Bay Area/NorCal Road Binge

[Max Rockatansky]

Just finished up my Bay Area photos from yesterday.  Below is what I did with some thoughts.

CA 120 Freeway

https://flic.kr/s/aHsmAZGTS7

-  This freeway more or less always felt like an extension of I-205 which I suppose makes sense since it is on the edge of the US 48 corridor and essentially is a limited access replacement for what was US 99W.  The design is pretty good through Manteca, it wouldn't surprise me if I-7/I-9 ever became a thing that CA 120 would see a truncation.


I-580 from I-205 to CA 13

https://flic.kr/s/aHskNNyxgv

-  Really this a very pretty freeway, especially over Altamont Pass.  There was some sort of construction area signed but there was no evidence of any work.  I thought it was odd the express lanes are all the way out in Livermore and not closer to San Francisco Bay. 


CA 123 to the terminus of US 40/US 50 in Oakland

https://flic.kr/s/aHskS6dhT7

-  I believe that CA 123 actually needs at Peralta Street on San Pablo Avenue if memory serves correctly.  The real surprise for me with this once was that CA 123 was actually signed with reassurance shields which I found to be a surprise.  Unless had prior knowledge that San Pablo and 14th was the terminus of US 40/50 before the Bay Bridge you would never know it.  The city plaza is kind of ugly and really is kind of disappointing it doesn't even acknowledge such an important highway terminus point. 


I-980

https://flic.kr/s/aHsmAZQobs

-  I can't be the only one who thinks this still should be part of CA 24?  Really there isn't much special on this route but the eastbound signage is pretty clear that you'll end up on CA 24 if you don't jump onto I-580.  Having I-80, I-880, I-580 and I-980 all within a couple blocks seems excessive for Interstate designations.


I-280 terminus and the Embarcadero:

https://flic.kr/s/aHskNNHG7Z

-  I-280 has one of the best looking terminus views in the State Highway system with the wiping sweeping look at downtown San Francisco.  The Embarcadero hasn't change a ton since I was on it last, the green bike lane is a nice touch.  The view of the Bay Bridge is worth the drive alone, it is hard to fathom the double decker freeway which used to be here.


Original US 101 alignment in San Francisco

https://flic.kr/s/aHsmAKA8oe

-  Aside from Hyde Street I got the impression driving the original alignment of US 101 in San Francisco that it largely used simply due to the easy of the terrain.  Valencia to Mission in particular seems to be right in the gap through the easiest terrain below the hill sides. 


CA 84 in the Santa Cruz Mountains

https://flic.kr/s/aHsmAKF5nV

-  Really this is a kind of primitive alignment even more so than CA 9 south from Saratoga.  Things get a little better west of CA 35 but pretty much all the reassurance shields disappear.  Someone went on a shield theft rampage and took all the CA 35 shields at the junctions to Skyline. 


Ice Cream Grade

https://flic.kr/s/aHsmyCnsoZ

-  Most of my photos turned out like crap but this was a pretty cool find that I didn't know was there.  Supposedly this road was named after how it was funded which I'm to understand was from ice cream sales in the late 19th century.  I'm sure there is interesting story with an answer just like Kitchen-Dick Road up in Washington.


Felton Covered Bridge

https://flic.kr/s/aHskNNSpG6

-  Really cool somewhat newer covered bridge from the 1890s which was used until 1937.  I'm to understand this was the tallest covered bridge ever built in the United States.  Compared to other covered bridges this one felt the most practical.


I-80 over the Bay Bridge

https://flic.kr/s/aHsmAZWcxG

-  This was my first time over the new bridge structure and it really is a looker.  The toll booths are fairly well organized, especially to what I'm remembering.  Its kind of disappointing that I-80 doesn't even get an "end" placard at US 101.

[TheStranger]

Re Route 123:  Cahighways identifies I-580 as Route 123's southern terminus, so that makes me wonder if the segment of the short MacArthur Boulevard expressway/freeway between I-580 and the Peralta/San Pablo Avenue ramp set is actually the real southernmost portion of 123.  That part of MacArthur of course connected what had been Business US 40 along San Pablo back to its parent, as well as carrying mainline US 50 before the MacArthur Freeway itself was built.

980:  Part of the reason for the numbering was that when it was first conceived, I-880 along the Nimitz Freeway hadn't been designated yet (880 at the time being used for the Beltline portion of today's I-80 in Sacramento's Natomas area).  So the numbering kinda made sense - a spur south from I-580 to a state route freeway, Route 17.  IMO with the opening of the 4th bore of the Caldecott a few years ago, 980 should be extended east, especially as 24/980 use one exit numbering set (very much unlike 17/880 which is still really one corridor to this day).

I actually drove all of 980 westbound today on the way to the Sharks game, and had driven all of it eastbound last week en route to Berkeley after a long drive up from Palmdale.  It feels a bit longer than it actually is as it has way more ramps than similarly short freeways in the Bay Area (238, the Central Freeway part of 101, 380).

Since you mentioned end placards,  I did notice that on the flyover that 980 west uses to get to 880 south, a SOUTH 880 trailblazer is up on there (rather than an END 980 sign set).

280:  I have some childhood memories of the old I-280 terminus at 4th Street that existed from about the mid-1970s to the time the Giants' ballpark was built - a large viaduct that had completely unused lanes between 4th and the 6th ramps, and essentially was only in use northbound only up until the ramp for 4th.  I sadly didn't take any photos of it back in the late 90s when it was in use.

[Max Rockatansky]

Re Route 123:  Cahighways identifies I-580 as Route 123's southern terminus, so that makes me wonder if the segment of the short MacArthur Boulevard expressway/freeway between I-580 and the Peralta/San Pablo Avenue ramp set is actually the real southernmost portion of 123.  That part of MacArthur of course connected what had been Business US 40 along San Pablo back to its parent, as well as carrying mainline US 50 before the MacArthur Freeway itself was built.

980:  Part of the reason for the numbering was that when it was first conceived, I-880 along the Nimitz Freeway hadn't been designated yet (880 at the time being used for the Beltline portion of today's I-80 in Sacramento's Natomas area).  So the numbering kinda made sense - a spur south from I-580 to a state route freeway, Route 17.  IMO with the opening of the 4th bore of the Caldecott a few years ago, 980 should be extended east, especially as 24/980 use one exit numbering set (very much unlike 17/880 which is still really one corridor to this day).

I actually drove all of 980 westbound today on the way to the Sharks game, and had driven all of it eastbound last week en route to Berkeley after a long drive up from Palmdale.  It feels a bit longer than it actually is as it has way more ramps than similarly short freeways in the Bay Area (238, the Central Freeway part of 101, 380).

Since you mentioned end placards,  I did notice that on the flyover that 980 west uses to get to 880 south, a SOUTH 880 trailblazer is up on there (rather than an END 980 sign set).

280:  I have some childhood memories of the old I-280 terminus at 4th Street that existed from about the mid-1970s to the time the Giants' ballpark was built - a large viaduct that had completely unused lanes between 4th and the 6th ramps, and essentially was only in use northbound only up until the ramp for 4th.  I sadly didn't take any photos of it back in the late 90s when it was in use.

Regarding CA 123 I plan on using the post Mile tool to see exactly we're the mileage ends at.  With 980 I was always under the impression that the tunnels on CA 24 was the reason why the designation couldn't be extended to 680?  Some of the older tunnels are a far cry from Interstate standards.  Interesting that 980 out of all places had an end placard, the only three I recall seeing on my trip was on 82, 61 (twice oddly) and 92.  I-280 and former 480 will be intriguing to look into given how much things have been altered since the 1980:   

Presently I'm on 112, 61 and 260 on my blog series.  I did the historical summary for all three routes which is actually fairly intriguing considering they were all part of LRN 69, 252 and 226 as one route at various points.  260 being spun off into its own thing always struck me as odd given how way too ambitious the expansion of 61 west of I-80 really was.  The double end 61 shields at both sides of the Webster/Posey Tubes was interesting to see.  Even 112 had signage indicating that 61 continues on it Via Davis Street. 

[TheStranger]

Regarding CA 123 I plan on using the post Mile tool to see exactly we're the mileage ends at.

In general does CalTrans consider the onramp connection to a route to be the route's terminus, or the physical overpass/underpass where one road crosses another?  It seems like a minor detail but that has me thinking a little bit given the way concurrencies are handled legislatively: i.e. for instance, when Route 99 connects with US 50 in Sacramento, does the segment end where the ramps feed into US 50 westbound, or is the mainline former US 99E/US 50 freeway between the offramp and the Business 80 onramp also part of Route 99?  And the second segment of I-10 in the legislative definition essentially includes all of the former US 60/70/99 portion of the San Bernardino Freeway between US 101 and I-5, which doesn't have any direct way of connecting with the Santa Monica Freeway portion.

With 980 I was always under the impression that the tunnels on CA 24 was the reason why the designation couldn't be extended to 680?  Some of the older tunnels are a far cry from Interstate standards.  Interesting that 980 out of all places had an end placard, the only three I recall seeing on my trip was on 82, 61 (twice oddly) and 92.  I-280 and former 480 will be intriguing to look into given how much things have been altered since the 1980:   

I actually meant that 980 didn't have an end placard, rather the 880 SOUTH thing, but I also drove through it as it was getting dark.  I'll need to check it out again sometime later this month.  I think the reason the designation wasn't extended is that 980 is the only segment that was built with Interstate funds.

Presently I'm on 112, 61 and 260 on my blog series.  I did the historical summary for all three routes which is actually fairly intriguing considering they were all part of LRN 69, 252 and 226 as one route at various points.  260 being spun off into its own thing always struck me as odd given how way too ambitious the expansion of 61 west of I-80 really was.  The double end 61 shields at both sides of the Webster/Posey Tubes was interesting to see.  Even 112 had signage indicating that 61 continues on it Via Davis Street. 

The 61 and 87 bayfront freeway concepts are interesting by themselves - not only due to the extreme optimism planners had in creating both concepts, but also making me wonder if the initial plan for relief/bypass routes in the Bay involved having closely-spaced parallel corridors of 6 or so lanes in width, rather than the current example of 8+ lane wide freeways doing all the heavy lifting for one trajectory.  (i.e. between I-238 and Route 84, the Nimitz Freeway was not intended to be the only north-south freeway between Hayward and Newark, but to be one of three with Route 238 and Route 61)

[Max Rockatansky]

I'm pretty sure the routes technically end before the ramps generally, or least that's how District 6 has been signing them.  I would imagine that the Post Mile Tool will be pretty illuminating towards answering that question. 

That makes me think it's a Freeway thing in the Bay Area regarding the lack of end signage.  For what it's worth some even well Signed surface routes like 84 don't seem to have end placards either.  I believe you are correct about 980 being signed over an area upgraded with Interstate funding, wasn't that also the case with I-238?

Really I don't think the planners had any reason not to be optimistic about some of the grand projects that popped up in the 1950s/60s.   There may have been Freeway revolts but it really wasn't until the California Environmental Quality Act follows by the Environmental Protection Act that road building really ground to a halt.  Really I find it amazing that some of the legislative plans of the time haven't been scrapped and an attempt clear up the Existing Highway system hasn't been made in the almost five decades since. 

[TheStranger]

I'm pretty sure the routes technically end before the ramps generally, or least that's how District 6 has been signing them.  I would imagine that the Post Mile Tool will be pretty illuminating towards answering that question. 

That makes me think it's a Freeway thing in the Bay Area regarding the lack of end signage.  For what it's worth some even well Signed surface routes like 84 don't seem to have end placards either.  I believe you are correct about 980 being signed over an area upgraded with Interstate funding, wasn't that also the case with I-238?

I-980 and I-110 came about ca. 1981, while I-238, I-710, today's I-880, and the I-580 extension to San Rafael are all from 1984.  Isn't that the last time new Interstate signage has been created in California, period?  (As 210 east of Route 57, I-15 south of I-8, and 905 all still are not yet signed as Interstates.)  880 interestingly is an example in which freeway that had once been part of Interstate routings in the early 1960s (the former 280/680 portion of 17 between 262 and the Santana Row shopping complex)  was readded to the system approximately 19 years after being removed from it, I feel like the former Business I-40 in Greensboro is one of the few other times a route was restored to the Interstate network after being taken out from it.

I don't know how much Interstate funding came into play with 880 when the rerouted Cypress portion of the freeway (980 to MacArthur Maze) ended up being constructed in the 1990s after the Loma Prieta earthquake.

Really I don't think the planners had any reason not to be optimistic about some of the grand projects that popped up in the 1950s/60s.   There may have been Freeway revolts but it really wasn't until the California Environmental Quality Act follows by the Environmental Protection Act that road building really ground to a halt.  Really I find it amazing that some of the legislative plans of the time haven't been scrapped and an attempt clear up the Existing Highway system hasn't been made in the almost five decades since. 

One of the side effects of the latter:

I-380's exit numbering starts at 5 at the El Camino Real ramp set, rather than at 1!  As a comparison: although Route 14 south of Sylmar is still legislatively on the books, the exit numbering deliberately starts from I-5 rather than from the planned southern terminus near Malibu that is never happening.  I remember seeing those Exit 5 signs on 380 for the first time a few years ago and being very surprised.

Could argue the piecemeal application of relinquishments has only added to the lack of cleanup of route definitions/numbers that exists to this day - there are many perfectly good route numbers like 64 and 81 that have never been used except to represent never-to-be-built lines on planning maps.  The 1964 renumbering was not as comprehensive as say Nevada's 1976 renumbering, in part to maintain as many existing state route numbers from California's 1934 batch as possible; however this is probably why we ended up with I-238.