AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: Capital Southeast Connector (Sacramento, CA)  (Read 7287 times)

sprjus4

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6602
  • Location: Hampton Roads, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 12:57:18 AM
Re: Capital Southeast Connector (Sacramento, CA)
« Reply #25 on: May 05, 2021, 04:42:29 PM »

The key is to call them “parkways”, brand them as such, advertise them as such, everything, but ultimately still end up building a freeway.

Sits better with the public eye and could bring less opposition, and still ultimately get the same thing done.

Problem is, pretty sure this project does not involve a full freeway, and still has signalized intersections and lower speed limits than 65 mph.
Logged

TheStranger

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 4361
  • Last Login: July 25, 2021, 06:37:13 PM
Re: Capital Southeast Connector (Sacramento, CA)
« Reply #26 on: May 05, 2021, 05:02:34 PM »

The key is to call them “parkways”, brand them as such, advertise them as such, everything, but ultimately still end up building a freeway.
That's pretty much what happened with US 101 in the SF Presidio when it was realigned from the old elevated Doyle Drive to the new surface-level (with 2 tunnels) Presidio Parkway about five years ago!
Logged
Chris Sampang

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 8261
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: July 25, 2021, 03:31:11 PM
Re: Capital Southeast Connector (Sacramento, CA)
« Reply #27 on: May 05, 2021, 05:34:36 PM »

The key is to call them “parkways”, brand them as such, advertise them as such, everything, but ultimately still end up building a freeway.

Sits better with the public eye and could bring less opposition, and still ultimately get the same thing done.

Problem is, pretty sure this project does not involve a full freeway, and still has signalized intersections and lower speed limits than 65 mph.

Amusingly, the current Arroyo Seco Parkway (CA 110) in NE L.A. started out life with that name, was renamed the Pasadena Freeway when pushed through Elysian Park to the 4-level Interchange, with its parkway name re-established several years back -- but it's still technically a "freeway", albeit one with reduced speed because of reduced (or nonexistent) lines of sight and stop signs at the functionally RIRO ramps.  But "parkway" seems to have caught on as a "non-threatening" catchall naming convention for a multitude of roadway configurations from simple 2-lane roads through actual parks to "near-freeways", often with narrow shoulders and medians in order to fit into a restricted ROW; a prime example is the US 97 "Bend Parkway" through Bend, OR, which functions as an urban freeway for portions, but with some commercial driveway access -- and physical curbs in places rather than flat shoulders -- presumably to make it look more like a "superstreet" than anything resembling a traditional freeway facility (and thus avoid the ire of the naysayers over in the Willamette Valley or PDX).  Unfortunately, in some jurisdictions such quasi-subterfuge becomes necessary to get a project off the launching pad.   
Logged

skluth

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1334
  • Age: 65
  • Location: Palm Springs, CA
  • Last Login: July 25, 2021, 01:58:52 PM
Re: Capital Southeast Connector (Sacramento, CA)
« Reply #28 on: May 06, 2021, 12:08:56 PM »

The key is to call them “parkways”, brand them as such, advertise them as such, everything, but ultimately still end up building a freeway.

Sits better with the public eye and could bring less opposition, and still ultimately get the same thing done.

Problem is, pretty sure this project does not involve a full freeway, and still has signalized intersections and lower speed limits than 65 mph.

Amusingly, the current Arroyo Seco Parkway (CA 110) in NE L.A. started out life with that name, was renamed the Pasadena Freeway when pushed through Elysian Park to the 4-level Interchange, with its parkway name re-established several years back -- but it's still technically a "freeway", albeit one with reduced speed because of reduced (or nonexistent) lines of sight and stop signs at the functionally RIRO ramps.  But "parkway" seems to have caught on as a "non-threatening" catchall naming convention for a multitude of roadway configurations from simple 2-lane roads through actual parks to "near-freeways", often with narrow shoulders and medians in order to fit into a restricted ROW; a prime example is the US 97 "Bend Parkway" through Bend, OR, which functions as an urban freeway for portions, but with some commercial driveway access -- and physical curbs in places rather than flat shoulders -- presumably to make it look more like a "superstreet" than anything resembling a traditional freeway facility (and thus avoid the ire of the naysayers over in the Willamette Valley or PDX).  Unfortunately, in some jurisdictions such quasi-subterfuge becomes necessary to get a project off the launching pad.   

Parkways are already somewhat interchangeable in the lexicon with freeways east of the Rockies. The Baltimore-Washington Parkway, Connecticut's Merritt Parkway, and Nashville's Briley Parkway are all freeways. There are also parkways that are not freeways like the Blue Ridge Parkway and NOVA's George Washington Parkway. The distinction is more important to the community here than elsewhere.
Logged

TheStranger

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 4361
  • Last Login: July 25, 2021, 06:37:13 PM
Re: Capital Southeast Connector (Sacramento, CA)
« Reply #29 on: May 06, 2021, 06:59:14 PM »

The key is to call them “parkways”, brand them as such, advertise them as such, everything, but ultimately still end up building a freeway.

Sits better with the public eye and could bring less opposition, and still ultimately get the same thing done.

Problem is, pretty sure this project does not involve a full freeway, and still has signalized intersections and lower speed limits than 65 mph.

Amusingly, the current Arroyo Seco Parkway (CA 110) in NE L.A. started out life with that name, was renamed the Pasadena Freeway when pushed through Elysian Park to the 4-level Interchange, with its parkway name re-established several years back -- but it's still technically a "freeway", albeit one with reduced speed because of reduced (or nonexistent) lines of sight and stop signs at the functionally RIRO ramps.  But "parkway" seems to have caught on as a "non-threatening" catchall naming convention for a multitude of roadway configurations from simple 2-lane roads through actual parks to "near-freeways", often with narrow shoulders and medians in order to fit into a restricted ROW; a prime example is the US 97 "Bend Parkway" through Bend, OR, which functions as an urban freeway for portions, but with some commercial driveway access -- and physical curbs in places rather than flat shoulders -- presumably to make it look more like a "superstreet" than anything resembling a traditional freeway facility (and thus avoid the ire of the naysayers over in the Willamette Valley or PDX).  Unfortunately, in some jurisdictions such quasi-subterfuge becomes necessary to get a project off the launching pad.   

Parkways are already somewhat interchangeable in the lexicon with freeways east of the Rockies. The Baltimore-Washington Parkway, Connecticut's Merritt Parkway, and Nashville's Briley Parkway are all freeways. There are also parkways that are not freeways like the Blue Ridge Parkway and NOVA's George Washington Parkway. The distinction is more important to the community here than elsewhere.

The traditional East Coast usage of "Parkway" is not dissimilar to that for the Arroyo Seco: a freeway/expressway that does not accept trucks on it, i.e. the New York parkway system, or the Merritt Parkway as mentioned above. 
Logged
Chris Sampang

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 8261
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: July 25, 2021, 03:31:11 PM
Re: Capital Southeast Connector (Sacramento, CA)
« Reply #30 on: May 07, 2021, 03:59:11 AM »

The traditional East Coast usage of "Parkway" is not dissimilar to that for the Arroyo Seco: a freeway/expressway that does not accept trucks on it, i.e. the New York parkway system, or the Merritt Parkway as mentioned above. 

The two truck-restricted freeways in the Bay area:  I-580 in east Oakland and CA 85 around the south side of San Jose, seem to have avoided the "parkway" label or name simply because they have been referred to as freeways for their entire existence.  Also, the former has been known as the MacArthur Freeway since its incipient I-5W days nearly 60 years ago, so any diminutive distinction like a descriptive "downgrade" to a parkway would simply and widely be ignored (I certainly couldn't see KCBS calling it a parkway in their every-10-minute radio traffic report!).
Logged

TheStranger

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 4361
  • Last Login: July 25, 2021, 06:37:13 PM
Re: Capital Southeast Connector (Sacramento, CA)
« Reply #31 on: May 07, 2021, 07:54:34 AM »

The traditional East Coast usage of "Parkway" is not dissimilar to that for the Arroyo Seco: a freeway/expressway that does not accept trucks on it, i.e. the New York parkway system, or the Merritt Parkway as mentioned above. 

The two truck-restricted freeways in the Bay area:  I-580 in east Oakland and CA 85 around the south side of San Jose, seem to have avoided the "parkway" label or name simply because they have been referred to as freeways for their entire existence.  Also, the former has been known as the MacArthur Freeway since its incipient I-5W days nearly 60 years ago, so any diminutive distinction like a descriptive "downgrade" to a parkway would simply and widely be ignored (I certainly couldn't see KCBS calling it a parkway in their every-10-minute radio traffic report!).
In the case of 85 it isn't even a full truck ban either (essentially there is a size component to what is allowed on that road).


IIRC there are also off peak hours where 580 does allow truck usage.  Interesting that that freeway was built entirely as Interstate (going back to 5W era) yet was able to maintain a truck ban, as opposed to 5W being routed on the modern truck route of 880 (then 17) and 238.

SM-G973U1

Logged
Chris Sampang

heynow415

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 49
  • Location: San Rafael, CA
  • Last Login: July 22, 2021, 05:50:29 PM
Re: Capital Southeast Connector (Sacramento, CA)
« Reply #32 on: May 07, 2021, 11:37:09 AM »

The traditional East Coast usage of "Parkway" is not dissimilar to that for the Arroyo Seco: a freeway/expressway that does not accept trucks on it, i.e. the New York parkway system, or the Merritt Parkway as mentioned above. 

The two truck-restricted freeways in the Bay area:  I-580 in east Oakland and CA 85 around the south side of San Jose, seem to have avoided the "parkway" label or name simply because they have been referred to as freeways for their entire existence.  Also, the former has been known as the MacArthur Freeway since its incipient I-5W days nearly 60 years ago, so any diminutive distinction like a descriptive "downgrade" to a parkway would simply and widely be ignored (I certainly couldn't see KCBS calling it a parkway in their every-10-minute radio traffic report!).
In the case of 85 it isn't even a full truck ban either (essentially there is a size component to what is allowed on that road).


IIRC there are also off peak hours where 580 does allow truck usage.  Interesting that that freeway was built entirely as Interstate (going back to 5W era) yet was able to maintain a truck ban, as opposed to 5W being routed on the modern truck route of 880 (then 17) and 238.

SM-G973U1

580 has had a full-time truck ban since its construction.  It is only applicable to the portion within Oakland City limits and has a tonnage max which allows for smaller panel type trucks but not large ones or semis, but effectively keeps them off the entire portion between 238 in Castro Valley and 980/24 in DT Oakland.  Eastbound trucks must exit by Grand Avenue, westbound by Estudillo Ave in San Leandro.  The only time the restriction is lifted is if 880 is effectively closed due to a sig-alert type event.  The main reason for the restriction is that when it was constructed in sections from 1962-65 the neighborhoods it cut through were (are still) affluent and they fought for it. 

In hindsight it was probably for the best considering the freeway is more serpentine than most and undulates more than typical as well, as opposed to 880 which is straight and flat so there aren't the impact of trucks slogging up hills creating plugs.  OTOH, it makes 880 that much more of a parking lot.  The other interesting thing is its demonstration of the impacts of trucks and other heavy vehicles to road surfaces compared with cars:  nearly all of it still has its original concrete surface, now pushing 60 years old. There have been concrete patches and slab replacements here and there and there was a microgrinding over the last 5 years or so to smooth minor lifting at the slab joints but other than a couple short sections that got an AC overlay, for the rest you're driving on the original.  Compare that to 880 which is 10 years older but has been repaved how many times??? 
Logged

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 8261
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: July 25, 2021, 03:31:11 PM
Re: Capital Southeast Connector (Sacramento, CA)
« Reply #33 on: May 07, 2021, 01:06:49 PM »

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
One of the rationales back in 1984 for designation of then-CA 17 as I-880 and the freeway portion of CA 238 as I-238 was to secure Interstate designation for the default truck route from Hayward to the MacArthur Maze.  It was apparently reasoned at the time that commercial drivers (and dispatchers) would be more comfortable sending their vehicles over a signed Interstate than on a series of state freeways -- also, the period this took place was prior to the ending of regularized federal support for maintenance of designated Interstate facilities. 
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.