🛣 Headlines about California Highways – January 2020

[cahwyguy]

The start of a new month, and you know what that means: Time for the headlines for the previous month. So here are the headlines for January (a relatively quiet month, highway-wise). As always, give them a good review. You're sure to find something to argue about ^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H discuss calmly.

Here's the link: https://cahighways.org/wordpress/?p=15662

As always, read, set, discuss.

[nexus73]

From the link:

Assemblyman's crusade for a new Richmond-San Rafael Bridge: All he needs is $8 billion. Since the day, early in February, when it unleashed chunks of concrete onto a white Mercedes, the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge has drawn all manner of colorful descriptions. It's also had 31 joints repaired on the westbound upper deck and opened a popular bicycle path while carrying 82,000 motorists each day.

<end of cut and paste>

$8 billion is more than the Columbia River Crossing project was going to cost.  At least only one state is involved instead of two.  Good luck in getting your bridge, especially after having spent $1 billion on maintenance only to have the concrete crumble away.

Rick

[Max Rockatansky]

Considering the volume of automotive traffic on the San Rafael-Richmond Bridge it seems like prioritizing a bike lane was a questionable decision.  Even the Golden Gate Bridge doesn't get as much foot and bike traffic as one might expect.  Retrofitting some sort of bike/pedestrian lane onto the older Bay Bridge span would be a more more sensible option, but then again there is BART service between Oakland-San Francisco.  I'm not opposed to pedestrian access via the corridor of I-580 it's just that the San Rafael-Richmond Bridge wasn't designed for it.  Any increase in traffic essentially means a new structure is the only long term solution.  I should add that I'm very much in favor of pedestrian paths on the bridges over San Francisco Bay but not at the expense of a real traffic problem.  I do enjoy running the Golden Gate Bridge and the Carquinez Bridge wasn't too shabby. 

A climbing lane on CA 58 eastbound would he very handy.  The climbing lane on CA 152 westbound makes that route of travel so much easier to traverse and less prone to traffic bottlenecks.  I almost run into trucks trying to pass each other at 20 MPH making the climb to Tehachapi. 

CA 1 in Marin County took a beating during the winter of 2017, any resurfacing would be a huge improvement.  Regarding Malibu parking bans, I'm sure those can be done if it's pushed as a safety issue.  Much of CA 1 in Big Sur already has overnight parking prohibitions posted on pullouts and overlooks. 

My wife transferred out of Oakhurst the week the project for the sewer replacement on CA 41 began.  Basically it's a traffic nightmare with all the crowds headed to Yosemite and workers heading home to the Valley.  Apparently using Road 425B (pre-CA 41) is kind of the back door way to get up to the top of Deadwood Gulch and bypass the project.  Road 426, Road 223, Road 221, and Road 200 through North Fork is also a popular bypass route of the construction area. 

[skluth]

A climbing lane on CA 58 eastbound would he very handy.  The climbing lane on CA 152 westbound makes that route of travel so much easier to traverse and less prone to traffic bottlenecks.  I almost run into trucks trying to pass each other at 20 MPH making the climb to Tehachapi. 

I've only traveled CA 58 a couple times so far and it wasn't busy either time I went eastbound. However, it was midday and I can easily see the need for an eastbound climbing lane. I tend to go near to slightly above the speed limit and stick to the right lane. There were still times when I passed a truck struggling uphill and a couple times waited for an even faster car doing 10-20 mph over the limit to pass first.

[Max Rockatansky]

A climbing lane on CA 58 eastbound would he very handy.  The climbing lane on CA 152 westbound makes that route of travel so much easier to traverse and less prone to traffic bottlenecks.  I almost run into trucks trying to pass each other at 20 MPH making the climb to Tehachapi. 

I've only traveled CA 58 a couple times so far and it wasn't busy either time I went eastbound. However, it was midday and I can easily see the need for an eastbound climbing lane. I tend to go near to slightly above the speed limit and stick to the right lane. There were still times when I passed a truck struggling uphill and a couple times waited for an even faster car doing 10-20 mph over the limit to pass first.

This current winter there was a severe accident on eastbound CA 58 after I-5, CA 33, and CA 166 all shut down due to the snow.  When the traffic is thick the differences in speed between the automobiles and trucks are pretty drastic.  Usually I run into problems somewhere around Woodford on the final uphill climb to CA 202. 

[ClassicHasClass]

As a temporary action, they should do on the Tehachapi grade what they previously did with CA 60 through the Badlands and simply limit truck traffic to the right lane until the top of the hill. Now CA 60 is getting its own expansion, so CA 58 can follow the same, er, roadmap.

[sparker]

A climbing lane on CA 58 eastbound would he very handy.  The climbing lane on CA 152 westbound makes that route of travel so much easier to traverse and less prone to traffic bottlenecks.  I almost run into trucks trying to pass each other at 20 MPH making the climb to Tehachapi. 

I've only traveled CA 58 a couple times so far and it wasn't busy either time I went eastbound. However, it was midday and I can easily see the need for an eastbound climbing lane. I tend to go near to slightly above the speed limit and stick to the right lane. There were still times when I passed a truck struggling uphill and a couple times waited for an even faster car doing 10-20 mph over the limit to pass first.

This current winter there was a severe accident on eastbound CA 58 after I-5, CA 33, and CA 166 all shut down due to the snow.  When the traffic is thick the differences in speed between the automobiles and trucks are pretty drastic.  Usually I run into problems somewhere around Woodford on the final uphill climb to CA 202. 

Most of the issues I've had with CA 58 have been through the S-curves between the Caliente intersection and Keene -- in both directions, but with different problems each way -- slow trucks crawling around the curvature EB, and trucks (including some smaller bobtails) having trouble staying in their lane WB.  This problem is exacerbated when fog creeps uphill from the Valley in winter, reducing visibility.  If this route is ever slated for a more comprehensive overhaul, reducing the curvature -- or at least substantially increasing the radius of those curves -- should be given first priority.   The steeper section up the hill between Woodford and Tehachapi would likely be remedied by the usual method -- carving out a bit more of the hillside to make room for a realignment featuring an additional uphill truck climbing lane, such as was done years ago on US 101 over the Cuesta grade north of San Luis Obispo.