ashbury district).  When that adopted alignment was cancelled that year, the available funds were re-deployed south to San Jose.   
Logged

TheStranger

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 4440
  • Last Login: Today at 03:21:49 AM
Re: CA 262
« Reply #3 on: November 09, 2019, 11:39:22 PM »

Just drove on here today on the way to a gift shop in Fremont and...

Wow!  There's still no trailblazer signage for 262, but it is now signed on overhead sign blades at Warm Springs Boulevard (former US 101E/Route 17/Route 238)!
Logged
Chris Sampang

Max Rockatansky

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 16246
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Route 9, Sector 26
  • Last Login: Today at 08:01:36 AM
    • Gribblenation
Re: CA 262
« Reply #4 on: November 09, 2019, 11:51:12 PM »

Still...at least the route is acknowledged, it’s a start. 
Logged

TheStranger

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 4440
  • Last Login: Today at 03:21:49 AM
Re: CA 262
« Reply #5 on: April 09, 2021, 12:58:33 AM »

Trailblazer sign sighted today (photo from my dad who was riding along) while I was en route from Sunol to Alviso and needed to cut over from 680 to 880!  Might be the first one ever for 262 after the route has existed for about 55 years. Not sure how long it has been up though the sign looks pretty new.

This is located a few feet west of 680 right after the southbound to westbound ramp.



Also occurred to me this might be the first signed designation on this road since Route 238 in the late 1960s...an unusual (for California) case of a road being a signed state/US route in the past and then getting a new signed number after a decades long gap.

SM-G973U1
« Last Edit: April 09, 2021, 01:07:16 AM by TheStranger »
Logged
Chris Sampang

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 8495
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: September 12, 2021, 12:44:33 AM
Re: CA 262
« Reply #6 on: April 09, 2021, 05:19:19 AM »

Trailblazer sign sighted today (photo from my dad who was riding along) while I was en route from Sunol to Alviso and needed to cut over from 680 to 880!  Might be the first one ever for 262 after the route has existed for about 55 years. Not sure how long it has been up though the sign looks pretty new.

This is located a few feet west of 680 right after the southbound to westbound ramp.



Also occurred to me this might be the first signed designation on this road since Route 238 in the late 1960s...an unusual (for California) case of a road being a signed state/US route in the past and then getting a new signed number after a decades long gap.

SM-G973U1


I was through there about 5 weeks ago, and that 262 reassurance shield wasn't there at the time.  Still, the only indication that it exists from the POV of the intersecting freeways remains the SB BGS's on I-680; still nothing over on I-880 as of last week.  But this is a welcome step (and a D4 surprise, considering their overall signage attitudes); something that should have been done decades ago. 
Logged

Max Rockatansky

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 16246
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Route 9, Sector 26
  • Last Login: Today at 08:01:36 AM
    • Gribblenation
Re: CA 262
« Reply #7 on: April 09, 2021, 08:32:31 AM »

Nice to see some of these unsigned routes getting shields finally, CA 211 had a couple last year. 
Logged

TheStranger

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 4440
  • Last Login: Today at 03:21:49 AM
Re: CA 262
« Reply #8 on: April 09, 2021, 10:24:12 AM »

Trailblazer sign sighted today (photo from my dad who was riding along) while I was en route from Sunol to Alviso and needed to cut over from 680 to 880!  Might be the first one ever for 262 after the route has existed for about 55 years. Not sure how long it has been up though the sign looks pretty new.

This is located a few feet west of 680 right after the southbound to westbound ramp.



Also occurred to me this might be the first signed designation on this road since Route 238 in the late 1960s...an unusual (for California) case of a road being a signed state/US route in the past and then getting a new signed number after a decades long gap.

SM-G973U1


I was through there about 5 weeks ago, and that 262 reassurance shield wasn't there at the time.  Still, the only indication that it exists from the POV of the intersecting freeways remains the SB BGS's on I-680; still nothing over on I-880 as of last week.  But this is a welcome step (and a D4 surprise, considering their overall signage attitudes); something that should have been done decades ago.
In the case of 262. I can initially see why it wasn't signed:


- its first few years were essentially when the south part of 238 was a placeholder designation from Fremont to US 101 in San Jose (along former Route 17/US 101E)

- the road was slated to be decommissioned when 237 was originally planned to continue northeast on new terrain alignment from 880 to 680

In a weird way the 680 toll HOV lane project is what gave 262 a permanent lease on life as most of the southbound signage pointing to 262 are references from the toll lane!


This does make me wonder if District 4 started going "by the book" about a decade ago with other short routes that have been briefly (112, 114) or currently (77) signed.  Surprised that 260 and 109 don't seem to have had the same treatment yet.

SM-G973U1

Logged
Chris Sampang

kurumi

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2016
  • Location: Cupertino, CA
  • Last Login: Today at 12:29:12 AM
    • kurumi.com
Re: CA 262
« Reply #9 on: April 09, 2021, 12:36:18 PM »

I had assumed (as Chris S. notes) that the only reason to sign 262 was to disambiguate the Mission Boulevard exits for the SB express lane.
Logged

TheStranger

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 4440
  • Last Login: Today at 03:21:49 AM
Re: CA 262
« Reply #10 on: April 23, 2021, 12:03:59 AM »

Just saw a new 262 trailblazer eastbound! It is just after the railroad overpass, right before the short freeway segment from 880 to Warm Springs ends.

SM-G973U1

Logged
Chris Sampang

myosh_tino

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2802
  • Silicon Valley Roadgeek

  • Age: 47
  • Location: Cupertino, CA
  • Last Login: Today at 02:56:02 AM
    • Silicon Valley Roads @ Markyville.com
Re: CA 262
« Reply #11 on: April 23, 2021, 12:17:23 AM »

Just saw a new 262 trailblazer eastbound! It is just after the railroad overpass, right before the short freeway segment from 880 to Warm Springs ends.

SM-G973U1

I noticed that too last Tuesday.  I was headed to Discovery Bay to get my first COVID shot that day and noticed the CA-262 shield eastbound on Mission Blvd.  I would normally post something like this right away but I think the mild side effects of the shot kept me from doing so.  :D
Logged
Quote from: golden eagle
If I owned a dam and decided to donate it to charity, would I be giving a dam? I'm sure that might be a first because no one really gives a dam.

TheStranger

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 4440
  • Last Login: Today at 03:21:49 AM
Re: CA 262
« Reply #12 on: April 23, 2021, 12:40:35 AM »

Just saw a new 262 trailblazer eastbound! It is just after the railroad overpass, right before the short freeway segment from 880 to Warm Springs ends.

SM-G973U1

I noticed that too last Tuesday.  I was headed to Discovery Bay to get my first COVID shot that day and noticed the CA-262 shield eastbound on Mission Blvd.  I would normally post something like this right away but I think the mild side effects of the shot kept me from doing so.  :D
My first thought when I saw the eastbound shield was "when will 262 finally be signed from 880?!"

"262 to 680" would make for better message loading than "Mission Blvd to 680".

Also wild to think that when the road got its number in 1965, none of the Asian dessert shops I'm stopping by on this street existed, nor did most of the sprawling shopping centers and supermarket sites between Warren and Mohave.

SM-G973U1

Logged
Chris Sampang

kurumi

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2016
  • Location: Cupertino, CA
  • Last Login: Today at 12:29:12 AM
    • kurumi.com
Re: CA 262
« Reply #13 on: April 23, 2021, 02:55:20 PM »

I caught a pic (phone through window, sorry for potato quality) on the way to see some friends (in person!) in San Ramon.

Logged

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 8495
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: September 12, 2021, 12:44:33 AM
Re: CA 262
« Reply #14 on: April 23, 2021, 06:43:21 PM »

I caught a pic (phone through window, sorry for potato quality) on the way to see some friends (in person!) in San Ramon.



I'll be heading up that way Monday; need to check this newer signage out.  I wonder if 262 will ever be cited on any of the BGS' on I-880 (either direction).   At least D4 got the kerning right on the shield (for once)!
Logged

ClassicHasClass

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 480
  • 0-60 in 59.999997 years

  • Location: sunny So Cal
  • Last Login: September 20, 2021, 07:04:44 PM
    • Floodgap Roadgap
Re: CA 262
« Reply #15 on: April 24, 2021, 12:04:54 PM »

Too bad the shield itself is dopey (a 2ds they crammed three digits on: typical).  :pan:
Logged

myosh_tino

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2802
  • Silicon Valley Roadgeek

  • Age: 47
  • Location: Cupertino, CA
  • Last Login: Today at 02:56:02 AM
    • Silicon Valley Roads @ Markyville.com
Re: CA 262
« Reply #16 on: April 24, 2021, 06:53:54 PM »

My first thought when I saw the eastbound shield was "when will 262 finally be signed from 880?!"

"262 to 680" would make for better message loading than "Mission Blvd to 680".

Also wild to think that when the road got its number in 1965, none of the Asian dessert shops I'm stopping by on this street existed, nor did most of the sprawling shopping centers and supermarket sites between Warren and Mohave.

SM-G973U1

I'd rather keep "Mission Blvd" on the sign and ditch the Sacramento control point.  Here's a mock up what that might look like...

Logged
Quote from: golden eagle
If I owned a dam and decided to donate it to charity, would I be giving a dam? I'm sure that might be a first because no one really gives a dam.

SeriesE

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 233
  • Location: CA
  • Last Login: September 20, 2021, 12:25:18 PM
Re: CA 262
« Reply #17 on: April 24, 2021, 08:25:29 PM »

My first thought when I saw the eastbound shield was "when will 262 finally be signed from 880?!"

"262 to 680" would make for better message loading than "Mission Blvd to 680".

Also wild to think that when the road got its number in 1965, none of the Asian dessert shops I'm stopping by on this street existed, nor did most of the sprawling shopping centers and supermarket sites between Warren and Mohave.

SM-G973U1

I'd rather keep "Mission Blvd" on the sign and ditch the Sacramento control point.  Here's a mock up what that might look like...


What about I-880 South? The existing sign is pretty crammed
Logged

myosh_tino

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2802
  • Silicon Valley Roadgeek

  • Age: 47
  • Location: Cupertino, CA
  • Last Login: Today at 02:56:02 AM
    • Silicon Valley Roads @ Markyville.com
Re: CA 262
« Reply #18 on: April 24, 2021, 08:45:43 PM »

What about I-880 South? The existing sign is pretty crammed

The current sign actually looks pretty good (not crammed at all) but trying to add a CA-262 shield presents some problems.

It's physically impossible to put "262 TO 680" on line 1, "Mission Blvd" on line 2, "Warren Ave" on line 3 and directional arrows plus EXIT ONLY plaque on line 4 all on a 120" tall sign panel without shrinking the route shields.  The only realistic option is to widen the sign panel placing the route shields on the left, the street names on the right and the arrows on the bottom.
Logged
Quote from: golden eagle
If I owned a dam and decided to donate it to charity, would I be giving a dam? I'm sure that might be a first because no one really gives a dam.

SeriesE

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 233
  • Location: CA
  • Last Login: September 20, 2021, 12:25:18 PM
Re: CA 262
« Reply #19 on: April 24, 2021, 09:09:33 PM »

What about I-880 South? The existing sign is pretty crammed

The current sign actually looks pretty good (not crammed at all) but trying to add a CA-262 shield presents some problems.

It's physically impossible to put "262 TO 680" on line 1, "Mission Blvd" on line 2, "Warren Ave" on line 3 and directional arrows plus EXIT ONLY plaque on line 4 all on a 120" tall sign panel without shrinking the route shields.  The only realistic option is to widen the sign panel placing the route shields on the left, the street names on the right and the arrows on the bottom.

My bad. :pan: I meant the sign is pretty full and wouldn’t fit another 262 shield within the same footprint.
Logged

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 8495
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: September 12, 2021, 12:44:33 AM
Re: CA 262
« Reply #20 on: April 25, 2021, 12:29:15 AM »

^^^^^^^^^^^^
Since a shunt over CA 262 from SB I-880 to SB I-680 is for all intents and purposes a secondary movement (at least in comparison with NB 880), a roadside medium-sized GS stating "CA 262 Next Right" before the ramp should suffice.  But the NB connection is important enough to deserve an overhead BGS such as shown in reply #16 above. 
Logged

TheStranger

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 4440
  • Last Login: Today at 03:21:49 AM
Re: CA 262
« Reply #21 on: April 25, 2021, 12:39:08 AM »

^^^^^^^^^^^^
Since a shunt over CA 262 from SB I-880 to SB I-680 is for all intents and purposes a secondary movement (at least in comparison with NB 880), a roadside medium-sized GS stating "CA 262 Next Right" before the ramp should suffice.  But the NB connection is important enough to deserve an overhead BGS such as shown in reply #16 above.
Considering that the 101/880 interchange is substandard (decades old cloverleaf with very little chance of expansion) would it make sense to try to have 680 south be mentioned here as an alternate to reach 101 south? Primarily if 262 ever becomes a full freeway from Warren to 680.

SM-G973U1

Logged
Chris Sampang

mrsman

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3514
  • Age: 45
  • Location: Silver Spring, MD
  • Last Login: September 20, 2021, 06:53:28 PM
Re: CA 262
« Reply #22 on: April 25, 2021, 01:41:38 PM »

My first thought when I saw the eastbound shield was "when will 262 finally be signed from 880?!"

"262 to 680" would make for better message loading than "Mission Blvd to 680".

Also wild to think that when the road got its number in 1965, none of the Asian dessert shops I'm stopping by on this street existed, nor did most of the sprawling shopping centers and supermarket sites between Warren and Mohave.

SM-G973U1

I'd rather keep "Mission Blvd" on the sign and ditch the Sacramento control point.  Here's a mock up what that might look like...


I like this.  Really short freeways (or at-grades in place of a freeway that are meant to connect 2 longer freeways) need to only mention that they are reaching another longer freeway.

So 262 is just an 880 to 680 connector.

In many ways, I see this as being similar to the CA-4 freeway in Stockton which is just a 5 to 99 connector and is largely signed in a similar manner.
Logged

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 8495
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: September 12, 2021, 12:44:33 AM
Re: CA 262
« Reply #23 on: April 25, 2021, 02:15:16 PM »

^^^^^^^^^^^^
Since a shunt over CA 262 from SB I-880 to SB I-680 is for all intents and purposes a secondary movement (at least in comparison with NB 880), a roadside medium-sized GS stating "CA 262 Next Right" before the ramp should suffice.  But the NB connection is important enough to deserve an overhead BGS such as shown in reply #16 above.
Considering that the 101/880 interchange is substandard (decades old cloverleaf with very little chance of expansion) would it make sense to try to have 680 south be mentioned here as an alternate to reach 101 south? Primarily if 262 ever becomes a full freeway from Warren to 680.

SM-G973U1



That might be TMI for signage (262 to 680 to south 101, even omitting reference to 262) at speed.  Since US 101 is about 7 miles down the road, having reference to it in south Fremont might be confusing, particularly since CA 262 remains a surface road over much of its short length and, frankly, doesn't need any more "alternative" traffic in its present state.  Could be revisited if and when it's converted to a full freeway -- but any reference to US 101 would likely remain on auxiliary signage -- IMO a single "TO" reference is about all that can be readily absorbed at 65 mph.  So the awkward 880/101 interchange will likely persist as is until D4 elects to purchase enough adjoining property to effect at least some sort of turbine -- or at least a SB 880>101 flyover (and gets rid of the adjoining Gish interchange on NB 880). 
Logged

myosh_tino

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2802
  • Silicon Valley Roadgeek

  • Age: 47
  • Location: Cupertino, CA
  • Last Login: Today at 02:56:02 AM
    • Silicon Valley Roads @ Markyville.com
Re: CA 262
« Reply #24 on: April 26, 2021, 10:01:13 PM »

What about I-880 South? The existing sign is pretty crammed

The current sign actually looks pretty good (not crammed at all) but trying to add a CA-262 shield presents some problems.

It's physically impossible to put "262 TO 680" on line 1, "Mission Blvd" on line 2, "Warren Ave" on line 3 and directional arrows plus EXIT ONLY plaque on line 4 all on a 120" tall sign panel without shrinking the route shields.  The only realistic option is to widen the sign panel placing the route shields on the left, the street names on the right and the arrows on the bottom.

My bad. :pan: I meant the sign is pretty full and wouldn’t fit another 262 shield within the same footprint.

Correct... *however* Caltrans just released specs for a new truss that supports much larger guide signs as mentioned in another thread.  Using that truss, I came up with this...


This sign is 150" tall (excluding the exit tab) and can comfortably accommodate the route shields, two road names and directional arrows.
Logged
Quote from: golden eagle
If I owned a dam and decided to donate it to charity, would I be giving a dam? I'm sure that might be a first because no one really gives a dam.

 


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.