I-210 in California

[Interstate Trav]

I was driving west on I-10 in Redlands and I saw the sign Caltrans put up a few years ago for the 210 West Jct, a sign that says 210 Pasadena 3 Miles.  Before it had an Interstate shield on it, but Caltrans covered it recently with a SR Shield.   Are they never planning to sign the 210 as I-210 east of the 57?

[theroadwayone]

I think they're going to. A few years ago, I saw an I-210 sign on I-10 in Redlands; it hasn't happened, but never say never.

[jrouse]

That piece of 210 has not been added into the Interstate system.  An attempt was made while the freeway was still under construction but it was cancelled.  I have heard that the older sections of freeway don't meet Interstate standards and that is part of the reason why it hasn't become I-210 but I've not been able to confirm this.

[triplemultiplex]

CalTrans is just a big party pooper about interstates.

[Max Rockatansky]

CalTrans is just a big party pooper about interstates.

Which is why pretty much almost every freeway route in the Bay Area is an Interstate?...available number be damned?  In the case of CA 210, that used to be CA 30 and CA 57 was the original alignment of I-210.  Parts of CA 57 are still part of the Interstate system and when I last drove the CA portion of 210 it has some substantial work left to upgrade it to Interstate standards.  You have similar situations with CA 110 (which will never be Interstate standards) and CA 15.

[Henry]

In a perfect world, I-15 would be extended all the way down to I-5 in San Diego, and I-905 would also exist, in addition to the I-210 in San Bernardino. Not to mention CA 99 between south of Bakersfield and Sacramento getting a new number (I-7 or I-9).

[Max Rockatansky]

In a perfect world, I-15 would be extended all the way down to I-5 in San Diego, and I-905 would also exist, in addition to the I-210 in San Bernardino. Not to mention CA 99 between south of Bakersfield and Sacramento getting a new number (I-7 or I-9).

But there also a popular perception on this forum that switching numbers in California is a cake walk and that 99 is a hop, skip, and a jump from Interstate standards.  Essentially almost the entirety of 99 would have to full rebuilt from stretch to conform to Interstate standards.  The shoulders are far from wide enough and generally are soft on the inside lanes.  There are tons of right-on/right-off ramps that would need to be removed.  All there would need to be a ton of eminent domain to widen the freeway in general.  Most of 99 was a Freeway back by the 50s and 60s.  I'd say just expand the current Freeway to six lanes entirely and forget about the Interstate standards. 

[LM117]

In a perfect world, I-15 would be extended all the way down to I-5 in San Diego, and I-905 would also exist, in addition to the I-210 in San Bernardino. Not to mention CA 99 between south of Bakersfield and Sacramento getting a new number (I-7 or I-9).

...or extending I-40 to I-5 near Bakersfield.

[Bobby5280]

Which sections of CA-210 don't meet Interstate standards? As far as I can tell the lanes and shoulders seem to be just as big (if not bigger) than those of existing I-210.

I don't understand why the I-15 designation in San Diego can't be brought down to I-5. What is it about CA-15 between I-5 and I-8 that it doesn't meet Interstate standards? If it's just a matter of making the shoulders a bit bigger it seems like there is enough room along the right of way to do that. Same goes for CA-905.

I'm all for extending I-40 through Bakersfield and over to I-5. It's a very busy route and vital for commercial trucking. The gravel driveways between the CA-223/CA-58 intersection and Tehachapi could be handled with a combination of limited frontage roads and alternative access points away from the highway.

[Techknow]

sparker has already commented on what you're asking:

CalTrans seems to be giving low priority to elevating state routes to Interstate status, like CA 210 in the San Bernadino area and CA 15 in San Diego, even when they have already been upgraded to freeways.

While Caltrans' reluctance to change much of anything regarding route designation & signage is legendary, the issues accompanying the two routes cited are very specific to the situations:  the issue with chargeability of the N-S section of former I-210 now signed as CA 57 has yet to be resolved (apparently FHWA still considers that I-210 and won't as of yet support signage of the non-chargeable section as I-210; and Caltrans hasn't pressed the issue).  And substandard features remain on CA 15 between I-5 and I-805;  programmed projects to address those haven't yet been let.  OTOH, Caltrans jumped on the conversion of I-110, I-710, and I-880 with little or no reluctance -- so their overall record is a mixed bag -- although I'll admit they're a little casual these days regarding anything Interstate.

With regards to CA 905, a signing project in San Diego county contains an outline for a I-905 shield but there is no other mentioning of I-905 so it seems to be an outlier, however it's not the first time these documents from Caltrans have had errors.

[myosh_tino]

Which sections of CA-210 don't meet Interstate standards? As far as I can tell the lanes and shoulders seem to be just as big (if not bigger) than those of existing I-210.

I was just about to ask the same question as most the freeway between CA-57 and I-215 is relatively new.  The only section that could be substandard is between I-215 and I-10 but I have been on 210 between I-215 and E. Highland Ave and it looks like it's up to Interstate standards to me.

I don't understand why the I-15 designation in San Diego can't be brought down to I-5. What is it about CA-15 between I-5 and I-8 that it doesn't meet Interstate standards? If it's just a matter of making the shoulders a bit bigger it seems like there is enough room along the right of way to do that. Same goes for CA-905.

From what I understand the 15/94 interchange is the issue.  More specifically it's the left exits on 94 to 15.

I'm all for extending I-40 through Bakersfield and over to I-5. It's a very busy route and vital for commercial trucking. The gravel driveways between the CA-223/CA-58 intersection and Tehachapi could be handled with a combination of limited frontage roads and alternative access points away from the highway.

But the CA-223 intersection is not the only thing that need to be done to 58 to bring it up to standards.  You'll have to upgrade the two 4-lane expressway segments, one between Mojave and Boron and the other between Kramer Junction and Hinkley.  As I have said in the other discussions regarding renumbering 58 as I-40, I don't think it's worth the added expense to upgrade what is already adequate highway (once the Kramer Junction Bypass is completed that is).

[Interstate Trav]

What part of Ca 210 is not up to interstate Standards?  I could have sworns the whole thing is.  A stretch between the 215 and the 10?

Also another thing I don't get about the 210 is on 210 West heading towards Sylmar the Control City is Sacramento, but you have to take 5 North to reach that, and 210 West is almost a bypass of Los Angeles so that makes sense, but on 210 East the Control City is Redlands.  why isn't it Palm Springs or Indio East of the 215 or atleast at the 330 jct?  Or atleast have a  mileage sign listing Indio or Palm Springs on it.  Seems like it would make sense.

[Bobby5280]

But the CA-223 intersection is not the only thing that need to be done to 58 to bring it up to standards.  You'll have to upgrade the two 4-lane expressway segments, one between Mojave and Boron and the other between Kramer Junction and Hinkley. As I have said in the other discussions regarding renumbering 58 as I-40, I don't think it's worth the added expense to upgrade what is already adequate highway (once the Kramer Junction Bypass is completed that is).

I think CA-58 is worth upgrading to full Interstate quality between Mojave and Barstow for a couple reasons. First, the upgrade would be very easy compared to most freeway conversion projects. It would certainly be a lot easier than upgrading CA-58 West of Mojave. Once the bypasses around Hinkley and Kramer Junction are complete much of that route segment will be at or near Interstate quality. The second reason is safety. That's a major trucking route. It's not good having at-grade crossings and driveways on a highway like that. That road not being an Interstate bugs me just as much as US-69 in Oklahoma.

It may still be a long time before that part of CA-58 is converted into a full fledged freeway. But if the US improves how it regards infrastructure and develops some innovation in construction that can, for once, bring down project costs the upgrade might happen faster.

[Max Rockatansky]

In a perfect world, I-15 would be extended all the way down to I-5 in San Diego, and I-905 would also exist, in addition to the I-210 in San Bernardino. Not to mention CA 99 between south of Bakersfield and Sacramento getting a new number (I-7 or I-9).

...or extending I-40 to I-5 near Bakersfield.

The irony is that 58 is probably much more likely to receive those kinds of upgrades.  The Hinkley Bypass has just been complete with just a couple at-grade intersections.  The Kramer Junction Bypass will presumably be much like the Hinkley Bypass whenever that comes to full fruition.  The big issue will be CA 58 west of Bakersfield and getting rid of all the at-grade intersections out in the desert....and CA 223 like someone already mentioned.  With 58 there is room to work with whereas 99 is backed up to towns and property owned by were ranchers.

[skluth]

Sorry to bump but I didn't want a new thread for what will probably be a few posts at most. In short, avoid I-210 east of I-605 from July 20 (10PM) - July 26 (4AM).  Highlighted text is mine.

San Gabriel Valley Drivers Prepare For A Mini-Carmageddon

Caltrans is warning drivers to prepare for a miniature carmageddon on the 210 Freeway in Irwindale.

The five-day repair project on the San Gabriel River Bridge begins at 10 p.m. Wednesday and will affect the portion of the freeway between Irwindale Avenue and the 605. The work is expected to last until 4 a.m. on the following Tuesday.

Caltrans is encouraging folks to use the Metro Gold Line or the Metrolink San Bernardino Line to avoid delays during the 126-hour closure.

Westbound traffic will be re-routed to the eastbound side, temporarily narrowing the highway to three lanes in each direction.

In West Covina and Baldwin Park, a nearly three-day closure will occur on two westbound lanes on the I-10 from Vincent to Puente avenues from 10 p.m. Friday until 5 a.m. Monday.

In addition, expect full overnight closures of all westbound lanes and the Azusa Avenue on-ramp to the westbound I-10 from 12 a.m. Saturday through 5 a.m. Sunday and from 11 p.m. Sunday to 4 a.m. Monday.

The 55-hour-closure will replace the pavement on the left westbound lane of the freeway.

Caltrans spokesperson Eric Menjivar is urging drivers to find alternate routes.

"If possible, if you're able to work from home, please do and just stay away from the area," he said.

Caltrans says the closures could start and end later, depending on weather conditions or construction issues.

Link in headline

[RZF]

Does anyone know what the whole disorganized situation is all about on CA-210 in its north-south stretch in Highland/Redlands? Are they trying to make that stretch up to interstate standards?

[skluth]

Does anyone know what the whole disorganized situation is all about on CA-210 in its north-south stretch in Highland/Redlands? Are they trying to make that stretch up to interstate standards?

Widening to six lanes and other improvements

[ClassicHasClass]

Completion of the six-laning is getting closer, though I don't think they'll meet the 'Summer 2022' target in that article.