A sort of a southern segment has been added from the south end of CA 241 at Oso Pkwy, Los Patrones Parkway.
https://www.ocregister.com/2018/09/11/first-segment-of-los-patrones-parkway-will-open-wednesday-sept-12/
This will eventually connect CA 241 at Oso nearly to CA 74 east of San Juan Capistrano. It will go to Cow Camp Rd in the Rancho Viejo development, which parallels CA 74/Ortega Hwy. Currently an overpass for Oso at CA 241 is being built for a direct connection from CA 241 to Los Patrones Parkway.
Also, last year a new connector opened between CA 74 at Antonio in SJC and Ave Pico in San Clemente, Ave La Pata. This is built like a freeway for a couple of miles.
[inserts comment before everyone comes in to bash the whole thing]
I drove the route today, here's a video of it:
https://youtu.be/kQd4c1rRc0Y
It's built as a freeway, with a bike lane on one side, but you can see the standards are lower than in the CA 241 part.
^^^^^^^
Except for the bike path, the 4-lane divided section doesn't appear to be much different physically than that of CA 241's gradient between the CA 133 and CA 261 interchanges. It's almost like this parkway is the functional equivalent of the proverbial "camel's nose through the tent flap" in terms of a 241 extension -- an incremental ROW "placeholder" for a future renewed effort toward a full limited-access facility. If any extension paralleling La Pata south of CA 74 is proposed down the line, the writing may then be on the wall regarding "Round 2" of the 241 saga; I'd take an educated guess that some factions within OCTA haven't quite given up on at least some variant of the original concept.
Are there plans to build this further south from Cow Camp Road? It would be especially helpful if it connected at that end to I-5. This extension by itself seems a pretty big waste of money and the environment for little in return other than a few people avoid a couple miles of back roads.
Quote from: skluth on September 24, 2018, 06:39:20 PM
Are there plans to build this further south from Cow Camp Road? It would be especially helpful if it connected at that end to I-5. This extension by itself seems a pretty big waste of money and the environment for little in return other than a few people avoid a couple miles of back roads.
One of the alternatives was building it along Christianitos Road, which I liked because it followed the original plan, mas o menos. They should have gone with that, along with building a spur to I-15 near Temecula.
Quote from: theroadwayone on September 24, 2018, 07:07:14 PM
Quote from: skluth on September 24, 2018, 06:39:20 PM
Are there plans to build this further south from Cow Camp Road? It would be especially helpful if it connected at that end to I-5. This extension by itself seems a pretty big waste of money and the environment for little in return other than a few people avoid a couple miles of back roads.
One of the alternatives was building it along Christianitos Road, which I liked because it followed the original plan, mas o menos. They should have gone with that, along with building a spur to I-15 near Temecula.
The parallel Antonio Parkway, which has been there since the late '90's, is hardly a "back road"; it's an arterial almost to expressway standards. Either there's some substantial new development in the works around the area where Los Patrones is intended to intersect CA 74 -- which in O.C. historically would on its own prompt some sort of functional extension of the 241 corridor (in South County the developer has always come first!) or my suspicions about OCTA trying to sneak such an extension farther and farther south until lo and behold, the original concept is fulfilled for at least most of its original distance.
Getting a spur to Temecula (or Fallbrook for that matter!) might be a tall order; it'd have to circle around the north and east side of Camp Pendleton, an area that's the poster child for "rugged", besides surmounting a ridge that's close to 5K in elevation at its lowest point; such an extension -- besides extending into another county (Riverside and/or San Diego) which may not welcome another traffic source -- certainly wouldn't come cheap, which is likely reasons #1-50 why such an extension hasn't been seriously explored to date.
Quote from: sparker on September 25, 2018, 02:39:34 AM
Quote from: theroadwayone on September 24, 2018, 07:07:14 PM
Quote from: skluth on September 24, 2018, 06:39:20 PM
Are there plans to build this further south from Cow Camp Road? It would be especially helpful if it connected at that end to I-5. This extension by itself seems a pretty big waste of money and the environment for little in return other than a few people avoid a couple miles of back roads.
One of the alternatives was building it along Christianitos Road, which I liked because it followed the original plan, mas o menos. They should have gone with that, along with building a spur to I-15 near Temecula.
The parallel Antonio Parkway, which has been there since the late '90's, is hardly a "back road"; it's an arterial almost to expressway standards. Either there's some substantial new development in the works around the area where Los Patrones is intended to intersect CA 74...
Cow Camp Road will be one of the main streets in Rancho Mission Viejo, which is planned for around 14000 homes.
Quote from: sparker on September 25, 2018, 02:39:34 AM
Quote from: theroadwayone on September 24, 2018, 07:07:14 PM
Quote from: skluth on September 24, 2018, 06:39:20 PM
Are there plans to build this further south from Cow Camp Road? It would be especially helpful if it connected at that end to I-5. This extension by itself seems a pretty big waste of money and the environment for little in return other than a few people avoid a couple miles of back roads.
One of the alternatives was building it along Christianitos Road, which I liked because it followed the original plan, mas o menos. They should have gone with that, along with building a spur to I-15 near Temecula.
The parallel Antonio Parkway, which has been there since the late '90's, is hardly a "back road"; it's an arterial almost to expressway standards. Either there's some substantial new development in the works around the area where Los Patrones is intended to intersect CA 74 -- which in O.C. historically would on its own prompt some sort of functional extension of the 241 corridor (in South County the developer has always come first!) or my suspicions about OCTA trying to sneak such an extension farther and farther south until lo and behold, the original concept is fulfilled for at least most of its original distance.
Getting a spur to Temecula (or Fallbrook for that matter!) might be a tall order; it'd have to circle around the north and east side of Camp Pendleton, an area that's the poster child for "rugged", besides surmounting a ridge that's close to 5K in elevation at its lowest point; such an extension -- besides extending into another county (Riverside and/or San Diego) which may not welcome another traffic source -- certainly wouldn't come cheap, which is likely reasons #1-50 why such an extension hasn't been seriously explored to date.
From your description, it seems the roads there are more than adequate for current and likely future traffic. Seems a waste of money when there are so many needed fixes elsewhere, even in Orange County. I don't see the point of this extension unless, as you also state, the long term plan is to build it further and further south (and preferably reaching I-5 at some point).
Quote from: sparker on September 25, 2018, 02:39:34 AM
Quote from: theroadwayone on September 24, 2018, 07:07:14 PM
Quote from: skluth on September 24, 2018, 06:39:20 PM
Are there plans to build this further south from Cow Camp Road? It would be especially helpful if it connected at that end to I-5. This extension by itself seems a pretty big waste of money and the environment for little in return other than a few people avoid a couple miles of back roads.
One of the alternatives was building it along Christianitos Road, which I liked because it followed the original plan, mas o menos. They should have gone with that, along with building a spur to I-15 near Temecula.
The parallel Antonio Parkway, which has been there since the late '90's, is hardly a "back road"; it's an arterial almost to expressway standards. Either there's some substantial new development in the works around the area where Los Patrones is intended to intersect CA 74 -- which in O.C. historically would on its own prompt some sort of functional extension of the 241 corridor (in South County the developer has always come first!) or my suspicions about OCTA trying to sneak such an extension farther and farther south until lo and behold, the original concept is fulfilled for at least most of its original distance.
Getting a spur to Temecula (or Fallbrook for that matter!) might be a tall order; it'd have to circle around the north and east side of Camp Pendleton, an area that's the poster child for "rugged", besides surmounting a ridge that's close to 5K in elevation at its lowest point; such an extension -- besides extending into another county (Riverside and/or San Diego) which may not welcome another traffic source -- certainly wouldn't come cheap, which is likely reasons #1-50 why such an extension hasn't been seriously explored to date.
To be honest, building a southeastern spur would be, though not impossible, difficult and unlikely. If it were to happen, I'd write it in for the title of Engineering Feat of the Century, no, the Millenium, if such an award exists.
That being said, even completing the 241 is going to be a challenge in and of itself. I've been a supporter of the whole thing for years, but I see things getting harder before getting easier. I'm also going to include the exit list for the south segment--if built as planned--in my Fictional Exit Lists thread.
Quote from: theroadwayone on September 27, 2018, 09:18:05 PM
To be honest, building a southeastern spur would be, though not impossible, difficult and unlikely. If it were to happen, I'd write it in for the title of Engineering Feat of the Century, no, the Millenium, if such an award exists.
There's a damn good reason why the only road to penetrate the Cleveland Nat'l Forest is CA 74, and it's a pain in the ass to drive. That whole ridgeline falls away to steep NE-SW canyons on the west side and to sheer cliffs on the east (Lake Elsinore/Temecula) side. Way back when, Santa Fe actually had a secondary line down to San Diego; parts of it still exist as the Perris/Hemet line, which parallels I-215 and CA 74. It originally snaked down a canyon to Lake Elsinore, then shot south parallel to today's I-15 to Temecula, then snaked down yet another canyon through what is now Camp Pendleton, joining the coastal line just north of Oceanside (the spur is still there as a service line into the Marine base). Both canyon alignments were wiped out by flooding and fully severed by the mid-'30's. Between fire & flood, those coastal mountains are treacherous!
The second segment of Los Patrones Parkway opened a couple of weeks ago, I haven't driven it yet:
https://www.ocregister.com/2019/10/18/second-segment-of-los-patrones-parkway-opens-in-rancho-mission-viejo/
The picture depicts a facility not significantly different from the CA 241 toll road to the north. As I opined earlier, Los Patrones, despite exhortations to the contrary, may well be a placeholder for an eventual 241 extension southward. As the old adage goes: if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it is, for all intents and purposes -- or may well be -- a duck! At least it's a ROW if not up to full freeway (or tollway) standards.
It wouldn't at all surprise me if OCTA emulates Clark County, NV and erects "pentagon" signage along Los Patrones as County 241!
Quote from: sparker on October 31, 2019, 02:30:05 AM
The picture depicts a facility not significantly different from the CA 241 toll road to the north. As I opined earlier, Los Patrones, despite exhortations to the contrary, may well be a placeholder for an eventual 241 extension southward. As the old adage goes: if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it is, for all intents and purposes -- or may well be -- a duck! At least it's a ROW if not up to full freeway (or tollway) standards.
It wouldn't at all surprise me if OCTA emulates Clark County, NV and erects "pentagon" signage along Los Patrones as County 241!
Los Patrones "Parkway" is built to full freeway standards. The "bike lane" is actually a Class I bike path separated by fencing off to the side. This is a full controlled access facility. The only differences to the 241 are: 1) It is free of tolls; 2) Maintained by Orange County (not the state); 3) The median and overall footprint is much more narrow than the 241.
The irony here is that this roadway was allowed while the Water Board denied a permit to the Tesoro Extension. This was never about water quality. It was about denying the TCA an easy way to finish the 241 to the 5.
Quote from: don1991 on December 10, 2019, 12:57:34 AM
Quote from: sparker on October 31, 2019, 02:30:05 AM
The picture depicts a facility not significantly different from the CA 241 toll road to the north. As I opined earlier, Los Patrones, despite exhortations to the contrary, may well be a placeholder for an eventual 241 extension southward. As the old adage goes: if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it is, for all intents and purposes -- or may well be -- a duck! At least it's a ROW if not up to full freeway (or tollway) standards.
It wouldn't at all surprise me if OCTA emulates Clark County, NV and erects "pentagon" signage along Los Patrones as County 241!
Los Patrones "Parkway" is built to full freeway standards. The "bike lane" is actually a Class I bike path separated by fencing off to the side. This is a fully controlled access facility. The only differences to the 241 are: 1) It is free of tolls; 2) Maintained by Orange County (not the state); 3) The median and overall footprint is much more narrow than the 241.
The irony here is that this roadway was allowed while the Water Board denied a permit to the Tesoro Extension. This was never about water quality. It was about denying the TCA an easy way to finish the 241 to the 5.
IIRC at one point -- about 8-9 years ago -- it was proposed to "shunt" the 241 facility down close to the San Juan riverbed paralleling CA 74 all the way to I-5. With a decidedly narrower profile/footprint, that concept may still be feasible. At this point Caltrans has obviously elected to wash its hands of anything pertaining to an extension; it
will be up to OCTA to take the reins here. With the actions regarding the Tesoro extension as well as Coastal Commission opposition, some sort of alternative that in all likelihood will abandon the notion of any facility through the foothills east of San Clemente would be the only remaining option. Fanciful extensions SE over the ridgeline to Fallbrook or I-15 will likely remain "pie-in-the-sky" concepts (requiring the cooperation of San Diego and/or Riverside counties in any instance); "shunting" it to I-5 north of San Clemente may well be the only way to ensure that traffic flow between the Santa Margarita "stub" of CA 241 and I-5 gets some sort of dedicated facility -- even a smaller-profile ROW built under county auspices.
Quote from: MarkF on September 20, 2018, 08:57:06 PM
A sort of a southern segment has been added from the south end of CA 241 at Oso Pkwy, Los Patrones Parkway.
https://www.ocregister.com/2018/09/11/first-segment-of-los-patrones-parkway-will-open-wednesday-sept-12/
This will eventually connect CA 241 at Oso nearly to CA 74 east of San Juan Capistrano. It will go to Cow Camp Rd in the Rancho Viejo development, which parallels CA 74/Ortega Hwy. Currently an overpass for Oso at CA 241 is being built for a direct connection from CA 241 to Los Patrones Parkway.
Also, last year a new connector opened between CA 74 at Antonio in SJC and Ave Pico in San Clemente, Ave La Pata. This is built like a freeway for a couple of miles.
The new "connector" you speak of - Ave La Pata only has an interchange at the Prima Derescha landfill. The rest could be considered to be "managed access" (a prime arterial) but not limited access by any means. Certainly not a freeway.
Quote from: sparker on October 31, 2019, 02:30:05 AM
The picture depicts a facility not significantly different from the CA 241 toll road to the north. As I opined earlier, Los Patrones, despite exhortations to the contrary, may well be a placeholder for an eventual 241 extension southward. As the old adage goes: if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it is, for all intents and purposes -- or may well be -- a duck! At least it's a ROW if not up to full freeway (or tollway) standards.
It wouldn't at all surprise me if OCTA emulates Clark County, NV and erects "pentagon" signage along Los Patrones as County 241!
An agreement earlier this year between San Clemente and Orange County precludes conversion of the free Los Patrones section to tollway. Indeed, the TCA's current South County Mobility Study (how many of these have we paid for now?) concentrates on the section from Cow Camp to I-5. They've given up on the section from Oso to Cow Camp. Though the developers built Los Patrones (once known as "F Street"), they were reimbursed by Orange County and the ROW still belongs to Caltrans and/or the TCA. Not sure if the TCA could still build a toll road by allowing free lanes off to the side.
At least we got a freeway of some kind anyway. If only we could get it to connect to I-5.
Quote from: don1991 on December 10, 2019, 12:57:34 AM
Quote from: sparker on October 31, 2019, 02:30:05 AM
The picture depicts a facility not significantly different from the CA 241 toll road to the north. As I opined earlier, Los Patrones, despite exhortations to the contrary, may well be a placeholder for an eventual 241 extension southward. As the old adage goes: if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it is, for all intents and purposes -- or may well be -- a duck! At least it's a ROW if not up to full freeway (or tollway) standards.
It wouldn't at all surprise me if OCTA emulates Clark County, NV and erects "pentagon" signage along Los Patrones as County 241!
Los Patrones "Parkway" is built to full freeway standards. The "bike lane" is actually a Class I bike path separated by fencing off to the side. This is a fully controlled access facility. The only differences to the 241 are: 1) It is free of tolls; 2) Maintained by Orange County (not the state); 3) The median and overall footprint is much more narrow than the 241.
The irony here is that this roadway was allowed while the Water Board denied a permit to the Tesoro Extension. This was never about water quality. It was about denying the TCA an easy way to finish the 241 to the 5.
I was going to say the same thing. Now, we just need some way of clearing a path to complete it that doesn't involve nuking southern OC.
Couldn't they have terminated the Los Patrones Parkway at CA 74? It's only a short distance south of Cow Camp Road.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on December 26, 2019, 04:41:58 PM
Couldn't they have terminated the Los Patrones Parkway at CA 74? It's only a short distance south of Cow Camp Road.
It could be eventually. The current terminus at Cow Camp Road is just an incomplete interchange, and it's designed for the Parkway to continue southward.
Most of the roadgeeks here would like to see it continued all the way to I-5, but having lived in San Clemente for a while I don't see the real-world value in that connection.
Quote from: djsekani on January 07, 2020, 03:06:48 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on December 26, 2019, 04:41:58 PM
Couldn't they have terminated the Los Patrones Parkway at CA 74? It's only a short distance south of Cow Camp Road.
It could be eventually. The current terminus at Cow Camp Road is just an incomplete interchange, and it's designed for the Parkway to continue southward.
Most of the roadgeeks here would like to see it continued all the way to I-5, but having lived in San Clemente for a while I don't see the real-world value in that connection.
It would've been a good northbound bypass for people from San Diego to avoid the traffic at the PCH curve.
If a connection was made to I-5, would this road be able to get expanded to 4 lanes or more in each direction with a measure of ease? Eventually the load on I-5 needs to be lessened. In a distant future one can see Camp Pendleton closed. then privately developed and a massive parallel route to I-5 going from San Diego County to Orange County.
Rick
Quote from: SeriesE on January 07, 2020, 05:40:14 PM
Quote from: djsekani on January 07, 2020, 03:06:48 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on December 26, 2019, 04:41:58 PM
Couldn't they have terminated the Los Patrones Parkway at CA 74? It's only a short distance south of Cow Camp Road.
It could be eventually. The current terminus at Cow Camp Road is just an incomplete interchange, and it's designed for the Parkway to continue southward.
Most of the roadgeeks here would like to see it continued all the way to I-5, but having lived in San Clemente for a while I don't see the real-world value in that connection.
It would've been a good northbound bypass for people from San Diego to avoid the traffic at the PCH curve.
I'm from San Diego and having been up there and back, I can concur.
While it likely would have been nice if a "reliever route" parallel to Interstate 5 could have been constructed, such a route would be impossible today. I have strong doubts on whether CA-241/Los Patrones Parkway will ever make it to Interstate 5. Would it be possible to hypothetically build an east-west route to connect Interstate 5 with CA-241/Los Patrones Parkway?
I really hope the 241 is extended to I-5. I am one who would use it many times a year.
On an unrelated note, anyone notice on the 241, just north of Oso Parkway, how there's something that looks like provisions for a future interchange (one with a SB exit and NB entrance?)
I have noticed the extra pavement there before, though it didn't occur to me that it could be for a future exit; that's a good point. And actually if you look a bit south there's more stubs for a NB exit and SB entrance as well, I do wonder what it was planned to connect to though...
Quote from: stevashe on January 15, 2020, 11:13:14 AM
I have noticed the extra pavement there before, though it didn't occur to me that it could be for a future exit; that's a good point. And actually if you look a bit south there's more stubs for a NB exit and SB entrance as well, I do wonder what it was planned to connect to though...
Oh yeah, I did notice. The only thing I saw in that area is what looks like some access road off Antonio Pkwy. There may be future development planned, but what do I know, anyways?
Quote from: theroadwayone on January 15, 2020, 03:13:45 PM
Quote from: stevashe on January 15, 2020, 11:13:14 AM
I have noticed the extra pavement there before, though it didn't occur to me that it could be for a future exit; that's a good point. And actually if you look a bit south there's more stubs for a NB exit and SB entrance as well, I do wonder what it was planned to connect to though...
Oh yeah, I did notice. The only thing I saw in that area is what looks like some access road off Antonio Pkwy. There may be future development planned, but what do I know, anyways?
Quote from: theroadwayone on January 15, 2020, 03:13:45 PM
Quote from: stevashe on January 15, 2020, 11:13:14 AM
I have noticed the extra pavement there before, though it didn't occur to me that it could be for a future exit; that's a good point. And actually if you look a bit south there's more stubs for a NB exit and SB entrance as well, I do wonder what it was planned to connect to though...
Oh yeah, I did notice. The only thing I saw in that area is what looks like some access road off Antonio Pkwy. There may be future development planned, but what do I know, anyways?
Even with the rapid growth of housing in the area, it's unlikely that an additional local-service interchange on CA 241 was planned so close to the existing Oso interchange, particularly since OTR machines would have to be installed on those ramps, raising the expense to do so. And looking at the area -- the only clear path from that "ghost ramp" area down to I-5 would involve snaking a multilane facility down Antonio Creek, intersecting I-5 at about the Mission Viejo/San Juan Capistrano city line (about a mile south of the CA 73 merge). And unless every environmental group in SoCal would be looking the other way, riparian areas such as that canyon are effectively off-limits. Trying to fashion a facililty over to I-5
without encountering such opposition -- or simply lack of a place to put much of anything -- doesn't appear to be happening now or in the foreseeable future.
There may be a way to have Los Patrones built due south of Cow Camp toward La Pata, following La Pata from about Stallion Ridge (just SE of San Juan Hills HS) to Camino del Rio, then south again to Pico (somewhere between Camino Vera Cruz & Calle Frontera), and then can parallel Pico to I-5.
I haven't been down that way, so I'm not sure how steep the hills are, but eyeball-wise, it looks possible on Google Maps.
Quote from: Mark68 on January 15, 2020, 06:33:51 PM
There may be a way to have Los Patrones built due south of Cow Camp toward La Pata, following La Pata from about Stallion Ridge (just SE of San Juan Hills HS) to Camino del Rio, then south again to Pico (somewhere between Camino Vera Cruz & Calle Frontera), and then can parallel Pico to I-5.
I haven't been down that way, so I'm not sure how steep the hills are, but eyeball-wise, it looks possible on Google Maps.
The problem is that once you get down to San Clemente's more developed areas flanking I-5, the opposition, whether from an environmental or simply NIMBY standpoint would likely be deafeningly loud, blunting any momentum toward completion of the basic 241 corridor concept, regardless of actual specific format. That's part & parcel of the reason the corridor was truncated in the first place; "joisting" it off parallel to an existing uphill arterial probably won't fare any better than the original plan.
This is why we need laws to stop these lawsuit happy NIMBYs. There are valid concerns and residents should absolutely have a voice. We just have to moved too far to the extreme allowing these projects to be delayed or even halted. I wonder what the chance of 241 ever reaching the 5 really is.
I see projects like extending the 55 freeway to PCH and Irvine Corona Tunnel on OCTA website and both of those are sorely needed yet don't stand a chance in today's political climate. Hopefully that changes towards the end of this decade.
Quote from: sparker on January 16, 2020, 05:09:18 PM
Quote from: Mark68 on January 15, 2020, 06:33:51 PM
There may be a way to have Los Patrones built due south of Cow Camp toward La Pata, following La Pata from about Stallion Ridge (just SE of San Juan Hills HS) to Camino del Rio, then south again to Pico (somewhere between Camino Vera Cruz & Calle Frontera), and then can parallel Pico to I-5.
I haven't been down that way, so I'm not sure how steep the hills are, but eyeball-wise, it looks possible on Google Maps.
The problem is that once you get down to San Clemente's more developed areas flanking I-5, the opposition, whether from an environmental or simply NIMBY standpoint would likely be deafeningly loud, blunting any momentum toward completion of the basic 241 corridor concept, regardless of actual specific format. That's part & parcel of the reason the corridor was truncated in the first place; "joisting" it off parallel to an existing uphill arterial probably won't fare any better than the original plan.
In that case, Mark's plan looks like it would work just fine until it got to Pico. Here's my solution- continue the route across Pico just north of the Calle del Cerro intersecion and run it between the neighborhoods to Cristianitos Road, then parallel
that road to the east until it reaches I-5.
I wonder how much of the opposition is "I don't want a tolled freeway" vs. "I don't want a freeway period."
Quote from: SeriesE on January 17, 2020, 03:27:10 AM
I wonder how much of the opposition is "I don't want a tolled freeway" vs. "I don't want a freeway period."
Pretty much the latter; although OC's political history would indicate otherwise, it (or at least its official public transportation body, OCTA) readily signed on to the tolled network in the late '80's after it was clear that (a) a limited-access network along the eastern hills wouldn't be financially feasible without tolls, and (b) without said network, the potential for developing the uphill areas like Rancho Santa Margarita and Coto de Caza was effectively nil. So, like most OC activity, the developers drove the concept, eventually overcoming the "we're getting taxed
twice" (i.e. gas tax + tolls) opposition. The whole network was built out by 1998 -- except 241 south of Mission Viejo.
That was effectively nixed by a combination of environmental activists (the southern end connecting to I-5 was routed right down a riparian creek bed, which incited much of the opposition from that quarter) as well as NIMBY's from the San Clemente area. That opposition would have emerged -- and prevailed -- regardless of whether the facility was tolled or not.
Quote from: theroadwayone on January 15, 2020, 01:59:31 AM
On an unrelated note, anyone notice on the 241, just north of Oso Parkway, how there's something that looks like provisions for a future interchange (one with a SB exit and NB entrance?)
There has been a small stub where Crown Valley ends at Antonio Pkwy for a long time. That would be perpendicular to CA-241 toll road. But that would be south of Oso Pkwy not north
Quote from: Mark68 on January 15, 2020, 06:33:51 PM
There may be a way to have Los Patrones built due south of Cow Camp toward La Pata, following La Pata from about Stallion Ridge (just SE of San Juan Hills HS) to Camino del Rio, then south again to Pico (somewhere between Camino Vera Cruz & Calle Frontera), and then can parallel Pico to I-5.
I haven't been down that way, so I'm not sure how steep the hills are, but eyeball-wise, it looks possible on Google Maps.
I agree with that, or it could also end at Ortega Hwy
Quote from: kendancy66 on January 17, 2020, 08:27:04 PM
Quote from: theroadwayone on January 15, 2020, 01:59:31 AM
On an unrelated note, anyone notice on the 241, just north of Oso Parkway, how there's something that looks like provisions for a future interchange (one with a SB exit and NB entrance?)
There has been a small stub where Crown Valley ends at Antonio Pkwy for a long time. That would be perpendicular to CA-241 toll road. But that would be south of Oso Pkwy not north
There may have been a plan to build it to the 241 as Exit 12 or 13, near where they would have had the toll plaza.
Quote from: Mark68 on January 15, 2020, 06:33:51 PM
There may be a way to have Los Patrones built due south of Cow Camp toward La Pata, following La Pata from about Stallion Ridge (just SE of San Juan Hills HS) to Camino del Rio, then south again to Pico (somewhere between Camino Vera Cruz & Calle Frontera), and then can parallel Pico to I-5.
I haven't been down that way, so I'm not sure how steep the hills are, but eyeball-wise, it looks possible on Google Maps.
Technically possible, sure, but these are all highly developed areas (both commercially and residentially) and residents will scream bloody murder at any attempt to route through there.
Honestly unless you want to either route 241 through/around Camp Pendleton in some way the odds of a full freeway connection to I-5 are about 0.0002%.
Quote from: djsekani on January 21, 2020, 07:38:07 PM
Quote from: Mark68 on January 15, 2020, 06:33:51 PM
There may be a way to have Los Patrones built due south of Cow Camp toward La Pata, following La Pata from about Stallion Ridge (just SE of San Juan Hills HS) to Camino del Rio, then south again to Pico (somewhere between Camino Vera Cruz & Calle Frontera), and then can parallel Pico to I-5.
I haven't been down that way, so I'm not sure how steep the hills are, but eyeball-wise, it looks possible on Google Maps.
Technically possible, sure, but these are all highly developed areas (both commercially and residentially) and residents will scream bloody murder at any attempt to route through there.
Honestly unless you want to either route 241 through/around Camp Pendleton in some way the odds of a full freeway connection to I-5 are about 0.0002%.
Since Pendleton extends all the way to the Santa Ana Mountains ridgeline in its northernmost reaches, and the Fallbrook city limits south of there, any extension of CA 241 would have to surmount the range and snake around behind the Marine base to get to a terminus ostensibly along CA 76. Alternately, running it east around the north end of Fallbrook to I-15 would entail just about the same mileage and effort. But the route would be out of Orange County by then; the original routing only passed through a mile or two of SD County en route to its merge with I-5 -- which was by design, so OCTA would have functional full control of the facility (the short SD County segment would have been paid for by OCTA, with the first toll-collection facility/device within OC). But it's doubtful that SD County would readily contribute to 15-20 miles of new-terrain construction in exceptionally difficult topology for a facility that wouldn't really provide much benefit to itself -- even if toll revenue were to be proportioned to provide a revenue/maintenance stream for both jurisdictions. And running through an active USMC base, particularly one with regularly active ordinance training/testing facilities, is a non-starter as long as the base remains open. Bottom line -- 241 and its short locally-maintained extension simply peter out where they are, or connect directly with CA 74 if that facility is expanded and/or upgraded (but almost certainly
not to limited-access standards).
Just an observation...I notice references in this thread to TCA and OCTA. OCTA is the Orange County Transportation Authority, which is responsible for transportation planning for all of Orange County. The OCTA operates the tolled express lanes on State Route 91. TCA stands for Transportation Corridor Agencies, which are two joint powers authorities that developed and operate the toll roads in Orange County and are responsible for planning the system, including the extension of State Route 241. OCTA is not leading or responsible for that planning effort. Each TCA has their own respective boards of directors but they share common management and staff. The Foothills/Eastern TCA is responsible for State Routes 241 and 261 and the tolled portion of State Route 133. The San Joaquin Hills TCA is responsible for the tolled portion of State Route 73. Caltrans owns the toll roads and maintains them. Some years ago revenues from the two TCAs were consolidated and used to cover expenses for the entire network. This was because the State Route 73 toll road was not generating enough revenue to cover its costs.
The 241 toll road extension is officially dead: https://www.ocregister.com/2020/03/03/241-extension-through-san-clemente-is-dead-assemblyman-says/
So just within the last few years here are some interesting infrastructure developments:
Bullet train cost jumps 20 billion and Newsom declares it dead and backpedals on his comments creating chaos amongst the project.
Purple line extension cost jumps a billion dollars
HDC freeway de facto killed
241 extension dead
710 tunnel dead
710 south improvements essentially killed
So what's the alternative project now for this toll road being canceled which should have extended to I-5? A surface road?
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on March 04, 2020, 09:24:01 AM
So what's the alternative project now for this toll road being canceled which should have extended to I-5? A surface road?
I mean, it's better than nothing, right?
Quote from: X99 on March 04, 2020, 10:37:04 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on March 04, 2020, 09:24:01 AM
So what's the alternative project now for this toll road being canceled which should have extended to I-5? A surface road?
I mean, it's better than nothing, right?
Yeah and selfishly for me I never would understand the need for it less it's built and I use from traveling from the IE or low desert to Laguna or Carlsbad. I'm happy for the folks in the community that won't have a roaring freeway in their backyard and I'm disappointed elected officials are doing next to nothing to really fix the traffic situation.
Will another alignment be proposed or is this it for this corridor?
Today I drove the 241/Los Patrones/Cow Camp/La Pata/Ave Vista Hermosa route to I-5 from Rancho Santa Margarita. It took 25 minutes to get from 241 at Los Alisos to I-5 at Ave Vista Hermosa in San Clemente, not much different from the time it takes when cutting over to I-5 via Alicia. The red signal at Antonio/La Pata and Ortega was 2 minutes.
There are now mileage signs south of 241/Antonio showing the Los Patrones exits:
(https://i.imgur.com/IcCqHan.jpg)
Also, there were warning signs up saying the 241 south of Antonio would be closed for a couple of days at the end of May, most likely to route the mainline under the completed Oso Pkwy bridge.
Current signage coming up for the 241/Los Patrones transition:
(https://i.imgur.com/LGs6yiH.jpg)
Video of 241 south to I-5 via La Pata:
https://youtu.be/KN4HA1erQfY
Quote from: MarkF on May 25, 2020, 04:44:10 AM
Today I drove the 241/Los Patrones/Cow Camp/La Pata/Ave Vista Hermosa route to I-5 from Rancho Santa Margarita. It took 25 minutes to get from 241 at Los Alisos to I-5 at Ave Vista Hermosa in San Clemente, not much different from the time it takes when cutting over to I-5 via Alicia. The red signal at Antonio/La Pata and Ortega was 2 minutes.
There are now mileage signs south of 241/Antonio showing the Los Patrones exits:
(https://i.imgur.com/IcCqHan.jpg)
Also, there were warning signs up saying the 241 south of Antonio would be closed for a couple of days at the end of May, most likely to route the mainline under the completed Oso Pkwy bridge.
Current signage coming up for the 241/Los Patrones transition:
(https://i.imgur.com/LGs6yiH.jpg)
Video of 241 south to I-5 via La Pata:
https://youtu.be/KN4HA1erQfY
Except for the right-hand curb, and lack of median shoulders, it looks a lot like 241 north over the hill to the 261 merge, down to the center K-rail. I guess that's an example of what, in OCTA terms, distinguishes a "parkway" from the remainder of the tolled system.
Quote from: sparker on May 26, 2020, 05:13:58 PM
Quote from: MarkF on May 25, 2020, 04:44:10 AM
Today I drove the 241/Los Patrones/Cow Camp/La Pata/Ave Vista Hermosa route to I-5 from Rancho Santa Margarita. It took 25 minutes to get from 241 at Los Alisos to I-5 at Ave Vista Hermosa in San Clemente, not much different from the time it takes when cutting over to I-5 via Alicia. The red signal at Antonio/La Pata and Ortega was 2 minutes.
There are now mileage signs south of 241/Antonio showing the Los Patrones exits:
(https://i.imgur.com/IcCqHan.jpg)
Also, there were warning signs up saying the 241 south of Antonio would be closed for a couple of days at the end of May, most likely to route the mainline under the completed Oso Pkwy bridge.
Current signage coming up for the 241/Los Patrones transition:
(https://i.imgur.com/LGs6yiH.jpg)
Video of 241 south to I-5 via La Pata:
https://youtu.be/KN4HA1erQfY
Except for the right-hand curb, and lack of median shoulders, it looks a lot like 241 north over the hill to the 261 merge, down to the center K-rail. I guess that's an example of what, in OCTA terms, distinguishes a "parkway" from the remainder of the tolled system.
La Pata was never meant to be more than a high functioning arterial. It will now likely serve as a de facto connector from whatever extension of Los Patrones is allowed down to Pico. There is the one exit at the landfill but otherwise there will be cross traffic at a few locations.
Quote from: SeriesE on January 17, 2020, 03:27:10 AM
I wonder how much of the opposition is "I don't want a tolled freeway" vs. "I don't want a freeway period."
Other than from the enviros, the rest of the opposition was more of "I don't want a tolled freeway". Funny how the Water Agency and most others did not oppose Los Patrones even though it is functionally a freeway. In California, it takes an act of the legislature to declare a stretch of road as a "freeway", which is why Los Patrones doesn't carry that name. But from an engineering standpoint, it fully meets the definition.
Very sad that people in California don't embrace toll freeways more. Its better than no road at all. In many other states, the concept is accepted, if not embraced, which allows much more freeway building.
Similar to the Richard Nixon Freeway / Parkway. South of Kellogg, it is a state freeway (Anaheim portion). North of that portion (Yorba Linda), it carries the name "Parkway" because the state relinquished the roadway to Yorba Linda. Functionally, however, the road is a freeway from Yorba Linda Blvd. to just north of Orangethorpe Avenue. South of there to the 91 Freeway, it is a functional expressway, save for the one driveway from the Shell Station south of La Palma Ave.
The Oso Parkway bridge mainlines (on Oso) are now complete and fully open to traffic - all 6 lanes. Now through October 2020 (the targeted completion date) they will finish tying the 241 into Los Patrones under the bridge, finish ramps, signal work, and other punch list items. It is getting close. It will nice to have a functional freeway now continue all the way down to Cow Camp.
If there's anything we can learn from this episode, what is it?
Quote from: theroadwayone on June 12, 2020, 07:58:47 PM
If there's anything we can learn from this episode, what is it?
fuck nimbys and anti car people? LOL!
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 12, 2020, 08:05:05 PM
Quote from: theroadwayone on June 12, 2020, 07:58:47 PM
If there's anything we can learn from this episode, what is it?
fuck nimbys and anti car people? LOL!
My thoughts exactly. F them all.
Quote from: kendancy66 on January 17, 2020, 08:27:04 PM
Quote from: theroadwayone on January 15, 2020, 01:59:31 AM
On an unrelated note, anyone notice on the 241, just north of Oso Parkway, how there's something that looks like provisions for a future interchange (one with a SB exit and NB entrance?)
There has been a small stub where Crown Valley ends at Antonio Pkwy for a long time. That would be perpendicular to CA-241 toll road. But that would be south of Oso Pkwy not north
Crown Valley was always supposed to extend eastward - at least to the future 241. I read recently that this is no longer in the cards. Developers no longer hold quite the sway that they used to in Orange County, though their influence is still considerably more than in most other parts of the state.
Quote from: theroadwayone on June 12, 2020, 07:58:47 PM
If there's anything we can learn from this episode, what is it?
The residents and environmentalists who oppose completion of CA-241 to I-5 have a choice: Complete the tollway or face the brunt of traffic upon your local roads. Given the expansion of employment in So OC and general growth into northern SC county and into the Inland Empire, there is a definite strong stream of traffic from southern I-5 to eastern 91. I-5 gets very busy, so the further south we can make this connection will ease traffic on other routes that make this connection like 133 or 55. given that traffic, pepole will be driving on these other roads to avoid I-5 traffic.
Quote from: mrsman on June 14, 2020, 01:09:33 PM
Quote from: theroadwayone on June 12, 2020, 07:58:47 PM
If there's anything we can learn from this episode, what is it?
The residents and environmentalists who oppose completion of CA-241 to I-5 have a choice: Complete the tollway or face the brunt of traffic upon your local roads. Given the expansion of employment in So OC and general growth into northern SC county and into the Inland Empire, there is a definite strong stream of traffic from southern I-5 to eastern 91. I-5 gets very busy, so the further south we can make this connection will ease traffic on other routes that make this connection like 133 or 55. given that traffic, pepole will be driving on these other roads to avoid I-5 traffic.
Oh, give 'em time. In a couple decades or so they'll be complaining about the traffic and why nothing was ever done, and then remind them that they opposed the solution a long time ago.
If Camp Pendleton was ever closed, then it would be a good idea to build a very large parallel freeway inland several miles to I-5 between San Diego County and Orange County to handle the traffic volume.
Rick
Quote from: nexus73 on June 14, 2020, 06:10:53 PM
If Camp Pendleton was ever closed, then it would be a good idea to build a very large parallel freeway inland several miles to I-5 between San Diego County and Orange County to handle the traffic volume.
Rick
If Pendleton were to close, the rush by developers to grab up the land (after detoxing it and making sure live ammo is gone!) would make the Oklahoma Sooner rush look like a church picnic! It's the last patch of undeveloped land on or near the coast from below Tijuana to above Goleta! If that were to ever happen, a freeway to serve the uphill side of the area would be a near-certainty -- but whether a revisited 241 extension were to be part of those plans is uncertain; I would suspect that an east-west connector between I-5 and I-15 passing near Fallbrook would be a centerpiece of any development. But I wouldn't hold my breath; Pendleton has some major political clout within both parties re its continued existence; it's not going away anytime soon.
This thread is several months old, and here is an update: in the Sunday 11/8/2020 Daily Breeze, the "Honk" Traffic column, written by Jim Radcliffe, he answered a question about this highway.
Evidently the 'main lines' beneath the Oso Parkway bridge, connecting SR 241 and Los Patrones Parkway, will open in late November or early December 2020. (The Oso Parkway bridge itself is also mentioned; it has a new sidewalk to improve safety for students walking to nearby Tesoro High School).
Quote from: skluth on September 24, 2018, 06:39:20 PM
Are there plans to build this further south from Cow Camp Road? It would be especially helpful if it connected at that end to I-5. This extension by itself seems a pretty big waste of money and the environment for little in return other than a few people avoid a couple miles of back roads.
I think it would be extended from Cow Camp Road onto CA-74 and into I-5, but it would have to avoid military bases like Camp Pendleton. Therefore, it would take 10-15 years before that would be completed.
Fixed quote. –Roadfro
Quote from: Anthony17 on December 28, 2021, 06:19:20 PM
Quote from: skluth on September 24, 2018, 06:39:20 PM
Are there plans to build this further south from Cow Camp Road? It would be especially helpful if it connected at that end to I-5. This extension by itself seems a pretty big waste of money and the environment for little in return other than a few people avoid a couple miles of back roads.
I think it would be extended from Cow Camp Road onto CA-74 and into I-5, but it would have to avoid military bases like Camp Pendleton. Therefore, it would take 10-15 years before that would be completed.
Fixed quote. –Roadfro
It won't. It's dead through San Clemente.
Put something together for the 241 corridor:
https://www.gribblenation.org/2022/01/california-state-route-241.html