Regional Boards > Pacific Southwest

Is CA-4 constructed to interstate freeway standards?

(1/5) > >>

MrAndy1369:
I was wondering if the new freeway segments, constructed bit by bit from 2008 to present, all the way down to Balfour Road, are constructed to interstate freeway standards? Theoretically in the future, CA-4 becomes all freeway down to potential CA-239, that could eventually be converted to an interstate spur of I-680/I-580. Realistically, with how Caltrans is, that might not happen, but asking just in case and out of curiosity.

Also, are there any plans to continue converting CA-4 into a freeway to at least Marsh Creek Road?

jdbx:

--- Quote from: MrAndy1369 on September 20, 2022, 10:01:56 PM ---I was wondering if the new freeway segments, constructed bit by bit from 2008 to present, all the way down to Balfour Road, are constructed to interstate freeway standards? Theoretically in the future, CA-4 becomes all freeway down to potential CA-239, that could eventually be converted to an interstate spur of I-680/I-580. Realistically, with how Caltrans is, that might not happen, but asking just in case and out of curiosity.

Also, are there any plans to continue converting CA-4 into a freeway to at least Marsh Creek Road?

--- End quote ---

The freeway section of the CA-4 Bypass between CA-160 and roughly Balfour Road I believe is constructed to interstate standards, given what I have observed while driving on it with regards to shoulder width, sight distances, and interchange spacing. Also, the rebuild of CA-4 between Bailey Road and CA-160 also added proper-sized shoulders and improved sight lines.  That said, your instinct is probably correct:  CA-4 is unlikely to ever bear a shield other than the miner's spade. I am going to be quite surprised to see CA-239 constructed within my lifetime, however I am aware that studies are ongoing regarding routing at the terminus with I-580/205

cahwyguy:

--- Quote from: MrAndy1369 on September 20, 2022, 10:01:56 PM ---freeway standards? Theoretically in the future, CA-4 becomes all freeway down to potential CA-239, that could eventually be converted to an interstate spur of I-680/I-580.

--- End quote ---

Conversion to an Interstate is unlikely for a large variety of reasons, primarily of which is that there are no realistic x80 numbers available (only 480 is available, and that's unlikely to be used). There also isn't any benefit to signing it as Interstate in terms of funding benefit. So they would have the cost of resigning for little benefit.

kphoger:

--- Quote from: cahwyguy on September 21, 2022, 04:16:50 PM ---there are no realistic x80 numbers available

--- End quote ---

Just make it an x38.

Quillz:
CA-210 has been interstate ready since 2002 and still hasn't been resigned as I-210. As cahwyguy pointed out, there's not much benefit. Most new interstates do not really get any special funding anymore, so whether it's a state highway or an interstate, it's the same thing on paper. The main benefit to the interstate shield would be "brand recognition." This was part of the reasoning for I-238, at least. But unlike CA-238, CA-4 is one of the original state highways and is fairly well known, one of several that cross the Sierra. Renumbering a portion of it to an interstate would be a stretch since I-480 is realistically the only one that could be used, and seems like it would be renumbering for the sake of renumbering. (Which I'm not necessarily opposed to, but one should be looking at things practically).

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

Go to full version