AARoads Forum

Regional Boards => Pacific Southwest => Topic started by: bing101 on January 07, 2014, 10:51:19 AM

Title: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: bing101 on January 07, 2014, 10:51:19 AM
http://www.bakersfieldcalifornian.com/local/x202923251/Westside-Parkway-ready-to-open
Well Its under the City of Bakersfield for now.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: NE2 on January 07, 2014, 11:01:45 AM
Beware the ides of West.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: agentsteel53 on January 07, 2014, 11:03:39 AM
I drove it the other day.  given that Truxtun Ave is a pretty good expressway, it will likely figure in to my plans to navigate to certain frequently-visited spots in west Bakersfield.  usually I've taken 5 to Old River Road, but it looks like 99 to Truxtun to Westside will be the way to go.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: NE2 on January 07, 2014, 11:14:45 AM
Are there any signs directing traffic between it and SR 99?
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: agentsteel53 on January 07, 2014, 11:49:32 AM
Quote from: NE2 on January 07, 2014, 11:14:45 AM
Are there any signs directing traffic between it and SR 99?

not that I saw.  when I went east, I followed Truxtun, which itself has a non-interchange with 99, requiring Oak and California streets at an optimum.  Oak and California are mall hell, but Truxtun is pleasantly free of commercial slog, so it actually went pretty quickly.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: agentsteel53 on January 07, 2014, 12:00:38 PM
the exit numbers are currently patched over, but I saw what looked to say "44".  did I mistake a "114" (approximate distance to end of CA-58) or is there a truncation planned?
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Henry on January 07, 2014, 01:44:14 PM
QuoteIt also is a sign of transportation projects on the move. The parkway's final $30.1 million segment, from Allen Road to the Heath Road and Stockdale Highway intersection, is due to be completed next year, while planning continues for the controversial Centennial Corridor, which will connect the parkway to Highway 58 and, eventually, Interstate 5.
Along with the improvements of CA 58 eastward to Barstow, I don't see why I-40 shouldn't continue further west in the future. It already connects to I-95 in the East, so why not I-5 in the West? (I-10, I-80 and I-90 already connect to both.)
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: kkt on January 27, 2014, 12:23:26 PM
Quote from: Henry on January 07, 2014, 01:44:14 PM
QuoteIt also is a sign of transportation projects on the move. The parkway's final $30.1 million segment, from Allen Road to the Heath Road and Stockdale Highway intersection, is due to be completed next year, while planning continues for the controversial Centennial Corridor, which will connect the parkway to Highway 58 and, eventually, Interstate 5.
Along with the improvements of CA 58 eastward to Barstow, I don't see why I-40 shouldn't continue further west in the future. It already connects to I-95 in the East, so why not I-5 in the West? (I-10, I-80 and I-90 already connect to both.)

It should, not because I-5 is the westernmost 2di, but because I-40 is the best route from California to the southern midwest and southeast.  Produce from California's Central Valley, manufactured goods from S.F.; the quickest route is I-5, cross the southern Central Valley at CA-46 or CA-58 to Bakersfield, than CA-58 to Barstow.  I-80 is possible, but it takes a lot of gas to climb up to Donner Pass, and if continuing east through the Rockies too, and they are both subject to closure in the winter.  Barstow is not the logical west end of the route, I-5 is.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: bing101 on January 27, 2014, 12:39:02 PM
http://www.scvresources.com/highways/socal_unsigned/alfred_harrell_hwy/

Was Alfred Harrell Highway supposed to be I-40 at one point?

According to the site

"The freeway portion of the Alfred Harrell Highway "Freeway"  extends from China Grade Loop east to Hart Park. It was constructed to freeway standards using FAS money from 1956 to 1958. The reason for the construction of this freeway was to relieve traffic congestion heading to Hart Park. Beyond Hart Park, Alfred Harrel Highway resumes two-lanes. Grading work was done to continue the freeway but was never used. The Alfred Harrel Highway would be a great northern bypass of Bakersfield if it were ever completed as a full freeway from SR-178 to SR-99."

Was this ever supposed to be a state route?
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Occidental Tourist on January 29, 2014, 01:06:51 AM
Quote from: bing101 on January 27, 2014, 12:39:02 PM
Was Alfred Harrell Highway supposed to be I-40 at one point?

No, it wouldn't meet interstate standards (curve, grade).

Quote from: bing101 on January 27, 2014, 12:39:02 PM
Was this ever supposed to be a state route?

No, some FAS money went to important local roads that weren't part of the state's highway system. 

Here's an old article:
http://archive.org/stream/cavol3940liforniahigh6061wa00calirich#page/n123/mode/2up
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: bing101 on January 29, 2014, 10:30:21 AM
Quote from: Occidental Tourist on January 29, 2014, 01:06:51 AM
Quote from: bing101 on January 27, 2014, 12:39:02 PM
Was Alfred Harrell Highway supposed to be I-40 at one point?

No, it wouldn't meet interstate standards (curve, grade).

Quote from: bing101 on January 27, 2014, 12:39:02 PM
Was this ever supposed to be a state route?

No, some FAS money went to important local roads that weren't part of the state's highway system. 

Here's an old article:
http://archive.org/stream/cavol3940liforniahigh6061wa00calirich#page/n123/mode/2up (http://archive.org/stream/cavol3940liforniahigh6061wa00calirich#page/n123/mode/2up)

Wow Alfred Harrell Highway is FAS Route 883 according to the link. I will look to FAS Routes.

Moved reply out of quoted material. Please take care to not reply to quotes within other quotes. --roadfro
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: BakoCondors on February 16, 2014, 05:14:50 AM
Quote from: Occidental Tourist on January 29, 2014, 01:06:51 AM
Here's an old article:
http://archive.org/stream/cavol3940liforniahigh6061wa00calirich#page/n123/mode/2up (http://archive.org/stream/cavol3940liforniahigh6061wa00calirich#page/n123/mode/2up)

Holy Jeebus! That link led to a goldmine (for me anyway). The Beale Library in Bakersfield had volumes of those Division of Highways journals in the third floor stacks. I spent many afternoons reading through them in the late 80s and early 90s.

Removed extra quote tags. --Roadfro
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Occidental Tourist on February 17, 2014, 01:21:58 AM
Quote from: BakoCondors on February 16, 2014, 05:14:50 AM
Holy Jeebus! That link led to a goldmine (for me anyway). The Beale Library in Bakersfield had volumes of those Division of Highways journals in the third floor stacks. I spent many afternoons reading through them in the late 80s and early 90s.


Those old California Public Works magazines are great.  I presume reading them evokes a feeling similar to how Fifth Century Romans felt hearing stories about the reign of Augustus while they watched the empire collapse.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: mrsman on February 17, 2014, 08:52:35 AM
Caltrans used to be the leader in highway development and planning, but now they are seriously devolving.  Badly maintained roads, getting rid of control cities left and right.

SIGH
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: andy3175 on February 17, 2014, 10:46:36 AM
Quote from: Occidental Tourist on February 17, 2014, 01:21:58 AM
Quote from: BakoCondors on February 16, 2014, 05:14:50 AM
Holy Jeebus! That link led to a goldmine (for me anyway). The Beale Library in Bakersfield had volumes of those Division of Highways journals in the third floor stacks. I spent many afternoons reading through them in the late 80s and early 90s.


Those old California Public Works magazines are great.  I presume reading them evokes a feeling similar to how Fifth Century Romans felt hearing stories about the reign of Augustus while they watched the empire collapse.

Not to get too far off topic, but Caltrans still produces some newsletters and other documents to replace some of the content found in the old CHPW. The most recent effort: http://www.dot.ca.gov/ctjournal/2014-1/TheMileMarker_Jan2014.pdf.

Regards,
Andy
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: TheStranger on September 24, 2014, 03:56:12 PM
Just discovered this website that covers the Westside Parkway and other relevant Bakersfield freeway projects:

http://www.bakersfieldfreeways.us/

Prep work on the section of 58 between 99 and 204/Business 99 is beginning soon (in anticipation for connecting that existing freeway with the Westside Parkway) -

http://www.bakersfieldfreeways.us/ConstructionActivity.htm
http://www.bakersfieldfreeways.us/documents/TRIPProgramMap-Mar2012.pdf
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: andy3175 on November 21, 2014, 12:50:56 AM
http://www.bakersfieldcalifornian.com/local/x15405380/Westside-Parkway-Highway-58-builds-fall-behind

QuoteTwo major highway improvement projects expected to be finished this year are behind and likely won't be done until early 2015, a city engineer said Tuesday. Phase 6C, the Westside Parkway's two-mile segment from Allen Road to the intersection of Heath Road and Stockdale Highway, is about 60 percent complete, Luis Topete, an engineer for the Thomas Roads Improvement Program, told members of Keep Bakersfield Beautiful.

QuoteImprovements to Highway 58 dubbed the "gap closure," which include widening it from Highway 99 to Cottonwood Road and improving bridges, ramps and retaining walls, are 65 to 70 percent finished. But last week, Topete said, the owner of Security Paving Co., which is building both, called city officials to let them know neither would be done by Dec. 31.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Chris on April 16, 2015, 10:24:17 AM
The next phase of the Westside Parkway from Allen Road to Stockdale Highway opened to traffic yesterday.



Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: The Ghostbuster on April 20, 2015, 06:15:49 PM
Any timelines on when/if the Westside Parkway will connect with Highway 99?
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Concrete Bob on April 20, 2015, 10:36:18 PM
The connection between the eastern end of the Westside Parkway at Truxton and the existing freeway section of SR 58 at the SR 99 interchange is known as the Centennial Corridor. 

If Caltrans' Project Fact Sheet for the Centennial Corridor project is adequate, look for the Westside Parkway to be connected to SR 58 and SR 99 by December 2018.

http://dot.ca.gov/dist6/environmental/projects/centennial/docs/centennial_project_fact_sheet.pdf

Once the Centennial Corridor is completed, I would expect the entire corridor (Centennial Corridor, Westside Parkway and Stockdale Highway to SR 43) to be signed as SR 58, and all the exits will be numbered as well. 
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: andy3175 on April 20, 2015, 11:00:22 PM
I believe it's fair to say that the Westside Corridor is complete as noted upthread. There's a "status report" page on the Bakersfield Freeways site that offers the current status of each of the roadway projects in Bakersfield. Here's a snippet for today 4/20/15:

http://www.bakersfieldfreeways.us/ConstructionActivity.htm

Quote
Centennial Corridor
April 17-24, 2015

The consultant for the Centennial Corridor Project's preliminary design is conducting surveys and geotechnical work at various locations along the proposed corridor. This work entails drilling a small diameter hole within the right-of-way, collecting samples, and restoring the surface to pre-existing conditions.




Westside Parkway
April 17-24, 2015

The final phase of the Westside Parkway, between Allen Road and Stockdale Highway/Heath Road, opened to traffic on April 15th.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: mgk920 on April 23, 2015, 12:16:36 PM
Quote from: Concrete Bob on April 20, 2015, 10:36:18 PM
The connection between the eastern end of the Westside Parkway at Truxton and the existing freeway section of SR 58 at the SR 99 interchange is known as the Centennial Corridor. 

If Caltrans' Project Fact Sheet for the Centennial Corridor project is adequate, look for the Westside Parkway to be connected to SR 58 and SR 99 by December 2018.

http://dot.ca.gov/dist6/environmental/projects/centennial/docs/centennial_project_fact_sheet.pdf

Once the Centennial Corridor is completed, I would expect the entire corridor (Centennial Corridor, Westside Parkway and Stockdale Highway to SR 43) to be signed as SR 58, and all the exits will be numbered as well.

Future I-40?  We shall see.

:nod:

It still kind of amazes me that Bakersfield is the only place in the state where CalTrans is still building new freeways.

Mike
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Bickendan on April 23, 2015, 01:20:57 PM
Where else would you build them?
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: kkt on April 23, 2015, 02:32:47 PM
There are still a few sections of 101 in  Marin County that have side roads enter without a full exit.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: TheStranger on April 23, 2015, 03:28:06 PM
Quote from: kkt on April 23, 2015, 02:32:47 PM
There are still a few sections of 101 in  Marin County that have side roads enter without a full exit.


Will the construction work on 101 south of Petaluma address the at-grades through the narrows?
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: BakoCondors on April 23, 2015, 05:33:23 PM
Quote from: mgk920 on April 23, 2015, 12:16:36 PM
Quote from: Concrete Bob on April 20, 2015, 10:36:18 PM
The connection between the eastern end of the Westside Parkway at Truxton and the existing freeway section of SR 58 at the SR 99 interchange is known as the Centennial Corridor. 

If Caltrans' Project Fact Sheet for the Centennial Corridor project is adequate, look for the Westside Parkway to be connected to SR 58 and SR 99 by December 2018.

http://dot.ca.gov/dist6/environmental/projects/centennial/docs/centennial_project_fact_sheet.pdf

Once the Centennial Corridor is completed, I would expect the entire corridor (Centennial Corridor, Westside Parkway and Stockdale Highway to SR 43) to be signed as SR 58, and all the exits will be numbered as well.

Future I-40?  We shall see.

:nod:

It still kind of amazes me that Bakersfield is the only place in the state where CalTrans is still building new freeways.

Mike

We can thank former congressman Bill Thomas for that. On his way out of Washington in 2007, after nearly three decades of public service, he obtained a $630 million earmark for upgrading roads in Kern County.

I was bored at work one day and gave thought to the possibility of extending exit numbers along the CenCorr and WestPark out to I-5, using the existing 58/99 interchange (exit 110) and came up with this:



Westbound from 99/58 interchange
108   Mohawk Street
107   Coffee Road
105B Calloway Drive North
105A Calloway Drive South
103   Allen Road
101   Stockdale Hwy/Heath Road
97   CA-43 Enos Lane
93   Interstate 5




Eastbound from Interstate 5
97  CA-43 Enos Lane
101  Heath Road/Stockdale Hwy
103  Allen Road
105  Calloway Drive
106  Coffee Road
108A Mohawk Street
108B Truxtun Avenue

I was intentionally vague regarding the Coffee Road exit. It's a really long exit.

The real confusion regarding exit numbering may come if the decision is made to extend Interstate 40 to the west throwing all the existing numbers on I-40 and CA-58 out of whack.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: kkt on April 23, 2015, 07:09:27 PM
Quote from: TheStranger on April 23, 2015, 03:28:06 PM
Quote from: kkt on April 23, 2015, 02:32:47 PM
There are still a few sections of 101 in  Marin County that have side roads enter without a full exit.
Will the construction work on 101 south of Petaluma address the at-grades through the narrows?

I don't know, I haven't kept up with it.  I'd suspect they're separate projects, though.

Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: andy3175 on July 31, 2015, 01:30:19 AM
Drove the eastbound parkway two weeks ago. The highway is paved concrete (even the shoulders, which surprised me). Exit signs have blank spaces left for exit numbers. I saw at least one reassurance marker "East Westside Parkway." Here are some pictures:

https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.10153554987232948.1073741845.181045197947&type=3

Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Occidental Tourist on July 31, 2015, 02:47:54 PM
Quote from: andy3175 on July 31, 2015, 01:30:19 AMHere are some pictures:

https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.10153554987232948.1073741845.181045197947&type=3


What's the deal with the interchange sequence sign in the center median? (https://www.facebook.com/aaroads/photos/a.10153554987232948.1073741845.181045197947/10153554991632948/?type=3&theater)  I thought Caltrans policy was to move those signs to the outside of the roadway and uniformly leave center median gantries for HOV-related signage only.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: emory on August 03, 2015, 01:50:27 AM
Quote from: Occidental Tourist on July 31, 2015, 02:47:54 PM
Quote from: andy3175 on July 31, 2015, 01:30:19 AMHere are some pictures:

https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.10153554987232948.1073741845.181045197947&type=3


What's the deal with the interchange sequence sign in the center median? (https://www.facebook.com/aaroads/photos/a.10153554987232948.1073741845.181045197947/10153554991632948/?type=3&theater)  I thought Caltrans policy was to move those signs to the outside of the roadway and uniformly leave center median gantries for HOV-related signage only.

The last time they replaced the signs on I-405 down here, they kept them in the median.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Henry on August 03, 2015, 12:35:15 PM
One day, I really hope they fill in the gaps east to Barstow. Then we can discuss I-40 being closer to a true coast-to-coast Interstate.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: roadfro on August 03, 2015, 09:59:12 PM
Quote from: emory on August 03, 2015, 01:50:27 AM
Quote from: Occidental Tourist on July 31, 2015, 02:47:54 PM
Quote from: andy3175 on July 31, 2015, 01:30:19 AMHere are some pictures:

https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.10153554987232948.1073741845.181045197947&type=3


What's the deal with the interchange sequence sign in the center median? (https://www.facebook.com/aaroads/photos/a.10153554987232948.1073741845.181045197947/10153554991632948/?type=3&theater)  I thought Caltrans policy was to move those signs to the outside of the roadway and uniformly leave center median gantries for HOV-related signage only.

The last time they replaced the signs on I-405 down here, they kept them in the median.

The national MUTCD always shows interchange sequence signs in the median. I'm not aware of any jurisdiction with policy for locating such signs on the outside.

What would make sense is if Caltrans moves the interchange sequence signs to the outside in cases where there is a buffer-separated or barrier-separated HOV/HOT lane... but that is not the case here.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: ARMOURERERIC on August 03, 2015, 10:00:56 PM
Any talk of ROW acquisition from 99/58 to the temp end?
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Occidental Tourist on August 04, 2015, 08:02:40 PM
Quote from: roadfro on August 03, 2015, 09:59:12 PM
The national MUTCD always shows interchange sequence signs in the median. I'm not aware of any jurisdiction with policy for locating such signs on the outside.

What would make sense is if Caltrans moves the interchange sequence signs to the outside in cases where there is a buffer-separated or barrier-separated HOV/HOT lane... but that is not the case here.

The California MUTCD also requires that interchange sequence signs be in the median (Section 2E.40-09).  But I've seen a bunch of instances where Districts 07 and 12 have been pulling interchange sequence signs from median overhead sign gantries, installing outside shoulder sign gantries, installing the new interchange sequence signs there, and then pulling down the median gantries, leaving the median gantries empty, or repurposing median gantries for HOV lane signs.

Here's an example. (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.877083,-118.13675,3a,75y,100.45h,90t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sp1C1InevZAmCj8KzK_jKUg!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3Dp1C1InevZAmCj8KzK_jKUg%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D100%26h%3D80%26yaw%3D333.12976%26pitch%3D0!7i13312!8i6656)  They pulled the sign off the median post and installed a new one behind the soundwall on the right on a new gantry.  There are lots of these on the Artesia Freeway.  When they've done this, in some instances they leave the median gantry empty.  In one instance they installed a Carpool Lane sign in its place.  In another instance they left both the old interchange sequence sign in place on the median gantry and installed a new shoulder sign gantry in the same location with another interchange sequence sign on it. 

Here's another example. (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.765868,-117.971042,3a,75y,276.55h,82.06t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1scmkhS1N-WkHcRIw33Sx5-Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)  When they widened the 22 freeway, they did not replace the existing median gantry and instead put a gantry on the outside shoulder.  Although almost all of the interchange sequence signs on the pre-construction 22 were in the median, I cannot offhand recall a single instance where they put the interchange sequence sign back in the median after reconstruction.

If anyone knows why they did this/are doing this in violation of their own guidelines, I'd love to hear the explanation.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: roadfro on August 06, 2015, 04:44:35 PM
Quote from: Occidental Tourist on August 04, 2015, 08:02:40 PM
The California MUTCD also requires that interchange sequence signs be in the median (Section 2E.40-09).  But I've seen a bunch of instances where Districts 07 and 12 have been pulling interchange sequence signs from median overhead sign gantries, installing outside shoulder sign gantries, installing the new interchange sequence signs there, and then pulling down the median gantries, leaving the median gantries empty, or repurposing median gantries for HOV lane signs.

Here's an example. (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.877083,-118.13675,3a,75y,100.45h,90t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sp1C1InevZAmCj8KzK_jKUg!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3Dp1C1InevZAmCj8KzK_jKUg%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D100%26h%3D80%26yaw%3D333.12976%26pitch%3D0!7i13312!8i6656)  They pulled the sign off the median post and installed a new one behind the soundwall on the right on a new gantry.  There are lots of these on the Artesia Freeway.  When they've done this, in some instances they leave the median gantry empty.  In one instance they installed a Carpool Lane sign in its place.  In another instance they left both the old interchange sequence sign in place on the median gantry and installed a new shoulder sign gantry in the same location with another interchange sequence sign on it. 

Here's another example. (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.765868,-117.971042,3a,75y,276.55h,82.06t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1scmkhS1N-WkHcRIw33Sx5-Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)  When they widened the 22 freeway, they did not replace the existing median gantry and instead put a gantry on the outside shoulder.  Although almost all of the interchange sequence signs on the pre-construction 22 were in the median, I cannot offhand recall a single instance where they put the interchange sequence sign back in the median after reconstruction.

If anyone knows why they did this/are doing this in violation of their own guidelines, I'd love to hear the explanation.

Actually, the line in the California MUTCD you've referenced is a guidance statement–thus, the practice is recommended but not required. That is the exact same statement from the national MUTCD.


The first one it looks like there is an HOV lane with designated entry/exit points (even though there is no separation), so maybe that lends some support to that thought.

The second doesn't involve an HOV lane. Interesting here is that this example is a butterfly gantry style (typical median mounted) instead of a cantilevered style.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Kniwt on September 15, 2015, 04:32:54 PM
Quote from: agentsteel53 on January 07, 2014, 12:00:38 PM
the exit numbers are currently patched over, but I saw what looked to say "44".  did I mistake a "114" (approximate distance to end of CA-58) or is there a truncation planned?

Drove this eastbound yesterday right before sunset, so the light was shining brightly onto the patched-over exits. And the weird thing? They ALL said "Exit 44," at least the three consecutive exits after I began to notice something strange. No pictures, alas.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: The Ghostbuster on September 15, 2015, 05:39:49 PM
Will the Westside Parkway connect with SR 99 within our lifetimes?
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: kkt on September 15, 2015, 06:11:54 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on September 15, 2015, 05:39:49 PM
Will the Westside Parkway connect with SR 99 within our lifetimes?

I dunno.  I'm 52, how old are you?
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: The Ghostbuster on September 15, 2015, 06:59:26 PM
I turn 31 next month.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: noelbotevera on September 15, 2015, 07:19:52 PM
It's going to be seven months till I turn 12. Certainly in my lifetime, and hopefully salvage this roadgeek forum.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: JNorton on September 20, 2015, 08:01:41 PM
Not a comment but a question about Bakersfield area highway history. Does anyone know why from the get-go SR 58 wasn't planned to continue straight through to I-5? It seems so obvious.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: kkt on September 21, 2015, 12:02:30 PM
Quote from: JNorton on September 20, 2015, 08:01:41 PM
Not a comment but a question about Bakersfield area highway history. Does anyone know why from the get-go SR 58 wasn't planned to continue straight through to I-5? It seems so obvious.

CA 99 and CA 58 were there way before the interstates.  By the time I-5's route was settled on the westside, there were already subdivisions in Bakersfield blocking the obvious path for CA 58 to continue west.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: TheStranger on September 21, 2015, 12:17:29 PM
Quote from: kkt on September 21, 2015, 12:02:30 PM
Quote from: JNorton on September 20, 2015, 08:01:41 PM
Not a comment but a question about Bakersfield area highway history. Does anyone know why from the get-go SR 58 wasn't planned to continue straight through to I-5? It seems so obvious.

CA 99 and CA 58 were there way before the interstates.  By the time I-5's route was settled on the westside, there were already subdivisions in Bakersfield blocking the obvious path for CA 58 to continue west.


Looking at HistoricAerials' 1968 view of Bakersfield, there aren't that many houses west of where then-future 58 ends (past 99) - if anything, the existing Route 58 freeway east of 99 obliterated subdivisions that existed at the time.

Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: kkt on September 21, 2015, 04:31:41 PM
From http://www.bakersfield.com/news/2008/01/27/highway-58-s-dead-end-issue-may-come-alive.html (http://www.bakersfield.com/news/2008/01/27/highway-58-s-dead-end-issue-may-come-alive.html)

QuoteBakersfield leaders didn't plan to dead-end a freeway at a shopping center.

The length of Highway 58 that connects to Highway 99 and South Real Road was opened grandly on Sept. 3, 1976.

Plans existed to continue the freeway, but there was nearly a mile of new neighborhood between the route's end and open earth that would have given the freeway a clear run west.

State politics and local waffling conspired to end the route where it stood.

Gov. Jerry Brown appointed a new transportation director, Adriana Gianturco, in 1976, and together they killed funding for new freeways in the state.

"She implemented his policy -- which was to de-emphasize highway work and put more stock in mass transit," said LaRochelle, who wasn't around but who has researched the period.

Former city of Bakersfield Public Works Director Dale Hawley, who died in 2005, and his friend, former Kern County public works boss Dale Mills, were there.

In an interview in 2001, the pair talked about why Highway 58 was never given the westward extension it was always intended to have.

The state tried to plan an extension, Hawley said, but it never made it to a public hearing.

Without a plan and without funding, quiet pressure from developers resulted in plans that allowed more homes and businesses to be built, blocking Highway 58's path west, the pair said.

"Public pressure kept 58 dead-ended in Real Road," Mills said.

So you could blame Brown.  Mass transit options may be fine for big cities but pretty much a nonstarter in autocentric sprawl like Bakersfield.

Or you could blame leaders of the early 1970s.  If they'd built a beltway around the urbanized area instead of ramming through it, it would probably have been done long ago.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: mrsman on September 25, 2015, 03:11:21 PM
Quote from: kkt on September 21, 2015, 04:31:41 PM
From http://www.bakersfield.com/news/2008/01/27/highway-58-s-dead-end-issue-may-come-alive.html (http://www.bakersfield.com/news/2008/01/27/highway-58-s-dead-end-issue-may-come-alive.html)

QuoteBakersfield leaders didn't plan to dead-end a freeway at a shopping center.

The length of Highway 58 that connects to Highway 99 and South Real Road was opened grandly on Sept. 3, 1976.

Plans existed to continue the freeway, but there was nearly a mile of new neighborhood between the route's end and open earth that would have given the freeway a clear run west.

State politics and local waffling conspired to end the route where it stood.

Gov. Jerry Brown appointed a new transportation director, Adriana Gianturco, in 1976, and together they killed funding for new freeways in the state.

"She implemented his policy -- which was to de-emphasize highway work and put more stock in mass transit," said LaRochelle, who wasn't around but who has researched the period.

Former city of Bakersfield Public Works Director Dale Hawley, who died in 2005, and his friend, former Kern County public works boss Dale Mills, were there.

In an interview in 2001, the pair talked about why Highway 58 was never given the westward extension it was always intended to have.

The state tried to plan an extension, Hawley said, but it never made it to a public hearing.

Without a plan and without funding, quiet pressure from developers resulted in plans that allowed more homes and businesses to be built, blocking Highway 58's path west, the pair said.

"Public pressure kept 58 dead-ended in Real Road," Mills said.

So you could blame Brown.  Mass transit options may be fine for big cities but pretty much a nonstarter in autocentric sprawl like Bakersfield.

Or you could blame leaders of the early 1970s.  If they'd built a beltway around the urbanized area instead of ramming through it, it would probably have been done long ago.

I blame all the government officials for not securing the right of way from development in the first place. 
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Henry on September 28, 2015, 01:00:19 PM
Quote from: kkt on September 15, 2015, 06:11:54 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on September 15, 2015, 05:39:49 PM
Will the Westside Parkway connect with SR 99 within our lifetimes?

I dunno.  I'm 52, how old are you?

45, and I will turn 46 in April. Total shot in the dark.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: TheStranger on October 19, 2015, 01:35:00 PM
The shopping center at the west end of the existing Route 58 freeway (just past 99) has been purchased as part of right-of-way acquisition for the Centennial Corridor segment:
http://kvpr.org/post/bakersfield-buy-wild-west-shopping-center-centennial-corridor-freeway

http://www.kerngoldenempire.com/news/city-talking-about-buying-shopping-center-so-it-can-knock-it-down-and-connect-a-freeway has a handy map of the right of way involved.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: kkt on October 19, 2015, 01:43:20 PM
$7.9 million? pretty cheap for a shopping center, even for Bakersfield, isn't it?
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Henry on October 21, 2015, 12:24:06 PM
I take it back. Hopefully the dead-end issue can be resolved within several years, with the shopping center being the obvious first step. At the risk of dividing neighborhoods, more property acquisition will have to be undertaken first, and I see a long fight between residents and the city.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: myosh_tino on October 21, 2015, 04:23:33 PM
Quote from: Henry on October 21, 2015, 12:24:06 PM
At the risk of dividing neighborhoods, more property acquisition will have to be undertaken first, and I see a long fight between residents and the city.

Same here.

I don't see how the city is going to plop a 6-lane freeway through an established neighborhood without a ton of legal challenges from the residents.  It's also going to impact a number of businesses located on the north side of California Ave including a medial center, office complexes and retail shops.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: TheStranger on October 21, 2015, 05:27:49 PM
Quote from: myosh_tino on October 21, 2015, 04:23:33 PM
Quote from: Henry on October 21, 2015, 12:24:06 PM
At the risk of dividing neighborhoods, more property acquisition will have to be undertaken first, and I see a long fight between residents and the city.

Same here.

I don't see how the city is going to plop a 6-lane freeway through an established neighborhood without a ton of legal challenges from the residents.  It's also going to impact a number of businesses located on the north side of California Ave including a medial center, office complexes and retail shops.

What's interesting is that this routing was chosen over a route through the rail yard that would have avoided most of the businesses (Alternative C) because of impacts the eastbound Route 58 ramp to 99 south would have had on Saunders Park:
http://dot.ca.gov/dist6/environmental/projects/centennial/docs/maps/final_alt_c_full_exhibit.pdf
http://dot.ca.gov/dist6/pressrelease/2012/ma_centennial_corridor_111512.pdf
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: mrsman on October 21, 2015, 10:37:32 PM
Independent of considerations about choosing which properties would be taken by eminent domain, it would be best to fully utilize the existing interchange connecting 58 to 99 and to not have 58 utilizing 99's right of way to make the connection from the W Pkwy to existing 58.

Do any of the alternatives provide a direct connection from 58E to 99N (and 99S to 58 W)?  How do they propose people make this connection?  At the very least, there should be an off-ramp from 99S to Truxton (and an on-ramp to 99N).
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Concrete Bob on October 21, 2015, 10:47:32 PM
Under the chosen alternative, there won't be a EB 58 to NB 99 ramp or a SB 99 to WB 58 ramp added to the existing interchange due to projected traffic counts:

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=16140.0

And, if Caltrans added ramps at Truxton and 99 to accomdate the missing 58/99 ramps, I think the ramps would be too close to the off ramps at the Rosedale Highway/178 interchange. 
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Henry on October 22, 2015, 12:30:19 PM
Quote from: mrsman on October 21, 2015, 10:37:32 PM
Independent of considerations about choosing which properties would be taken by eminent domain, it would be best to fully utilize the existing interchange connecting 58 to 99 and to not have 58 utilizing 99's right of way to make the connection from the W Pkwy to existing 58.
Agreed on that.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: ACSCmapcollector on July 09, 2016, 03:56:29 PM
Cenntential Corridor for California State Route 58, Westside Parkway/Stockdale Hwy. ?

Does anyone know about the lawsuits and litigations of having the Cenntenial Corridor for California for the transfer of California State Route 58 to the Bakersfield-Barstow Highway?

http://www.dot.ca.gov/dist6/environmental/projects/centennial/

http://www.bakersfieldcity.us/gov/depts/public_works/bakersfield_freeways/centennial_corridor.htm

Scott C. Presnal
Morro Bay, CA
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: coatimundi on July 09, 2016, 04:12:44 PM
The "Bakersfield-Barstow Highway" is already CA 58.
There is some pending legal action on the part of local Bakersfield residents who are in the path of the connector between the existing Westside Parkway and the existing end of CA 58. I believe the details of this are - again - in another, existing thread on this forum.


Centennial Corridor thread (started July 2016) merged with existing Westside Parkway thread. Threads renamed. –Roadfro
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sparker on November 19, 2016, 09:29:17 PM
Quote from: compdude787 on November 19, 2016, 09:10:12 PM
I was looking at Bakersfield on OpenStreetMap (https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=15/35.3628/-119.0402) and I noticed that a freeway connecting the Westside Parkway with the CA 58/ CA 99 interchange was shown as under construction. Any info on this? Is it actually under construction? I'd be surprised if it even was, since it goes straight through a residential area. The only conceivable way of it being built would be as a tunnel.

The last I heard, the route shown on the map was still in the planning stages, no construction has yet begun -- there remains some controversy about the plans.  AFAIK, if & when the route is fully approved, the properties in the path of the proposed freeway will be acquired by eminent domain; it will be a surface or raised facility.  If anyone local and/or with more info has any further updates on this, please chime in! 


Mod Note: This post split out from the general "California" thread. –Roadfro.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: coatimundi on November 19, 2016, 09:30:56 PM
Quote from: compdude787 on November 19, 2016, 09:10:12 PM
I was looking at Bakersfield on OpenStreetMap (https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=15/35.3628/-119.0402) and I noticed that a freeway connecting the Westside Parkway with the CA 58/ CA 99 interchange was shown as under construction. Any info on this? Is it actually under construction? I'd be surprised if it even was, since it goes straight through a residential area. The only conceivable way of it being built would be as a tunnel.

It's referred to as the Centennial Corridor: http://dot.ca.gov/dist6/environmental/projects/centennial/ & http://www.bakersfieldcity.us/gov/depts/public_works/bakersfield_freeways/centennial_corridor.htm

Others closer may know better, but I believe they're currently demolishing the homes that stand in its way, and that may take a while. But everything is approved and it has a very high chance of being built within the next couple of years.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: compdude787 on November 19, 2016, 09:46:12 PM
Hmm, wow, cool. If it actually gets built on the proposed alignment, that would be pretty impressive.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: coatimundi on November 19, 2016, 10:00:20 PM
Quote from: compdude787 on November 19, 2016, 09:46:12 PM
Hmm, wow, cool. If it actually gets built on the proposed alignment, that would be pretty impressive.

OpenStreetMap shows the project realigning the existing 58 WB to 99 SB ramp by going through an existing medical office building. I don't believe that part of it is happening. In fact, Caltrans changed one of the new ramp locations so that there would be less impact on that building.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: coatimundi on November 22, 2016, 04:23:36 PM
I know the docs say that the 58 designation will be moved once the freeway opens, but I think it'll be interesting to see that transition. Obviously they're going to have to "green out" the 58 shield on the BGS for Rosedale Highway at the same time they take the cover off of the one for Westside Parkway. I mean, when was the last time there was a transition like that?

Personally I've been taking Westside Parkway out of Bakersfield since it opened. Rosedale Highway is just such a slog and the parkway doesn't really ever seem to have much traffic on it.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: TheStranger on November 22, 2016, 09:00:34 PM
Quote from: coatimundi on November 22, 2016, 04:23:36 PM
I know the docs say that the 58 designation will be moved once the freeway opens, but I think it'll be interesting to see that transition. Obviously they're going to have to "green out" the 58 shield on the BGS for Rosedale Highway at the same time they take the cover off of the one for Westside Parkway. I mean, when was the last time there was a transition like that?

Route 4 being moved off of the old surface routing in Brentwood to the long-planned bypass alignment south of Antioch might be a recent example of this.  (for a while, the new route was simply signed as "Bypass Route" while 4 was still on the older surface streets for a year or two)

I wonder how the US 101 move to the bypass in Willits is being handled too, in that vein.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sparker on November 22, 2016, 09:49:14 PM
Quote from: coatimundi on November 22, 2016, 04:23:36 PM
I know the docs say that the 58 designation will be moved once the freeway opens, but I think it'll be interesting to see that transition. Obviously they're going to have to "green out" the 58 shield on the BGS for Rosedale Highway at the same time they take the cover off of the one for Westside Parkway. I mean, when was the last time there was a transition like that?

Personally I've been taking Westside Parkway out of Bakersfield since it opened. Rosedale Highway is just such a slog and the parkway doesn't really ever seem to have much traffic on it.

At least they'll have the CA 178 sign remaining on the Rosedale BGS; I don't see that highway being rerouted away from its present downtown alignment anytime soon (if someone has info to the contrary, please speak up). 
Title: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: jrouse on November 24, 2016, 12:40:40 AM
Quote from: TheStranger on November 22, 2016, 09:00:34 PM

I wonder how the US 101 move to the bypass in Willits is being handled too, in that vein.

Doubtful.  The reason why the Route 4 Bypass was signed the way that it was is because it was not a state highway when it was built; it was a local road that was eventually adopted into the state system.  The Willits Bypass was planned as a state highway from the beginning.  The old alignment of 101 through Willits will become part of CA-20 south of the point where it comes in from Fort Bragg, and the portion north of CA-20 is supposed to be relinquished to the city.


iPhone
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: jeffe on December 06, 2016, 02:05:43 AM
Quote from: coatimundi on November 19, 2016, 09:30:56 PM
Others closer may know better, but I believe they're currently demolishing the homes that stand in its way, and that may take a while. But everything is approved and it has a very high chance of being built within the next couple of years.

The shopping center where CA-58 currently ends in a T-intersection with South Real Road is currently being demolished:

Quote
Demolition started on Monday [28 November 2016] of a central Bakersfield shopping center in order to make room for the controversial Centennial Corridor Project.

The Wild West Shopping Center off of Stockdale Highway and Real Road is being demolished this week, and it should be completed by the end of the year, if not sooner.

Earlier this month, opponents of the Centennial Corridor project went to court to try and prevent demolition of homes which were acquired by the city and were in the way of the proposed route.

But Judge Kenneth Twissleman denied a preliminary injunction on any demolition.

The Centennial project would connect the Westside Parkway to the eastern end of Highway 58.
Source: http://www.kerngoldenempire.com/news/demolition-of-the-wild-west-shoping-center-continues-for-centennial-corridor-project
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: BakoCondors on January 31, 2017, 10:39:23 PM
I took a drive through that area today. The shopping center is gone, as are a large swath of homes and businesses between Stockdale Hwy and California Ave through the Westpark neighborhood that will make up the Corridor's footprint. There is also substantial work going on along the existing 58 freeway east of the 99, widening the 58's footprint and earth moving for the new ramps to connect the Corridor to Hwy 99. It was both exciting, from a roadgeek point of view, and humbling, from a human POV.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: BakoCondors on January 31, 2017, 11:22:50 PM
Quote from: sparker on November 22, 2016, 09:49:14 PMAt least they'll have the CA 178 sign remaining on the Rosedale BGS; I don't see that highway being rerouted away from its present downtown alignment anytime soon (if someone has info to the contrary, please speak up).

New signage went up on NB 99 last March that eliminated the 178 shield from the BGS at Rosedale/24th. CalTrans relinquished the portion of 178 between M Street and the 99 back in 2011, though there is still signage on both 23rd & 24th Streets linking to the 178 Crosstown Fwy.
(https://scontent-lax3-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t31.0-8/12513749_10209174095767431_8985585053043144000_o.jpg?oh=e1f5cff677fad4c83886499abc8ce6b9&oe=590896BE)
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sparker on February 01, 2017, 12:03:54 AM
Quote from: BakoCondors on January 31, 2017, 11:22:50 PM
Quote from: sparker on November 22, 2016, 09:49:14 PMAt least they'll have the CA 178 sign remaining on the Rosedale BGS; I don't see that highway being rerouted away from its present downtown alignment anytime soon (if someone has info to the contrary, please speak up).

New signage went up on NB 99 last March that eliminated the 178 shield from the BGS at Rosedale/24th. CalTrans relinquished the portion of 178 between M Street and the 99 back in 2011, though there is still signage on both 23rd & 24th Streets linking to the 178 Crosstown Fwy.
(https://scontent-lax3-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t31.0-8/12513749_10209174095767431_8985585053043144000_o.jpg?oh=e1f5cff677fad4c83886499abc8ce6b9&oe=590896BE)

So does that leave CA 178 hanging in downtown -- or is a reroute (perhaps along CA 204/Biz 99 north to CA 99) in the works?  I can't see Caltrans not indicating access to the 178 freeway from somewhere along either CA 99 or CA 58 -- and CA 204 is one of the more useless routes in the state system.  Again, more info, please! :confused:
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: NE2 on February 01, 2017, 12:04:57 AM
Technically the part between 99 and the Kern River is still 178. And "the City of Bakersfield shall install and maintain within its jurisdiction signs directing motorists to the continuation of Route 178". Fuck Caltrans.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on February 01, 2017, 12:13:11 AM
As stated above there is still signage on 23rd and 24th.  The signage that is in place is actually quite good even with the one-way split in 178.  Things are still far better than on the surface route in regards to directing motorists than other urban areas that have reliquished state highways with signage continuation agreements....I'm looking your way San Jose with CA 130.

I'm going to disagree on 204 being completely useless.  That is a handy little connector to get from the 178 freeway up to 99 bypassing downtown if you are heading north especially....then again it might not be the worst thing ever if it was absorbed into 178. 
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sparker on February 01, 2017, 12:28:32 AM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 01, 2017, 12:13:11 AM
As stated above there is still signage on 23rd and 24th.  The signage that is in place is actually quite good even with the one-way split in 178.  Things are still far better than on the surface route in regards to directing motorists than other urban areas that have reliquished state highways with signage continuation agreements....I'm looking your way San Jose with CA 130.

Yeah, 130 signage has sucked for some time now.  The BGS's on US 101 indicating CA 130 on Alum Rock are still intact (although there never has been a similar indication from the I-680/Alum Rock interchange to the east).  It seems as if there is an ad hoc if unofficial policy within the City of San Jose to not expedite through traffic within city limits -- and state signage on city streets may be construed within planning circles as doing just that, so enforcement of post-relinquishment signage agreements isn't going to fall to the city -- and Caltrans certainly isn't going to go out of their way to post signage on roadways they don't maintain.  So the notion of signed continuous routes may be given lip service at best, but follow-through in the field doesn't seem to consistently exist.  And it's probable that San Jose isn't the only CA city to discourage pass-through traffic on surface facilities.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on February 01, 2017, 10:31:51 AM
Quote from: sparker on February 01, 2017, 12:28:32 AM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 01, 2017, 12:13:11 AM
As stated above there is still signage on 23rd and 24th.  The signage that is in place is actually quite good even with the one-way split in 178.  Things are still far better than on the surface route in regards to directing motorists than other urban areas that have reliquished state highways with signage continuation agreements....I'm looking your way San Jose with CA 130.

Yeah, 130 signage has sucked for some time now.  The BGS's on US 101 indicating CA 130 on Alum Rock are still intact (although there never has been a similar indication from the I-680/Alum Rock interchange to the east).  It seems as if there is an ad hoc if unofficial policy within the City of San Jose to not expedite through traffic within city limits -- and state signage on city streets may be construed within planning circles as doing just that, so enforcement of post-relinquishment signage agreements isn't going to fall to the city -- and Caltrans certainly isn't going to go out of their way to post signage on roadways they don't maintain.  So the notion of signed continuous routes may be given lip service at best, but follow-through in the field doesn't seem to consistently exist.  And it's probable that San Jose isn't the only CA city to discourage pass-through traffic on surface facilities.

Oh no doubt there is issues with many urban routes.  One that I used to encounter daily was CA 66 which was still somewhat signed albeit poorly up until a couple years back.  The Los Angeles area in general is pretty bad at surface route signage, relinquished or not just in general.  I guess it really just goes back to whatever DOT you're dealing with; be it Caltrans district or something more localized.  Hell Tulare County doesn't even seem to sign County Routes anymore and apparently never sent a memo to anyone that they are basically defunct. 

In regards to CA 130 it certainly seems that the route in general is a problem for the city.  Heading up Mount Hamilton Road there are signs warning you not to pretty much everything under the sun....especially "no parking x miles."  My assumption is that 130 has many a story to tell of locals getting out of control or tourists doing something stupid.  For what its worth though compared to other mountain routes in the state 130 is one of the more tame with the low elevation and mild grade....so score one for the skill level of the average driver? 
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: coatimundi on February 01, 2017, 01:00:43 PM
Quote from: BakoCondors on January 31, 2017, 10:39:23 PM
I took a drive through that area today. The shopping center is gone, as are a large swath of homes and businesses between Stockdale Hwy and California Ave through the Westpark neighborhood that will make up the Corridor's footprint. There is also substantial work going on along the existing 58 freeway east of the 99, widening the 58's footprint and earth moving for the new ramps to connect the Corridor to Hwy 99. It was both exciting, from a roadgeek point of view, and humbling, from a human POV.

These things are so often delayed, that I'm surprised they acted that quickly on it.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: kkt on February 01, 2017, 01:18:31 PM
They had the money in place, and when the finally got permission they acted fast before someone changed their mind again...
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sparker on February 01, 2017, 04:19:48 PM
Quote from: coatimundi on February 01, 2017, 01:00:43 PM
Quote from: BakoCondors on January 31, 2017, 10:39:23 PM
I took a drive through that area today. The shopping center is gone, as are a large swath of homes and businesses between Stockdale Hwy and California Ave through the Westpark neighborhood that will make up the Corridor's footprint. There is also substantial work going on along the existing 58 freeway east of the 99, widening the 58's footprint and earth moving for the new ramps to connect the Corridor to Hwy 99. It was both exciting, from a roadgeek point of view, and humbling, from a human POV.

These things are so often delayed, that I'm surprised they acted that quickly on it.
Quote from: kkt on February 01, 2017, 01:18:31 PM
They had the money in place, and when the finally got permission they acted fast before someone changed their mind again...


Quick reflexes, so to speak, by the jurisdictions tasked with undertaking a project of this sort, will likely become an integral part of the developmental arsenal -- fend off the gadflies before they swarm again by simply having your job well under way (the old fait accompli methodology, updated to suit the times). 
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: BakoCondors on February 04, 2017, 08:52:07 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 01, 2017, 12:13:11 AM
I'm going to disagree on 204 being completely useless.  That is a handy little connector to get from the 178 freeway up to 99 bypassing downtown if you are heading north especially....then again it might not be the worst thing ever if it was absorbed into 178.

Wholeheartedly agree with Max on this. CalTrans thought enough of 204's importance in funneling traffic out of downtown and its link with Olive Drive (exit 28), the main street to the burgeoning northwest communities, that they added dedicated lanes on both directions of 99 between 204 and Olive so that traffic making the northwest-to-downtown trip and vice-versa, wouldn't have to merge with mainline 99 traffic. A side consequence of this is that 204 at F Street where the freeway ends has become a bit of a bottleneck at morning rush. Maybe a short freeway connection between existing 178 and 99 along Golden State (204) wouldn't be a bad idea.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: BakoCondors on February 04, 2017, 09:21:02 PM
Quote from: sparker on February 01, 2017, 12:03:54 AM
Quote from: BakoCondors on January 31, 2017, 11:22:50 PM
Quote from: sparker on November 22, 2016, 09:49:14 PMAt least they'll have the CA 178 sign remaining on the Rosedale BGS; I don't see that highway being rerouted away from its present downtown alignment anytime soon (if someone has info to the contrary, please speak up).

New signage went up on NB 99 last March that eliminated the 178 shield from the BGS at Rosedale/24th. CalTrans relinquished the portion of 178 between M Street and the 99 back in 2011, though there is still signage on both 23rd & 24th Streets linking to the 178 Crosstown Fwy.
(https://scontent-lax3-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t31.0-8/12513749_10209174095767431_8985585053043144000_o.jpg?oh=e1f5cff677fad4c83886499abc8ce6b9&oe=590896BE)

So does that leave CA 178 hanging in downtown -- or is a reroute (perhaps along CA 204/Biz 99 north to CA 99) in the works?  I can't see Caltrans not indicating access to the 178 freeway from somewhere along either CA 99 or CA 58 -- and CA 204 is one of the more useless routes in the state system.  Again, more info, please! :confused:

There is new signage on SB 99 indicating the preferred route to freeway 178 is 204. I'll snap a pic of that and post it here soon. There's also a curious anomaly at the SB 99/204 transition that I've never seen anywhere. Might be worthy of a separate post. A 'freeway entrance' sign on a freeway. I'll let the moderators decide.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FjIB5U6F.jpg&hash=28fb557fe9d4a448b3b4ad892da96b9913a93b7f)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FE0B812y.jpg&hash=2e9353b9be77e20d37e75df99439dde62d5d8917)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FKX387I3.jpg&hash=4d4b41bb021a402c805aadfbdd537e52f96bddcc)
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sparker on February 05, 2017, 05:36:40 AM
Let me clarify my statement about CA 204 being a "useless" route -- since it's multiplexed with Business 99 its entire length, it essentially functions as just that -- a business loop.  However, since I see the CA 178 trailblazer signage from SB 99 indicating 204 as the connector, maybe it does have value as an individual route -- now!  But is there any corresponding trailblazer signage for CA 178 northbound on CA 99?  CA 184 and its southern county extension notwithstanding, it would seem that there would be sufficient traffic movement from 99 north to 178 east that would warrant such signage somewhere -- maybe on the access to 204 south from 99 north?  If anyone local has pix of such signage, please post it.....thanks!
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: AsphaltPlanet on February 05, 2017, 09:15:21 AM
... Maybe getting off topic for this thread... but was there ever a plan to extend Route 178 to Route 99?  It's trajectory through Downtown makes me think not, but it also doesn't seem too logical to have an orphaned freeway route, considering 178 actually goes somewhere east of Bakersfield.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on February 05, 2017, 10:02:14 AM
Quote from: AsphaltPlanet on February 05, 2017, 09:15:21 AM
... Maybe getting off topic for this thread... but was there ever a plan to extend Route 178 to Route 99?  It's trajectory through Downtown makes me think not, but it also doesn't seem too logical to have an orphaned freeway route, considering 178 actually goes somewhere east of Bakersfield.

Yes and it is fairly recent:

http://www.cahighways.org/177-184.html

But considering CA 204 was once part of US 99 it would seem to make sense that the freeway end there given that Bakersfield only had about 56,000 people in 1960.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: BakoCondors on February 06, 2017, 09:53:24 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 05, 2017, 10:02:14 AM
Quote from: AsphaltPlanet on February 05, 2017, 09:15:21 AM
... Maybe getting off topic for this thread... but was there ever a plan to extend Route 178 to Route 99?  It's trajectory through Downtown makes me think not, but it also doesn't seem too logical to have an orphaned freeway route, considering 178 actually goes somewhere east of Bakersfield.

Yes and it is fairly recent:

http://www.cahighways.org/177-184.html

But considering CA 204 was once part of US 99 it would seem to make sense that the freeway end there given that Bakersfield only had about 56,000 people in 1960.

The Centennial Corridor is what's currently being cleared to connect the Westside Pkwy to Hwy 58. Reading the info on CAHighways is the first time I've seen mention of Centennial connecting to 178, though on a boring day at work I augmented a Google Map of the area showing just that, though I envisioned it going though the Westchester neighborhood (which would never in a million years happen given their current tooth-and-nail fight with the city on the 24th St widening project). This sounds like a rehash of the old Bakersfield 2010 General Plan from 1990, which never really got off the ground and have been revised a few times. I'll have to hit the vertical files of the Beale library to do some research. I am intrigued at the prospect.

Another wrinkle to consider: the much-ballyhooed High Speed Rail project is planned to go through the same area as this 178 extension CA Highways mentions.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: BakoCondors on February 06, 2017, 10:04:26 PM
Quote from: sparker on February 05, 2017, 05:36:40 AM
Let me clarify my statement about CA 204 being a "useless" route -- since it's multiplexed with Business 99 its entire length, it essentially functions as just that -- a business loop.  However, since I see the CA 178 trailblazer signage from SB 99 indicating 204 as the connector, maybe it does have value as an individual route -- now!  But is there any corresponding trailblazer signage for CA 178 northbound on CA 99?  CA 184 and its southern county extension notwithstanding, it would seem that there would be sufficient traffic movement from 99 north to 178 east that would warrant such signage somewhere -- maybe on the access to 204 south from 99 north?  If anyone local has pix of such signage, please post it.....thanks!

On northbound 99, not anymore. Before that new sign went up last March, the older one had both 58 and 178 shields on it. I am assuming the relinquishment made CalTrans decide to remove 178. There is one southbound sign that still has 178 on it, but the rest of the signs southbound have been removed while construction is ongoing on the exit ramp from 99 South at Rosedale/24th St. The temporary orange signage has only 58.

Technically there is no direct link from NB 99 to SB 204. While exit 27 southbound is signed for CA 204 Golden State Hwy, as displayed earlier, NB exit 27 is signed as Airport Drive/Oildale, with no mention of either Golden State or CA 204.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: don1991 on March 25, 2017, 02:12:10 AM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 05, 2017, 10:02:14 AM
Quote from: AsphaltPlanet on February 05, 2017, 09:15:21 AM
... Maybe getting off topic for this thread... but was there ever a plan to extend Route 178 to Route 99?  It's trajectory through Downtown makes me think not, but it also doesn't seem too logical to have an orphaned freeway route, considering 178 actually goes somewhere east of Bakersfield.

Yes and it is fairly recent:

http://www.cahighways.org/177-184.html

But considering CA 204 was once part of US 99 it would seem to make sense that the freeway end there given that Bakersfield only had about 56,000 people in 1960.

====

There are no plans to connect the new FUTURE CA-58 Centennial Freeway with the 178.  Too bad but not in the cards.

At one time, Centennial actually was to be more of a 178 extension west to connect to 58 - either via beltway or new alignment.  But this went away.  Instead, Centennial became the route to fix the 58 dead-end situation at Real and connect with the new Westside Parkway (which itself was the new version of the old Kern River Freeway concept) and finally allow a straight route for CA-58.

CA-178 has (for now) been left to die just west of CA-204, as the remaining surface street portion along 24th Street has been relinquished to Bakersfield.

Someday Bakersfield will have to resolve the Crosstown Freeway issue - either upgrade the 178 to 204 to 99 connection (though that is still awkward for those wanting to go south on 99 from 178) or find a way to build the 178 Freeway west to the 99.

Don
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: mrsman on March 26, 2017, 08:35:15 AM
Quote from: don1991 on March 25, 2017, 02:12:10 AM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 05, 2017, 10:02:14 AM
Quote from: AsphaltPlanet on February 05, 2017, 09:15:21 AM
... Maybe getting off topic for this thread... but was there ever a plan to extend Route 178 to Route 99?  It's trajectory through Downtown makes me think not, but it also doesn't seem too logical to have an orphaned freeway route, considering 178 actually goes somewhere east of Bakersfield.

Yes and it is fairly recent:

http://www.cahighways.org/177-184.html

But considering CA 204 was once part of US 99 it would seem to make sense that the freeway end there given that Bakersfield only had about 56,000 people in 1960.

====

There are no plans to connect the new FUTURE CA-58 Centennial Freeway with the 178.  Too bad but not in the cards.

At one time, Centennial actually was to be more of a 178 extension west to connect to 58 - either via beltway or new alignment.  But this went away.  Instead, Centennial became the route to fix the 58 dead-end situation at Real and connect with the new Westside Parkway (which itself was the new version of the old Kern River Freeway concept) and finally allow a straight route for CA-58.

CA-178 has (for now) been left to die just west of CA-204, as the remaining surface street portion along 24th Street has been relinquished to Bakersfield.

Someday Bakersfield will have to resolve the Crosstown Freeway issue - either upgrade the 178 to 204 to 99 connection (though that is still awkward for those wanting to go south on 99 from 178) or find a way to build the 178 Freeway west to the 99.

Don

It would seem to me that an upgrade of 204 would be all that is needed to help 178 to 99 north traffic.  A few spot fixes to get rid of the handful of traffic signals along the stretch.  A full freeway would be unnecessary.

For traffic from Lake Isabella to 99 south, it seems that CA-184 should bear this traffic.  Maybe a few spot widenings would be appropriate here.   Signage already directs traffic bound for Los Angeles to use this route.  Perhaps all traffic heading for CA-99 south of CA-58 and the Westside Parkway (once its connected to CA 58) should just take CA-184 to CA-58 or all the way down to Wheeler Ridge.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on March 26, 2017, 10:25:01 AM
The main problem with the Weedpatch Highway is that has a ton of agricultural development on it and has likewise traffic.  The road is two-lanes and generally isn't something that I think most people would want to take all the way south from 178 down to 223 or I-5.  184 I think is okay for most suburban forays to 58 and I-5 out Lake Isabella, I couldn't ever foresee a realistic upgrade south of 58.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sparker on March 26, 2017, 02:29:56 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on March 26, 2017, 10:25:01 AM
The main problem with the Weedpatch Highway is that has a ton of agricultural development on it and has likewise traffic.  The road is two-lanes and generally isn't something that I think most people would want to take all the way south from 178 down to 223 or I-5.  184 I think is okay for most suburban forays to 58 and I-5 out Lake Isabella, I couldn't ever foresee a realistic upgrade south of 58.

Pretty much the same can be said for most Valley 2-lane state or local routes: a lot of ag traffic (necessarily) getting in the way of through traffic.  Back during my early college days (late '60's-early '70's) I had occasion to head up Weedpatch from Wheeler Ridge en route to Isabella; always thought that the "regular" non-ag traffic I encountered south of 223 warranted a southern extension of 184 all the way to I-5.  These days, with Caltrans attempting to shed as much surface mileage as they can (admittedly, most of which is somewhat more urban), the possibility of this happening falls between zero and "yeah, right!"  I haven't been on this road for several decades; I'll defer to the more local posters to inform the rest of us about current traffic levels and whether Weedpatch deserves enhancement.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: pderocco on May 18, 2017, 04:15:07 AM
On 5/7 I drove around the portion of Bakersfield where the new 58 will be built. It's really happening, folks. They've completely demolished and cleared all the buildings between the existing 58 stub at 99, and California Ave, except for maybe a half dozen houses near the stub that already look unoccupied. The ground is covered with what looks sort of like bark mulch, to keep the dust down, but on closer inspection, it looks like they ground up some of the lumber the houses were made out of. Kind of creepy, if you think about it. They haven't yet torn down any of the businesses in the short gap between California Ave and the Westside Pkwy.

The most recent Google Earth imagery from last October just shows a few cleared lots.

Next up, I guess they'll be rerouting some of the streets and putting in cul-de-sacs. Or is it culs-de-sac?

Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Henry on May 18, 2017, 10:20:08 AM
About time they finished the thing!
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: kkt on May 18, 2017, 02:23:35 PM
Great!  About time.  Too bad California didn't reserve the ROW back in the 50s when it was cheap.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sparker on May 18, 2017, 02:36:35 PM
Quote from: kkt on May 18, 2017, 02:23:35 PM
Great!  About time.  Too bad California didn't reserve the ROW back in the 50s when it was cheap.


Unfortunately, they didn't have an adopted alignment west of 99 until the Westside Parkway plans came about; what was on the books was an inexact corridor concept extending west from the 58/99 freeway interchange (in Caltrans' old cartographic idiom, a line of circles rather than a line of squares, which would have indicated a formally adopted route).  Convoluted as it is, the under-development Westside alignment is the first freeway facility heading west from CA 99 to advance beyond the conceptual. 
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: kkt on May 18, 2017, 07:24:46 PM
Quote from: sparker on May 18, 2017, 02:36:35 PM
Quote from: kkt on May 18, 2017, 02:23:35 PM
Great!  About time.  Too bad California didn't reserve the ROW back in the 50s when it was cheap.


Unfortunately, they didn't have an adopted alignment west of 99 until the Westside Parkway plans came about; what was on the books was an inexact corridor concept extending west from the 58/99 freeway interchange (in Caltrans' old cartographic idiom, a line of circles rather than a line of squares, which would have indicated a formally adopted route).  Convoluted as it is, the under-development Westside alignment is the first freeway facility heading west from CA 99 to advance beyond the conceptual. 

I know, but it should have been obvious it would be needed as soon as the Westside Freeway was adopted for the interstate route.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sparker on May 18, 2017, 08:13:56 PM
Quote from: kkt on May 18, 2017, 07:24:46 PM
Quote from: sparker on May 18, 2017, 02:36:35 PM
Quote from: kkt on May 18, 2017, 02:23:35 PM
Great!  About time.  Too bad California didn't reserve the ROW back in the 50s when it was cheap.


Unfortunately, they didn't have an adopted alignment west of 99 until the Westside Parkway plans came about; what was on the books was an inexact corridor concept extending west from the 58/99 freeway interchange (in Caltrans' old cartographic idiom, a line of circles rather than a line of squares, which would have indicated a formally adopted route).  Convoluted as it is, the under-development Westside alignment is the first freeway facility heading west from CA 99 to advance beyond the conceptual. 

I know, but it should have been obvious it would be needed as soon as the Westside Freeway was adopted for the interstate route.


Despite my avatar, it's not an interstate yet.  The Westside Freeway was a locally planned (if not locally funded) facility; it was touch & go whether a connector to the existing CA 58 freeway east of CA 99 would ever reach fruition (even to the extent that it was thought for a time that it wouldn't even reach CA 99 at any location, much less the 58/99 interchange).  These days, it seems nothing is really obvious to Caltrans; they seem to need to be dragged kicking & screaming into the middle of locally promulgated projects (I suppose persistent underfunding will do that to an agency!).  Head on over to the "Hinkley Bypass" thread in this board -- more on possible Interstate conversion there!
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: kkt on May 19, 2017, 01:48:53 PM
Quote from: sparker on May 18, 2017, 08:13:56 PM
Quote from: kkt on May 18, 2017, 07:24:46 PM
Quote from: sparker on May 18, 2017, 02:36:35 PM
Quote from: kkt on May 18, 2017, 02:23:35 PM
Great!  About time.  Too bad California didn't reserve the ROW back in the 50s when it was cheap.


Unfortunately, they didn't have an adopted alignment west of 99 until the Westside Parkway plans came about; what was on the books was an inexact corridor concept extending west from the 58/99 freeway interchange (in Caltrans' old cartographic idiom, a line of circles rather than a line of squares, which would have indicated a formally adopted route).  Convoluted as it is, the under-development Westside alignment is the first freeway facility heading west from CA 99 to advance beyond the conceptual. 

I know, but it should have been obvious it would be needed as soon as the Westside Freeway was adopted for the interstate route.


Despite my avatar, it's not an interstate yet.  The Westside Freeway was a locally planned (if not locally funded) facility; it was touch & go whether a connector to the existing CA 58 freeway east of CA 99 would ever reach fruition (even to the extent that it was thought for a time that it wouldn't even reach CA 99 at any location, much less the 58/99 interchange).  These days, it seems nothing is really obvious to Caltrans; they seem to need to be dragged kicking & screaming into the middle of locally promulgated projects (I suppose persistent underfunding will do that to an agency!).  Head on over to the "Hinkley Bypass" thread in this board -- more on possible Interstate conversion there!

By Westside Freeway, I mean I-5 up the west side of the valley from Wheeler Ridge to Tracy.  The new freeway from CA 58 at 99 to the west end of Bakersfield is the Westside Parkway.  Confusing choice of names, I know.
The need for the Barstow-Bakersfield route to continue to I-5 should have been obvious by the late 1950s, before west Bakersfield was subdivisions.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sparker on May 19, 2017, 07:53:41 PM
It's likely that all the parties involved in relocating I-5 away from (then) US 99 and onto the Westside Freeway -- for the sake of providing a more direct LA-Bay Area connection -- didn't want to stir up any more local resentment toward their action than was already present; suggesting "spurs" -- Interstate or otherwise -- from I-5 toward the bypassed cities might have done just that after the fact.  An Interstate corridor following CA 58 was proposed as part of the 1968 batch of Interstate additions when that proposal was at the 4K+ mileage level; when it was truncated back to 1500 miles that particular corridor was discarded (CA only got the I-15 extension to San Diego and I-105).  After that, it appears the Division of Highways and, later, Caltrans just seemed to lose interest in the corridor in general.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: mgk920 on May 19, 2017, 09:09:02 PM
Quote from: sparker on May 19, 2017, 07:53:41 PM
It's likely that all the parties involved in relocating I-5 away from (then) US 99 and onto the Westside Freeway -- for the sake of providing a more direct LA-Bay Area connection -- didn't want to stir up any more local resentment toward their action than was already present; suggesting "spurs" -- Interstate or otherwise -- from I-5 toward the bypassed cities might have done just that after the fact.  An Interstate corridor following CA 58 was proposed as part of the 1968 batch of Interstate additions when that proposal was at the 4K+ mileage level; when it was truncated back to 1500 miles that particular corridor was discarded (CA only got the I-15 extension to San Diego and I-105).  After that, it appears the Division of Highways and, later, Caltrans just seemed to lose interest in the corridor in general.

Actually, I-5 was built where it was because it was far easier, faster, and cheaper for Caltrans to do that than it was to upgrade existing US (now CA) 99 to full interstate standards.  It's the same reason why the US 141 routing was made into an interstate (I-43) here in Wisconsin back in the 1970s - it was faster, easier, and cheaper than upgrading the US 41 corridor (now I-41, signed two years ago).

Mike
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sparker on May 19, 2017, 09:46:24 PM
Quote from: mgk920 on May 19, 2017, 09:09:02 PM
Actually, I-5 was built where it was because it was far easier, faster, and cheaper for Caltrans to do that than it was to upgrade existing US (now CA) 99 to full interstate standards.  It's the same reason why the US 141 routing was made into an interstate (I-43) here in Wisconsin back in the 1970s - it was faster, easier, and cheaper than upgrading the US 41 corridor (now I-41, signed two years ago).

Mike

Regardless of the rationale behind the construction of I-5 as it is today, there is more than a little residual resentment emanating from cities along the 99 corridor; this resentment has, on occasion, promulgated the various proposals to elevate CA 99 to Interstate status -- one of which, of course, resulted in the designation of HPC #54 and its future-Interstate status back in 2005.  It's ironic that the overall process in this instance mimics the Wisconsin situation -- an Interstate deployed over what was a secondary (in CA's case, new terrain altogether) intercity corridor but bypassing a string of populated areas lying along an existing arterial route -- which itself was later designated an Interstate (both states' future corridors were established at the same time) with end points more or less at or along the first corridor.  It took 46 years (from the 1968 legislation that resulted in the original Green Bay extension to 2014) to get I-41 designated; we're looking at 61 years and counting (1956-?) for something similar to occur in CA, since CA 99 is a designated future Interstate.  I guess the moral of the story is that if you bypass masses of registered voters, eventually -- if pressure is consistently maintained -- they'll get their Interstate sooner or later.  We'll just have to see what happens in CA in the not-too-distant future.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: ARMOURERERIC on May 20, 2017, 01:15:07 AM
It has been fun watching the slow but sure clearing of ROW.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: BakoCondors on May 23, 2017, 11:20:12 PM
Quote from: pderocco on May 18, 2017, 04:15:07 AM
On 5/7 I drove around the portion of Bakersfield where the new 58 will be built. It's really happening, folks. They've completely demolished and cleared all the buildings between the existing 58 stub at 99, and California Ave, except for maybe a half dozen houses near the stub that already look unoccupied. The ground is covered with what looks sort of like bark mulch, to keep the dust down, but on closer inspection, it looks like they ground up some of the lumber the houses were made out of. Kind of creepy, if you think about it. They haven't yet torn down any of the businesses in the short gap between California Ave and the Westside Pkwy.

The most recent Google Earth imagery from last October just shows a few cleared lots.

Next up, I guess they'll be rerouting some of the streets and putting in cul-de-sacs. Or is it culs-de-sac?

This was published in the Bakersfield Californian on May 15th. The caption read:

The city released an aerial picture of the homes and commercial buildings that have been cleared to build the Centennial Corridor, which will link Highway 58 to the Westside Parkway.
The most recent Thomas Roads Improvement Program project update said the corridor design is 65 percent complete and all except one residence and two commercial buildings have been acquired.


(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FrLDqikf.png&hash=33783447cd6e7bebe397c63b33695b36db86a2a8)
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sparker on May 24, 2017, 01:32:00 AM
Quote from: BakoCondors on May 23, 2017, 11:20:12 PM
The city released an aerial picture of the homes and commercial buildings that have been cleared to build the Centennial Corridor, which will link Highway 58 to the Westside Parkway.
The most recent Thomas Roads Improvement Program project update said the corridor design is 65 percent complete and all except one residence and two commercial buildings have been acquired.


(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FrLDqikf.png&hash=33783447cd6e7bebe397c63b33695b36db86a2a8)


Good call -- that is a bit creepy!  Looks like a swath of chemical warfare hit Bakersfield.  Interesting note about the source of the ground cover (my admittedly occasionally disturbed mind is picturing Charlton Heston running down the cleared corridor yelling "Soylent Beige is Houses!").

But seriously....have any actual physical plans for the freeway been released as of yet? -- such as will it primarily be at ground level, on a berm, sunk, or a combination of all of the above?  I can't imagine those adjacent property owners being too thrilled with the prospect of a ground-level freeway through their midst (fumes, noise, etc.); it's more than likely that very high sound walls will be an integral part of this project.   




Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: compdude787 on May 24, 2017, 01:41:06 AM
Whoa, that's something you don't see very often anymore.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: BakoCondors on May 24, 2017, 11:29:37 PM
Quote from: sparker on May 24, 2017, 01:32:00 AM
But seriously....have any actual physical plans for the freeway been released as of yet? -- such as will it primarily be at ground level, on a berm, sunk, or a combination of all of the above?  I can't imagine those adjacent property owners being too thrilled with the prospect of a ground-level freeway through their midst (fumes, noise, etc.); it's more than likely that very high sound walls will be an integral part of this project.   

There's quite a bit of data online at http://www.bakersfieldcity.us/gov/depts/public_works/bakersfield_freeways/centennial_corridor.htm (http://www.bakersfieldcity.us/gov/depts/public_works/bakersfield_freeways/centennial_corridor.htm), including grades, sound walling etc. for about two-thirds of the route, between the stub end of 58 at Real Rd. and California Ave.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sparker on May 25, 2017, 01:55:54 AM
Quote from: BakoCondors on May 24, 2017, 11:29:37 PM
Quote from: sparker on May 24, 2017, 01:32:00 AM
But seriously....have any actual physical plans for the freeway been released as of yet? -- such as will it primarily be at ground level, on a berm, sunk, or a combination of all of the above?  I can't imagine those adjacent property owners being too thrilled with the prospect of a ground-level freeway through their midst (fumes, noise, etc.); it's more than likely that very high sound walls will be an integral part of this project.   

There's quite a bit of data online at http://www.bakersfieldcity.us/gov/depts/public_works/bakersfield_freeways/centennial_corridor.htm (http://www.bakersfieldcity.us/gov/depts/public_works/bakersfield_freeways/centennial_corridor.htm), including grades, sound walling etc. for about two-thirds of the route, between the stub end of 58 at Real Rd. and California Ave.

Now that's a real roller-coaster profile for such a short distance: looks like coming off the 99 interchange, it's elevated -- then it dips down through the middle of the affected neighborhood, then comes up again on an overpass at California Ave. -- the whole thing can't be more than 0.7-0.8 miles over that stretch.  The only part that's street level is at the midpoint going into and out of the below-grade alignment.  And lots of sound walls!  At this point in time -- and with all the various objections -- this project looks like it's all about the mitigation!  Welcome to roadbuilding 2017!
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: rte66man on May 25, 2017, 09:25:49 AM
I noticed there are no EB 58 to NB 99 and SB 99 to WB 58 ramps.  Was there a stated reason for omitting those movements or was it a cost savings measure?
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Bobby5280 on May 25, 2017, 01:52:26 PM
Maybe they'll add those interchange movements at a later date. It reminds me of when the TX-121 and I-35E stack was first built in Lewisville, TX. Only four of the eight ramp movements were initially built. Now, years later, the other four ramps are being built to complete the five-level stack.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sparker on May 25, 2017, 04:21:14 PM
Quote from: rte66man on May 25, 2017, 09:25:49 AM
I noticed there are no EB 58 to NB 99 and SB 99 to WB 58 ramps.  Was there a stated reason for omitting those movements or was it a cost savings measure?
Quote from: Bobby5280 on May 25, 2017, 01:52:26 PM
Maybe they'll add those interchange movements at a later date. It reminds me of when the TX-121 and I-35E stack was first built in Lewisville, TX. Only four of the eight ramp movements were initially built. Now, years later, the other four ramps are being built to complete the five-level stack.

Because of the very acute angle at which the 58/Centennial extension alignment curves through the area -- and the need to take as few properties as feasible -- it was decided to omit the EB>NB and SB>WB connectors.  Aside from these issues, it was surmised that much of the eventual through traffic on 58 would be coming from SB I-5 or to NB I-5 and that a "reverse" connector to NB 99 wasn't necessary (and vice-versa as well).  Local traffic to the west side of Bakersfield could continue to use the California Ave. and Stockdale Blvd. interchanges as with current practice (I would predict, given Caltrans practice, that the California Ave. exit from SB CA 99 will have auxiliary signage indicating "TO CA 58 West", with corresponding directional signage on EB 58).

That being said, one set of plans for the connector prior to the one under discussion being adopted (and now cleared!) had ramps extending down the side of the Kern River riverbed east to 99; so there's a possibility that if the need for such connectors emerges in the future, they could be deployed on this alternate alignment (they would have to also bridge the BNSF yard perpendicular to CA 99 as well).  It'd be tricky, a tight fit, and by no means cheap -- but it is within the realm of possibility.     
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Bobby5280 on May 25, 2017, 10:30:53 PM
They would need to do something like straddle the missing connector ramps over the BNSF yard to CA-99 in the event either or both CA-58 and CA-99 were to receive Interstate designations. In the case of CA-58, I-40 would seem like an eventual, foregone conclusion. I mean, why go to all that trouble upgrading that corridor to Interstate standards completely between I-5 and CA-99 and the existing CA-58 freeway in Bakersfield if it won't have an Interstate designation?

Even without the scenario of building some long ramps over the BNSF rail yard, in the long term Caltrans could buy out the extra property needed to build a complete directional stack interchange at CA-99 and CA-58. That may be less expensive than the BNSF rail yard concept.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Occidental Tourist on May 25, 2017, 11:53:37 PM
Or you could have a surface connector on Truxton with a loop ramp for the 99 north on-ramp and a right turn only off-ramp.  The biggest costs would be the bridge over the canal for the loop ramp and the need to add auxiliary lanes on 99 between Truxton and Rosedale Highway.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Bobby5280 on May 26, 2017, 12:15:50 AM
Surface connectors? It wouldn't be freeway/Interstate quality. It would be a way of having a partial exit built for Truxton Ave. In that scenario they would only be able to build a half-diamond exit due to the close proximity of ramps for the California Ave. exit on the other side of the railroad tracks. Any flyover ramps or cloverleaf ramps would require just about as much property acquisition as flyovers from the the limited access concept Sparker described.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Occidental Tourist on May 26, 2017, 01:26:25 AM
If the eastbound to northbound movement was a loop ramp, the only land acquisition would be an easement over the existing canal.  And an auxiliary lane should take care of the proximity of both the California Avenue on-ramp and the Rosedale Highway off-ramp.  Particularly if that loop ramp is metered.

Admittedly, it's not ideal, but it's cheap.  And there are lots of circumstances where interstates use surface routings for seldom-used acute angle interchanges, e.g., southbound 15 to eastbound 40 is an exit to Main Street and two stoplights.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: LM117 on May 26, 2017, 08:11:47 AM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on May 25, 2017, 10:30:53 PMIn the case of CA-58, I-40 would seem like an eventual, foregone conclusion. I mean, why go to all that trouble upgrading that corridor to Interstate standards completely between I-5 and CA-99 and the existing CA-58 freeway in Bakersfield if it won't have an Interstate designation?

Because Caltrans. :pan:

I agree that extending I-40 is a no-brainer, considering CA-58's importance as a major freight corridor and, combined with existing I-40, links the Southeast with the S.F. Bay Area and the Pacific Northwest (via link to I-5), while also acting as a bypass of the heavily congested Los Angeles metro.

I think once the entire corridor between Barstow and I-5 is finished, there will be some movement among local officials along the corridor to extend I-40. Whether or not Caltrans will listen is another matter. Caltrans isn't interested in new interstates except I-710's extension.

If Caltrans had the same attitude as TX and NC, you'd better believe that "Future I-40" signs would be plastered all over CA-58.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: mgk920 on May 26, 2017, 03:54:33 PM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on May 26, 2017, 12:15:50 AM
Surface connectors? It wouldn't be freeway/Interstate quality. It would be a way of having a partial exit built for Truxton Ave. In that scenario they would only be able to build a half-diamond exit due to the close proximity of ramps for the California Ave. exit on the other side of the railroad tracks. Any flyover ramps or cloverleaf ramps would require just about as much property acquisition as flyovers from the the limited access concept Sparker described.

Well, making the inbound to outbound turns (either direction) at the I-90/94 Edens/Kennedy split on Chicago's northwest side requires using city streets.

:nod:

Mike
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sparker on May 26, 2017, 04:19:12 PM
Quote from: LM117 on May 26, 2017, 08:11:47 AM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on May 25, 2017, 10:30:53 PMIn the case of CA-58, I-40 would seem like an eventual, foregone conclusion. I mean, why go to all that trouble upgrading that corridor to Interstate standards completely between I-5 and CA-99 and the existing CA-58 freeway in Bakersfield if it won't have an Interstate designation?

Because Caltrans. :pan:

I agree that extending I-40 is a no-brainer, considering CA-58's importance as a major freight corridor and, combined with existing I-40, links the Southeast with the S.F. Bay Area and the Pacific Northwest (via link to I-5), while also acting as a bypass of the heavily congested Los Angeles metro.

I think once the entire corridor between Barstow and I-5 is finished, there will be some movement among local officials along the corridor to extend I-40. Whether or not Caltrans will listen is another matter. Caltrans isn't interested in new interstates except I-710's extension.

If Caltrans had the same attitude as TX and NC, you'd better believe that "Future I-40" signs would be plastered all over CA-58.

This is the reason why any Interstate-designation activity for this or any other CA corridors will likely have to come from the legislative quarter -- likely both state assemblypersons and/or senators from the districts affected by such an action as well as the congressional delegation from the same region -- prompted, of course, by local promoters and officials.  Caltrans won't take the lead on this for this simple reason that they don't want to add additional projects that will disrupt their priorities (they function via a 6-year STIP with projects selected years in advance -- and have enough trouble just keeping to published schedules).  But while they'll initially piss and moan if indeed a corridor is established without their input, they'll subsequently go about their business getting it done -- although projects to do so will be spread over time. 
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: vdeane on May 26, 2017, 10:31:53 PM
Of course, even if it gets done, that doesn't mean they'll bother with the paperwork and resigning once it's complete (see: CA 210, CA 905).
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sparker on May 27, 2017, 02:40:32 AM
Quote from: vdeane on May 26, 2017, 10:31:53 PM
Of course, even if it gets done, that doesn't mean they'll bother with the paperwork and resigning once it's complete (see: CA 210, CA 905).

True, but here we're dealing with a 150-mile intercity corridor, not a truck route/border crossing or an extension of a 3di.  If there's enough political pressure amassed to get this done, you can bet your life savings there will be follow-through that will override Caltrans' lack of such.  Tellingly, there never have been "Future I-210" signs along the state-signed portion of that corridor, although there is (or was as of 2010, the last time I was down that way) "Future I-905" signage along that corridor; IIRC, it was eastbound just east of I-805 and, curiously, was in the form of a white project information sign rather than the standard green stand-alone roadside rectangle.  Nevertheless, in the case of those two routes, the benefits were there regardless of the designation; it's likely that CA 58 will remain a "hybrid" facility (part freeway, part expressway) unless Interstate designation is sought.
 
What I'm getting at here is that while Caltrans probably won't actively seek out Interstate designation for CA 58 or any other corridor, they will allow themselves to be dragged kicking & screaming into the activity once political support for the concept has been demonstrated.  Standing by while getting dragged underneath the bus isn't their nature -- and if the support for Interstate designation is both reasonably vocal and relentless, they'll probably even try to take some of the credit; above all else, they're survivors! 
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: mrsman on May 28, 2017, 11:33:33 PM
Quote from: sparker on May 27, 2017, 02:40:32 AM
Quote from: vdeane on May 26, 2017, 10:31:53 PM
Of course, even if it gets done, that doesn't mean they'll bother with the paperwork and resigning once it's complete (see: CA 210, CA 905).

True, but here we're dealing with a 150-mile intercity corridor, not a truck route/border crossing or an extension of a 3di.  If there's enough political pressure amassed to get this done, you can bet your life savings there will be follow-through that will override Caltrans' lack of such.  Tellingly, there never have been "Future I-210" signs along the state-signed portion of that corridor, although there is (or was as of 2010, the last time I was down that way) "Future I-905" signage along that corridor; IIRC, it was eastbound just east of I-805 and, curiously, was in the form of a white project information sign rather than the standard green stand-alone roadside rectangle.  Nevertheless, in the case of those two routes, the benefits were there regardless of the designation; it's likely that CA 58 will remain a "hybrid" facility (part freeway, part expressway) unless Interstate designation is sought.
 
What I'm getting at here is that while Caltrans probably won't actively seek out Interstate designation for CA 58 or any other corridor, they will allow themselves to be dragged kicking & screaming into the activity once political support for the concept has been demonstrated.  Standing by while getting dragged underneath the bus isn't their nature -- and if the support for Interstate designation is both reasonably vocal and relentless, they'll probably even try to take some of the credit; above all else, they're survivors!

I think the case can be made that an interstate designation here would be highly beneficial for the economy of the SJ Valley.  It will make it stand out as a better bypass of the LA area. 

And given that there is a push in the area for an interstate 9 designation (for the 99) we know that the area understands the importance of the interstate designation for the local economy.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sparker on May 29, 2017, 03:32:05 AM
Quote from: mrsman on May 28, 2017, 11:33:33 PM
Quote from: sparker on May 27, 2017, 02:40:32 AM
Quote from: vdeane on May 26, 2017, 10:31:53 PM
Of course, even if it gets done, that doesn't mean they'll bother with the paperwork and resigning once it's complete (see: CA 210, CA 905).

True, but here we're dealing with a 150-mile intercity corridor, not a truck route/border crossing or an extension of a 3di.  If there's enough political pressure amassed to get this done, you can bet your life savings there will be follow-through that will override Caltrans' lack of such.  Tellingly, there never have been "Future I-210" signs along the state-signed portion of that corridor, although there is (or was as of 2010, the last time I was down that way) "Future I-905" signage along that corridor; IIRC, it was eastbound just east of I-805 and, curiously, was in the form of a white project information sign rather than the standard green stand-alone roadside rectangle.  Nevertheless, in the case of those two routes, the benefits were there regardless of the designation; it's likely that CA 58 will remain a "hybrid" facility (part freeway, part expressway) unless Interstate designation is sought.
 
What I'm getting at here is that while Caltrans probably won't actively seek out Interstate designation for CA 58 or any other corridor, they will allow themselves to be dragged kicking & screaming into the activity once political support for the concept has been demonstrated.  Standing by while getting dragged underneath the bus isn't their nature -- and if the support for Interstate designation is both reasonably vocal and relentless, they'll probably even try to take some of the credit; above all else, they're survivors!

I think the case can be made that an interstate designation here would be highly beneficial for the economy of the SJ Valley.  It will make it stand out as a better bypass of the LA area. 

And given that there is a push in the area for an interstate 9 designation (for the 99) we know that the area understands the importance of the interstate designation for the local economy.

Getting that across to the Congressional delegation representing the area through which both the CA 58 and CA 99 corridors run might not be as easy as one thinks; their party's line strongly discourages support of domestic spending (and the House majority leader hails from Bakersfield, the crux of the matter) -- this is the "reddest" part of CA.  OTOH, since most of the Congressional seats in question are being targeted by the other party for other transgressions that ostensibly negatively affect constituent pocketbooks (this same area includes some of the least affluent areas in the state), there may be local seniment from the delegation at large to demonstrate that they have the best interest of those same constituents at heart.  If the latter scenario prevails in the "best case", there might be some push for designation of a new HPC/future I-40 along CA 58 -- and possibly, as a bonus, a numerical I-designation for the previously-designated (2005) HPC 54 along CA 99 -- with a manifesto for near-term signage.  However, if the party line holds fast, don't expect much until after the 2018 election; since the (D)'s from the Valley tend to be more centrist than in the coastal urban areas, the corridor concepts have a possibility of revisiting at that time if enough of the districts change parties. 

As an observational aside, it's little wonder that road transportation issues have reached an impasse in most jurisdictions (with states such as TX and NC being the exception that illustrates the issue) -- one party is increasingly dominated by activists who discount and disparage automotive travel and even road-bound commerce, while the other is more and more influenced by ideologues who view spending on items not connected to national defense and/or expression of authority is at best unwise and at worst unconstitutional.  They both function in a knee-jerk fashion; one cannot seem to distinguish between the needs of dense urban regions and those of the rural areas in between, while the other wants to wield a broad defunding sword to as many public programs as possible regardless of the consequences.  Meanwhile, inflation continually eats at the effectiveness of whatever funding makes it through the gauntlet, exacerbating the problem.  As a lifelong functioning utilitarian (and registered independent), the whole process is increasingly disheartening as well as dysfunctional. 

Let's just hope the folks on the ground in the affected areas can impress some common sense on their representatives and actually accomplish something useful despite the political posturing they're likely to encounter.       
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: kkt on May 29, 2017, 04:33:28 PM
Perhaps the people in the San Joaquin Valley and desert along 99 and 58 are taking a more nuanced point of view than you give them credit for.  They could support projects that substantially improve safety and capacity like town bypasses and two lanes each way.  At the same time, they could oppose projects that would cost a lot without noticeably improving safety or capacity, like eliminating access to ranch roads and widening shoulders to meet interstate standards.  After all, any way those projects might be funded in today's world would include a large local share.

Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sparker on May 29, 2017, 09:18:34 PM
Quote from: kkt on May 29, 2017, 04:33:28 PM
Perhaps the people in the San Joaquin Valley and desert along 99 and 58 are taking a more nuanced point of view than you give them credit for.  They could support projects that substantially improve safety and capacity like town bypasses and two lanes each way.  At the same time, they could oppose projects that would cost a lot without noticeably improving safety or capacity, like eliminating access to ranch roads and widening shoulders to meet interstate standards.  After all, any way those projects might be funded in today's world would include a large local share.



Actually, that's essentially what's happening right now -- on a step-by-step basis.  CA 58 is indeed being gradually elevated to a divided 4-lane facility; about 85% of the corridor fits this description right now, with a large portion of that being full freeway.  In an earlier post, it was pointed out that there's currently not much in the way of ranch access to 58 over the Tehachapi range, just maintenance access to the adjoining RR tracks and a gated turnoff to a nearby radar installation -- nothing that would impede or conflict with an upgrading process; this sort of situation exists on the 99 corridor as well regarding RR access, even within full-freeway segments.  It's a little different out in the flatlands east of Mojave; between that city and the beginning of the Boron bypass freeway there are multiple access points; some have been turned into channelized intersections, while others remain infrequently-accessed gates to nearby acreage.  But once again, there's nothing particularly vital or that would arouse much in the way of ire out that way as well. 

The point is that there's no evident local opposition to upgrading CA 58 to Interstate standards; there would be no more than marginal disruption to existing usage patterns.  And out in the flat desert, "joisting" off currently gated access to periodic interchanges -- considering the lack of actual commercial enterprises along the route -- would likely be as much welcomed as criticized.  The objections to any such upgrading effort would emanate from the usual suspects -- fiscal hard-liners who generically object to any public effort beyond minimal maintenance, and observers who just don't assign any particular value to such upgrades or designations. 

The full CA 58 corridor east of I-5 will see improvement to at least expressway standards in the near term -- that's being done or planned as we speak/write.  Whether that evolves into an eventual Interstate upgrade remains to be seen; if enough locals -- and those with power/influence in the region -- want it done, we'll all know soon enough! 
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: pderocco on May 31, 2017, 02:52:56 AM
Quote from: sparker on May 29, 2017, 09:18:34 PM
The point is that there's no evident local opposition to upgrading CA 58 to Interstate standards; there would be no more than marginal disruption to existing usage patterns.  And out in the flat desert, "joisting" off currently gated access to periodic interchanges -- considering the lack of actual commercial enterprises along the route -- would likely be as much welcomed as criticized.  The objections to any such upgrading effort would emanate from the usual suspects -- fiscal hard-liners who generically object to any public effort beyond minimal maintenance, and observers who just don't assign any particular value to such upgrades or designations. 

The big obstacle is that it would be a huge expensive project to upgrade 58 going up the canyon from Bakersfield into Tehachapi. And all you'd end up with is a somewhat less curvy road with wider shoulders, but still just as steep with trucks crawling up at 40mph. But if they don't upgrade all of it from I-5 to I-15, it won't become part of I-40.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: pderocco on May 31, 2017, 03:04:06 AM
Quote from: sparker on May 19, 2017, 09:46:24 PM
Regardless of the rationale behind the construction of I-5 as it is today, there is more than a little residual resentment emanating from cities along the 99 corridor; this resentment has, on occasion, promulgated the various proposals to elevate CA 99 to Interstate status -- one of which, of course, resulted in the designation of HPC #54 and its future-Interstate status back in 2005.

It's odd that I-5 up the west side has existed for almost half a century, yet no significant development has taken place along it. It is used almost completely for long haul transportation, basically LA to SF or Sacramento. Given the heavy traffic on 99, fueling a constant demand for more lanes, I can't imagine the residents of the cities along that route "resenting" that the long haul traffic got diverted to the other side of the valley. They should be counting their blessings.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: kkt on May 31, 2017, 01:25:04 PM
Quote from: pderocco on May 31, 2017, 03:04:06 AM
Quote from: sparker on May 19, 2017, 09:46:24 PM
Regardless of the rationale behind the construction of I-5 as it is today, there is more than a little residual resentment emanating from cities along the 99 corridor; this resentment has, on occasion, promulgated the various proposals to elevate CA 99 to Interstate status -- one of which, of course, resulted in the designation of HPC #54 and its future-Interstate status back in 2005.

It's odd that I-5 up the west side has existed for almost half a century, yet no significant development has taken place along it. It is used almost completely for long haul transportation, basically LA to SF or Sacramento. Given the heavy traffic on 99, fueling a constant demand for more lanes, I can't imagine the residents of the cities along that route "resenting" that the long haul traffic got diverted to the other side of the valley. They should be counting their blessings.

There's been roadside services developed.  Back in the day, there were very few gas stations, fast food places, or hotels along I-5.  Now most exits have at least gas and food.

The land next to I-5 is not very useful for agriculture.  Not enough water and poor soil, unlike the valley floor.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sparker on May 31, 2017, 03:28:52 PM
Quote from: kkt on May 31, 2017, 01:25:04 PM
Quote from: pderocco on May 31, 2017, 03:04:06 AM
Quote from: sparker on May 19, 2017, 09:46:24 PM
Regardless of the rationale behind the construction of I-5 as it is today, there is more than a little residual resentment emanating from cities along the 99 corridor; this resentment has, on occasion, promulgated the various proposals to elevate CA 99 to Interstate status -- one of which, of course, resulted in the designation of HPC #54 and its future-Interstate status back in 2005.

It's odd that I-5 up the west side has existed for almost half a century, yet no significant development has taken place along it. It is used almost completely for long haul transportation, basically LA to SF or Sacramento. Given the heavy traffic on 99, fueling a constant demand for more lanes, I can't imagine the residents of the cities along that route "resenting" that the long haul traffic got diverted to the other side of the valley. They should be counting their blessings.

There's been roadside services developed.  Back in the day, there were very few gas stations, fast food places, or hotels along I-5.  Now most exits have at least gas and food.

The land next to I-5 is not very useful for agriculture.  Not enough water and poor soil, unlike the valley floor.


North of Coalinga, I-5 is sited on the east alluvial of the Coast Range; this, as KKT states, is very poor soil (mostly pulverized rock) for agricultural purposes; however, south of there down to just about the 5/99 split, the typical land is loam soil, good for crops such as cotton, hay, and some deciduous fruits and nuts (purportedly very good for pistachios, almonds, and even cherries).

But the north segment on the alluvial is seeing another form of activity: "overflow" suburbs spilling over from the Bay Area -- and, because of the distances involved, priced considerably lower than even Tracy or Manteca, the longstanding centers of long-distance commute action.  Normally isolated towns such as Patterson and even Gustine have seen tract development between I-5 and CA 33.  I suppose since nothing else profitable will grow in these locations, may as well plant houses! 
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: kkt on May 31, 2017, 03:47:32 PM
Houses where people commute to the Bay Area, but too far and not dense enough to serve by public transit, so they end up in horrible SOV commutes.  I feel sorry for them.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sparker on May 31, 2017, 09:50:06 PM
Quote from: kkt on May 31, 2017, 03:47:32 PM
Houses where people commute to the Bay Area, but too far and not dense enough to serve by public transit, so they end up in horrible SOV commutes.  I feel sorry for them.


After newcomers to the area see the prices of real estate in the Bay Area, they're often relieved to see 2500-3000 square feet available east of the Coast Range for $275K or thereabouts.  Gustine's a bit of a stretch by any means (usually this appeals to folks working from San Jose south to Hollister who can use 152 & 33 to get home), but folks from Patterson north can get themselves up to the Tracy ACE station and take the train into Silicon Valley -- and now there's solid plans afoot to extend the ACE service down to Modesto, Turlock, and even Merced (now that's an uber-commute!).  Shopping for other things besides groceries is presently a bit of a pain in the ass (according to a friend who lives in Patterson) -- usually done by "trip-chaining" the leg from the train station to home.  But if these "outer exurbs" continue to grow, expect the larger chain stores to deploy outlets nearby.  Not an ideal situation by any means, but to fiscally strapped homebuyers, one of the few avenues available to acquire property. 
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Bobby5280 on June 01, 2017, 03:23:31 PM
Quote from: sparkerAs an observational aside, it's little wonder that road transportation issues have reached an impasse in most jurisdictions (with states such as TX and NC being the exception that illustrates the issue) -- one party is increasingly dominated by activists who discount and disparage automotive travel and even road-bound commerce, while the other is more and more influenced by ideologues who view spending on items not connected to national defense and/or expression of authority is at best unwise and at worst unconstitutional.  They both function in a knee-jerk fashion; one cannot seem to distinguish between the needs of dense urban regions and those of the rural areas in between, while the other wants to wield a broad defunding sword to as many public programs as possible regardless of the consequences.  Meanwhile, inflation continually eats at the effectiveness of whatever funding makes it through the gauntlet, exacerbating the problem.  As a lifelong functioning utilitarian (and registered independent), the whole process is increasingly disheartening as well as dysfunctional.

Our nation's leadership is suffering from a lot of self-inflicted wounds. Congress' ban on earmarks is one such example. Pork-barrel spending has no stopped despite the earmark ban. However, the earmark ban itself has eliminated a lot of the deal-making activity that allows opposing party members to reach across the aisle to get things done. It has also allowed those on the political left and right to become more extreme and hard-lined in their views (mostly whoring themselves to the most rabidly "pure" camps in their voting base). Sensible, practical, middle of the road leadership from moderates, centrists and independents is disappearing. Sadly I only see this getting worse as our voting public continues to get dumber and more emotional by the minute.

It will be interesting to see what happens over the next 10-20 years. The United States' position as the world's top global and cultural power will be challenged. China would love to supersede the US. They're currently out-building the hell out of us on road and rail infrastructure. But how long can they sustain it? Their national debt is 2.5X their GDP. Meanwhile America is trying hard to price itself out of being able to build any big things. The far ends of the political left and right have their own issues with infrastructure spending. But they've lost touch with the fact Americans have historically put a lot of national pride into our ability to build big things.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sparker on June 01, 2017, 04:40:00 PM
The right bemoans the fact that the American default position is no longer as disciples of traditional values and practices, while the left whines about the fact that we're too willful as individuals and not self-loathing enough as a species to concede the ideological high road to their largely communitarian ideals.  It's like two boxers who have retreated to their corners; neither has the real strength to continue the fight, so they just come out each round, clinch each other and inflict meaningless body punches until the bell.  Rinse and repeat!  And we spectators don't have a lot of recourse; between gerrymandered districts and the great urban/rural/sociopolitical/socioeconomic divides, a situation of cynical stasis has been attained.  The results of this past election shows that the practice of setting foxes loose in every public-sector henhouse simply exacerbates the problems rather than either fixing them or forcing a completely new set of viewpoints.  Regardless of who won last November's election, the arena containing the nation's transportation issues would still be in a holding pattern -- no one has figured out how to address the runaway inflation regarding both the materials and labor required to effect progress.  It's a dysfunctional illustration of Kingdon's principle of the effective policy "garbage can"; a series of partisan solutions in search of problems that can be "massaged" or reframed to make a fit.  At this juncture, there's no practical way out of the quagmire. 

All this could be discussed and dissected ad infinitum; but the funny thing is that by the time this was even close to being hashed out by current and future posters (likely to no particular conclusion), the CA 58/Centennial Extension would be open to traffic!  And I agree that road development efforts proceeded much more smoothly when earmarks and reciprocal favors could be negotiated and traded freely -- and that process gave the Congressional critters something to do besides pontificating about ideals that none of them will ever achieve much less impress upon their constituents!     
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: andy3175 on June 28, 2017, 12:57:13 AM
Although some of this information is dated, here's an April 21, 2017 article on status of multiple Bakersfield road projects including Centennial Corridor:

http://www.bakersfield.com/news/bakersfield-freeway-building-what-s-done-what-s-to-come/article_70b2361f-afdd-5acb-93b2-e6ee76e657bf.html

Quote1. Beltway Operational Improvements

Details: Provides traffic improvements along Highway 58, from Highway 99 to Cottonwood Road, and adds a lane in either direction along Highway 99 in the area between Ming Avenue and Wilson Road.

Status: 60 percent complete; completion expected in early 2018

...

2. Highway 178 Widening

Details: Widens the highway from two to six lanes from just east of Morning Drive to Masterson Street and from two to four lanes from Masterson to Miramonte Drive. Masterson, Alfred Harrell Highway, Miramonte and Highway 184 will be realigned and/or widened where they intersect with 178.

Status: 85 percent complete; completion expected in May 2017

...

3. Southbound Highway 99 auxiliary lane/Rosedale Highway off-ramp improvements

Status: 95 percent complete; completion expected this month

IN DESIGN AND RIGHT-OF-WAY ACQUISITION

4. 24th Street Improvement Project

Details: Widens, realigns and restripes 24th Street from west of Highway 99 to east of M Street; realigns and restripes 23rd from west of C Street to east of M Street to add a lane in each direction. Also includes improvements to the 24th Street/Highway 99 interchange and the northbound 99 auxiliary lane; widens the Oak Street/24th Street intersection.

Status: Design 65 percent complete; right-of-way acquisition 100 percent complete

The project designer is working to complete the sound wall construction plans. Sound walls for properties on the north side of 24th Street could begin in summer 2017.

Demolition work is underway on the north side of 24th Street. Five houses have been removed; eight houses are scheduled for demolition in April.

...

5. Truxtun Avenue/Oak Street Intersection Operational Improvements

Details: Widens Truxtun to three lanes in both directions between Empire Drive and Elm Street.

Status: Design 100 percent complete; right-of-way acquisition 65 percent complete

Timeline for the lane expansion is subject to receiving permits from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and Army Corps of Engineers.

6. Hageman Flyover

Details: Connects Hageman Road to Golden State Highway/Highway 204 with roadway across Highway 99.

Status: Design 95 percent complete; right-of-way acquisition 0 percent complete

Caltrans is finalizing draft plans. The city is working with San Joaquin Valley Railroad on a construction and maintenance agreement and a California Public Utilities Commission permit application. Right-of-way appraisals and acquisition will not begin until design has progressed to 100 percent.

7. Centennial Corridor

Details: Connects Highway 58 to the Westside Parkway with possible connections to southbound Highway 99.

Status: Design 65 percent complete; right-of-way acquisition 98 percent complete

Final design, right-of-way acquisitions of single-family properties, and demolition activities are underway. To date, 202 of the 222 houses and retail properties have been demolished.

The City Council has approved purchase agreements for 192 single family properties (99 percent of what must be acquired); nine multi-family properties (100 percent of what must be acquired); and 17 commercial/industrial properties (89 percent of what must be acquired). Sewer, local streets, screen wall and sound wall packages are being prepared and work is expected to begin in summer 2017.

On March 29, the City Council awarded the $41.1 million contract for the Kern River Bridge Improvements Project to Security Paving Company.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sparker on June 28, 2017, 05:24:18 PM
I do hope that the plans to connect the Centennial Corridor to the existing portion of CA 58 east of CA 99 include an additional lane on CA 58 out to the section that's already 6 lanes -- which should have been done 38 years ago when the facility was first opened (thanks, Ms. Gianturco!) :pan: Otherwise, expect nasty traffic backups!
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: compdude787 on June 29, 2017, 08:55:17 PM
At least they left enough room in the median to widen CA 58 to 6 lanes.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sparker on June 29, 2017, 09:16:39 PM
Quote from: compdude787 on June 29, 2017, 08:55:17 PM
At least they left enough room in the median to widen CA 58 to 6 lanes.

That's solely because with a stroke of a pen back about 1976 what was left of the CA 58 project east of CA 99 was cut back abruptly to 2+2 from 3+3.  The engineers did the only rational thing possible and cut the dropped lane from the median; the sole saving grace of that whole situation. 
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: pderocco on September 01, 2017, 02:22:47 PM
Aerial imagery from June just popped up on Google Maps and Google Earth (but you have to turn off 3D).
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sparker on September 04, 2017, 02:20:46 AM
Yowza!!  And that image was from almost 3 months ago.  Obviously this project has been prioritized in a fashion not seen in CA for some time (likely a highly cooperative arrangement between the local MPO and Caltrans!).  One can only hope that they see fit to widen CA 58 immediately east of CA 99 out to its originally (pre-Gianturco days at Caltrans) planned 6 lanes!

Also: does anyone know if an alignment west of the existing Westside Parkway out to I-5 has been selected as of yet?  If so, we'd sure appreciate some info!  :nod:
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: TheStranger on October 24, 2017, 05:54:12 PM
Just discovered this drone video of the Centennial Corridor right of way, also showing how the shopping center that was at Real Road has been mostly cleared out now:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U9MHcvcHkKA&feature=youtu.be
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: kkt on October 24, 2017, 06:54:52 PM
Quote from: TheStranger on October 24, 2017, 05:54:12 PM
Just discovered this drone video of the Centennial Corridor right of way, also showing how the shopping center that was at Real Road has been mostly cleared out now:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U9MHcvcHkKA&feature=youtu.be

Nice video!  Like the shot of the building being demolished...
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on December 01, 2017, 07:11:48 PM
Took a spin on the Westside Parkway after clinching CA 43 this morning:

https://www.flickr.com/gp/151828809@N08/qjf431

http://surewhynotnow.blogspot.com/2017/12/westside-parkway-and-centennial.html
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: oscar on December 01, 2017, 07:57:15 PM
Quote from: sparker on June 29, 2017, 09:16:39 PM
Quote from: compdude787 on June 29, 2017, 08:55:17 PM
At least they left enough room in the median to widen CA 58 to 6 lanes.

That's solely because with a stroke of a pen back about 1976 what was left of the CA 58 project east of CA 99 was cut back abruptly to 2+2 from 3+3.  The engineers did the only rational thing possible and cut the dropped lane from the median; the sole saving grace of that whole situation. 

Maybe in that situation, but down in northern San Diego County when I lived in the area, when Ms. Gianturco ordered a new I-15 segment reduced from 4+4 to 2+2, the engineers turned the deleted travel lanes into 12-foot wide concrete shoulders, while keeping bridge widths intact. That way, a later administration could (and did) restore 4+4 just by adding asphalt shoulders alongside the concrete ones, then restriping the old shoulders into new travel lanes.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sparker on December 02, 2017, 03:33:23 PM
Quote from: oscar on December 01, 2017, 07:57:15 PM
Quote from: sparker on June 29, 2017, 09:16:39 PM
Quote from: compdude787 on June 29, 2017, 08:55:17 PM
At least they left enough room in the median to widen CA 58 to 6 lanes.

That's solely because with a stroke of a pen back about 1976 what was left of the CA 58 project east of CA 99 was cut back abruptly to 2+2 from 3+3.  The engineers did the only rational thing possible and cut the dropped lane from the median; the sole saving grace of that whole situation. 

Maybe in that situation, but down in northern San Diego County when I lived in the area, when Ms. Gianturco ordered a new I-15 segment reduced from 4+4 to 2+2, the engineers turned the deleted travel lanes into 12-foot wide concrete shoulders, while keeping bridge widths intact. That way, a later administration could (and did) restore 4+4 just by adding asphalt shoulders alongside the concrete ones, then restriping the old shoulders into new travel lanes.

Yeah, Gianturco was quite blind as to context, preferring to either eliminate road projects completely or reduce them to their legal minimum (she couldn't do much about Interstate construction except to do that minimum plus delay lettings whenever she could).  The only saving grace to her Caltrans administration was that some questionable urban routings that had been hanging around since the '50's were finally deleted (along with a bunch of more worthy alignments!).   To Caltrans engineers, '75-'83 were the "wilderness" years.  Ironically, the next (Deukmejian) state administration was "penny-pinching" in nature; it took some time to get things rolling after 1983.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Techknow on February 13, 2018, 12:38:57 PM
It looks like the city of Bakersfield has posted an update on their progress. The flyover doesn't look too different from before, but according to a couple news articles all ROW has been acquired by now. Also at the beginning, construction of Phase 1 is currently underway
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sparker on February 13, 2018, 05:21:27 PM
Quote from: Techknow on February 13, 2018, 12:38:57 PM
It looks like the city of Bakersfield has posted an update on their progress. The flyover doesn't look too different from before, but according to a couple news articles all ROW has been acquired by now. Also at the beginning, construction of Phase 1 is currently underway


Question: are they starting construction (the above mentioned Phase One) from the west (Kern River bridge) or east (CA 99 interchange) end?  -- the corridor portion pictured in the post doesn't indicate this. 
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Techknow on February 13, 2018, 11:27:13 PM
Quote from: sparker on February 13, 2018, 05:21:27 PM
Question: are they starting construction (the above mentioned Phase One) from the west (Kern River bridge) or east (CA 99 interchange) end?  -- the corridor portion pictured in the post doesn't indicate this.
I noticed that the previous video update had the drone head north along the corridor but for the latest update the drone was heading south instead (the video ends at the SR 58/99 interchange). So it appears the phase one construction is at the Kern River Bridge
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sparker on February 15, 2018, 12:19:13 AM
Quote from: Techknow on February 13, 2018, 11:27:13 PM
Quote from: sparker on February 13, 2018, 05:21:27 PM
Question: are they starting construction (the above mentioned Phase One) from the west (Kern River bridge) or east (CA 99 interchange) end?  -- the corridor portion pictured in the post doesn't indicate this.
I noticed that the previous video update had the drone head north along the corridor but for the latest update the drone was heading south instead (the video ends at the SR 58/99 interchange). So it appears the phase one construction is at the Kern River Bridge

Thanks!  That actually is to be expected, given the present iteration of Caltrans -- since the (arguably) most expensive part of the construction will be the ramps to CA 99, it'll be put off until the final phase.  Quite a turnaround from the '50's and '60's heyday -- they did the most difficult portions first (possibly to forestall interim inflation, but more likely to avoid the generation of controversy).  Adhering to that program allowed many corridor completions, particularly in urban areas, before the onset of the "freeway revolt" circa 1965-73 (a method to their madness!?).   
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Techknow on June 18, 2018, 04:02:27 PM
Another news article (http://www.bakersfield.com/news/with-funding-in-place-city-speeding-along-with-centennial-corridor/article_41d43442-6c3b-11e8-bf7d-436cac412725.html) has cropped up with some important updates:
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: kkt on June 18, 2018, 04:17:30 PM
Yay for funded projects!
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sparker on June 19, 2018, 10:36:43 AM
Quote from: Techknow on June 18, 2018, 04:02:27 PM
Another news article (http://www.bakersfield.com/news/with-funding-in-place-city-speeding-along-with-centennial-corridor/article_41d43442-6c3b-11e8-bf7d-436cac412725.html) has cropped up with some important updates:

  • Funding for the entire project is complete, including $50 million from the federal DOT
  • Multiple phases of the project will begin or have begun this year, but not the construction of the corridor itself
  • Currently, the target completion date is 2022, which is in four years!

When referring to the "entire project", does that terminology cover (a) simply the in-town connector between the existing parkway and the 58/99 interchange or (b) the whole shooting match out to I-5?  If the latter, securing funding to do so is in itself a miracle! -- and, hopefully, we'll finally see some actual plans for the 5/58 interchange (my money's on an elongated trumpet). 
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: kkt on June 19, 2018, 12:16:17 PM
I think the funding is just the in-town connection.

When an interchange with I-5 is built, I hope it doesn't have any missing movements.  The movements two and from west of I-5 might be done with a stoplight, but they should not require merging onto 5 and then exiting.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sparker on June 19, 2018, 04:18:37 PM
Quote from: kkt on June 19, 2018, 12:16:17 PM
I think the funding is just the in-town connection.

When an interchange with I-5 is built, I hope it doesn't have any missing movements.  The movements two and from west of I-5 might be done with a stoplight, but they should not require merging onto 5 and then exiting.


Since there will be two I-5/CA 58 interchanges when the Westside extension is done -- likely along Stockdale -- I don't think that there will be any facility extension at the southern/Westside interchange that would require signalization (unless Caltrans decides to do cheap & dirty here); I think the Westside extension will be free-flowing onto NB 5, with a trumpet loop and corresponding ramp being the contrary moves.  Of course, the existing 5/58 Buttonwillow interchange will remain as is, but serving CA 58 west of I-5, with CA 58 multiplexed over I-5 between the two interchanges.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: kkt on June 19, 2018, 04:29:59 PM
Stockdale Highway continues west of I-5 a few miles.  I'd hope there will be a direct connection to/from the Westside Extension to Stockdale Highway west of I-5.    Not a freeway, but at least an overpass and 2-lane road.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sparker on June 19, 2018, 05:56:44 PM
Quote from: kkt on June 19, 2018, 04:29:59 PM
Stockdale Highway continues west of I-5 a few miles.  I'd hope there will be a direct connection to/from the Westside Extension to Stockdale Highway west of I-5.    Not a freeway, but at least an overpass and 2-lane road.


It's likely that the Westside Parkway will parallel Stockdale (too many private access points on the existing road), with a separate interchange with I-5 rather than something "piggybacking" on the present interchange; an extension of Stockdale west of I-5 probably won't have any bearing on the transition between I-5 and CA 58 (unless, as I've said before, Caltrans "cheaps out" and eschews a freeway-to-freeway interchange).  But considering the effort put into the in-town connector, it would seem appropriate for D6 to just build CA 58 as a full freeway.

But, OTOH, there's the longstanding CA 14 to CA 58 discrepancy to consider as a precedent.  Let's just hope they don't pull that shit on the Westside!
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: pderocco on June 22, 2018, 12:12:24 AM
I just drove through the construction. Not much going on in the residential area, besides a few of the cross streets being turned into cul-de-sacs. But they're pouring their effort into building the overpass over Truxton Ave.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: TheStranger on November 05, 2018, 01:10:04 AM
https://bakersfieldnow.com/news/local/belle-terrace-overpass-closed-until-spring-2020
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sparker on November 05, 2018, 03:20:00 AM
Quote from: TheStranger on November 05, 2018, 01:10:04 AM
https://bakersfieldnow.com/news/local/belle-terrace-overpass-closed-until-spring-2020

Looks as if this project is being expedited rather than done in discrete "chunks"; the cited closure is so that CA 99 to CA 58 (and vice-versa) ramps can be constructed.  And it looks like in doing so a few substandard (in this case low-clearance) features of CA 99, common in facilities constructed in the very early 1960's, are being dealt with as well.  Good to see progress continuing here. 
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: pderocco on July 15, 2019, 01:34:50 AM
Not much progress in the residential areas, but the interchange and bridges at the north end are coming along. There's some work at the south end of the project, but I couldn't see what it really is by driving by on Real Rd.

When it's done, I'm wondering if CA-58 along Rosedale Hwy and the piece between CA-43 and I-5 will be relinquished. The other possibility is that they could renumber it back to CA-178, as it was before 1964. That would be kind of cool.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: TheStranger on July 15, 2019, 04:20:39 AM
Quote from: pderocco on July 15, 2019, 01:34:50 AM

When it's done, I'm wondering if CA-58 along Rosedale Hwy and the piece between CA-43 and I-5 will be relinquished. The other possibility is that they could renumber it back to CA-178, as it was before 1964. That would be kind of cool.


IIRC some of the Route 58 surface routing between 99 and 43 has already been relinquished, though I'm not yet sure how all that is signed.

Biggest thing that I am super curious about with, long-term - how much less traffic will 46 have between 5 and 99 once 58/Westside Parkway becomes the preferred route west of the metro area?
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sparker on July 15, 2019, 05:25:51 AM
From what I know, the surface portion of CA 58 within Bakersfield city limits (and west of CA 99) has been relinquished; Caltrans still maintains the portion west of there to CA 43 and then on to I-5.  That pretty much sinks the idea of a CA 178 re-designation of that route.  I haven't driven on the relinquished portion since that action was taken; have no idea how much CA 58 reassurance signage remains.  Regarding the potential of the Westside to relieve some traffic from CA 46 -- that's somewhat intriguing.  Traffic heading to Bakersfield on CA 46 from the central coast area (SLO, Paso Robles) tends to stay on 46 all the way to CA 99, but traffic coming south on I-5 seems to wait until CA 58 at Buttonwillow before exiting onto the surface road.  Part of that may be the possibility of hitting signals at Wasco (although I've never found that to be a particular problem) -- but more likely that the shorter distance of CA 58 (despite the right-angle "jog" on CA 43) from I-5 east to CA 99 has been the deciding factor there.  It certainly would be interesting to see "before & after" traffic counts on CA 58 at, say, the Bakersfield west city limits as well as CA 46 between Wasco and CA 99 to see just how much that decreases once the Westside is completed all the way out to I-5.  As a side note -- it would also be interesting to see if diverging eastward CA 58 traffic at a new interchange south of the current folded diamond/frontage road configuration at Buttonwillow has a devastating effect on the roadside businesses located at the present interchange.  Presuming the new facility will be a free-flow type (semi-directional Y or a large trumpet would be my guess as to interchange format), there wouldn't be much opportunity to establish travel-related commercial facilities at that location.   
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: ranger5830 on August 02, 2019, 11:59:24 AM
I was just on 58 between Buttonwillow and Bakersfield and headed eastbound there are a couple "TO 58" shields with a straight arrow, indicating relinquishment, between Allen and Coffee Roads.  Then there is a standard East 58 shield at Mohawk Rd, about a mile west of 99, which would indicate it is still a state highway at that point.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: I94RoadRunner on February 10, 2020, 10:43:24 PM
Quote from: pderocco on July 15, 2019, 01:34:50 AM
Not much progress in the residential areas, but the interchange and bridges at the north end are coming along. There's some work at the south end of the project, but I couldn't see what it really is by driving by on Real Rd.

When it's done, I'm wondering if CA-58 along Rosedale Hwy and the piece between CA-43 and I-5 will be relinquished. The other possibility is that they could renumber it back to CA-178, as it was before 1964. That would be kind of cool.

IMHO I still believe that Caltrans should instead consider numbering Rosedale Hwy, the Westside Parkway, and Centennial Corridor as CA 40 and then replace CA 58 eastward all the way to Barstow as CA 40. The reason is that since any upgrade to I-40 would still be a long way off, it still could be a continuous number from I-5 to the start of I-40. CA 58 could just stay where it is from CA 99 (Future I-9) westward .....
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Kniwt on February 10, 2020, 11:02:51 PM
Here's a picture taken last week from Marella Way, a little west of Real Road, looking south.

(https://i.imgur.com/pxxvMUD.jpg)
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: skluth on February 10, 2020, 11:53:59 PM
Quote from: I94RoadRunner on February 10, 2020, 10:43:24 PM
Quote from: pderocco on July 15, 2019, 01:34:50 AM
Not much progress in the residential areas, but the interchange and bridges at the north end are coming along. There's some work at the south end of the project, but I couldn't see what it really is by driving by on Real Rd.

When it's done, I'm wondering if CA-58 along Rosedale Hwy and the piece between CA-43 and I-5 will be relinquished. The other possibility is that they could renumber it back to CA-178, as it was before 1964. That would be kind of cool.

IMHO I still believe that Caltrans should instead consider numbering Rosedale Hwy, the Westside Parkway, and Centennial Corridor as CA 40 and then replace CA 58 eastward all the way to Barstow as CA 40. The reason is that since any upgrade to I-40 would still be a long way off, it still could be a continuous number from I-5 to the start of I-40. CA 58 could just stay where it is from CA 99 (Future I-9) westward .....
That would be great. Unfortunately, it makes far too much sense to ever be implemented.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sparker on February 11, 2020, 07:08:06 PM
Quote from: skluth on February 10, 2020, 11:53:59 PM
Quote from: I94RoadRunner on February 10, 2020, 10:43:24 PM
Quote from: pderocco on July 15, 2019, 01:34:50 AM
Not much progress in the residential areas, but the interchange and bridges at the north end are coming along. There's some work at the south end of the project, but I couldn't see what it really is by driving by on Real Rd.

When it's done, I'm wondering if CA-58 along Rosedale Hwy and the piece between CA-43 and I-5 will be relinquished. The other possibility is that they could renumber it back to CA-178, as it was before 1964. That would be kind of cool.

IMHO I still believe that Caltrans should instead consider numbering Rosedale Hwy, the Westside Parkway, and Centennial Corridor as CA 40 and then replace CA 58 eastward all the way to Barstow as CA 40. The reason is that since any upgrade to I-40 would still be a long way off, it still could be a continuous number from I-5 to the start of I-40. CA 58 could just stay where it is from CA 99 (Future I-9) westward .....
That would be great. Unfortunately, it makes far too much sense to ever be implemented.

The corridor (at least east of Bakersfield) was US 466 for 30 years; it's been CA 58 for 56 years -- the only thing that could supplant it would be an Interstate 40 designation.   The expense of changing every sign for the 160 miles from the west end of the Westside to I-15 from CA 58 to a CA 40 would be prohibitive -- particularly for a decidedly "placeholder" number;  Caltrans would likely laugh that one off in short order (although they would do it for an Interstate, grumbling all the while). 

An unrelated and largely random thought:  Has anyone ever noticed that both CA and OR have state highways numbered 58 that connect the interior/eastern part of the state with the southern end of the state's major agricultural valley?  And that they are both paralleled by UP/former SP main lines over the intervening mountain range?  (OK, the similarities pretty much end there!).     
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on February 11, 2020, 09:20:24 PM
At this point I'd settle for a free flowing expressway alignment of CA 58 west of CA 43 over an extension of I-40.  With the Kramer Junction and Hinkley bypasses complete it's hard to argue that traffic doesn't flow properly even with at-grade intersections.  As cool as it would be to have an extension of I-40 routes like US 101, CA 198, and even CA 152 prove that expressways can still have value in rural corridors. 
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Kniwt on February 12, 2020, 12:14:42 AM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 11, 2020, 09:20:24 PM
With the Kramer Junction and Hinkley bypasses complete it's hard to argue that traffic doesn't flow properly even with at-grade intersections. 

If Caltrans ever finds the money to do more work on 58, first priority should be a climbing lane toward Tehachapi. I've lost track of how many times I've been held up by semis* doing the slow-motion uphill tango, 27mph passing 25mph.

* And for the benefit of actual professional truck drivers, who have a difficult job already, let me stress that I'm referring only to unskilled, rude drivers (not just truckers) who don't consider their actions on other road users. The same thing applies to giant motorhomes towing giant SUVs doing 27mph in the left lane.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: kkt on February 12, 2020, 01:09:01 AM
Quote from: I94RoadRunner on February 10, 2020, 10:43:24 PM
Quote from: pderocco on July 15, 2019, 01:34:50 AM
Not much progress in the residential areas, but the interchange and bridges at the north end are coming along. There's some work at the south end of the project, but I couldn't see what it really is by driving by on Real Rd.

When it's done, I'm wondering if CA-58 along Rosedale Hwy and the piece between CA-43 and I-5 will be relinquished. The other possibility is that they could renumber it back to CA-178, as it was before 1964. That would be kind of cool.

IMHO I still believe that Caltrans should instead consider numbering Rosedale Hwy, the Westside Parkway, and Centennial Corridor as CA 40 and then replace CA 58 eastward all the way to Barstow as CA 40. The reason is that since any upgrade to I-40 would still be a long way off, it still could be a continuous number from I-5 to the start of I-40. CA 58 could just stay where it is from CA 99 (Future I-9) westward .....

That would make sense.

Perhaps they'll just renumber it once, after the CA 58 to Westside Parkway and Westside Parkway to I-5 connections are done.

Modified:  Also, the mileage signs and exit numbers for I-40 start at Barstow.  If CA 58 is made in CA 40 or I-40, it'll be a lot of work to change them, and confuse people who are used to giving directions...
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sparker on February 12, 2020, 03:39:30 AM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 11, 2020, 09:20:24 PM
At this point I'd settle for a free flowing expressway alignment of CA 58 west of CA 43 over an extension of I-40.  With the Kramer Junction and Hinkley bypasses complete it's hard to argue that traffic doesn't flow properly even with at-grade intersections.  As cool as it would be to have an extension of I-40 routes like US 101, CA 198, and even CA 152 prove that expressways can still have value in rural corridors. 

In basic agreement on the type of facility that would be appropriate for a western extension of the Westside/58 facility to I-5; for the present, either an expressway or full freeway would do.  My only concern is with the actual connection to I-5; if Caltrans elects to "piggyback" on the present Stockdale diamond interchange (with no or even minimal improvements) or build a non-free-flowing new interchange (SPUI, parclo, or DDI included) it would tend to put limits on the E-W corridor's long-term prospects.  A trumpet -- "biased" for traffic to NB I-5 and from SB I-5 would be ideal as well as cost-effective as to the actual structures required; the facility at the other end of the effective corridor -- the I-15/CA 58 Barstow trumpet -- could well serve as a model for this, adjusted for topology.  While not posing immediate prospects for doing so, it's likely that over the next several decades CA 58 will be upgraded to a full freeway, possibly featuring Interstate-grade standards -- one remaining piece at a time, as with the various 4-laning projects.   It would be short-sighted to build interim facilities that would limit or give pause to upgrading efforts down the line. 
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: stevashe on February 13, 2020, 10:36:56 AM
Quote from: kkt on February 12, 2020, 01:09:01 AM

Modified:  Also, the mileage signs and exit numbers for I-40 start at Barstow.  If CA 58 is made in CA 40 or I-40, it'll be a lot of work to change them, and confuse people who are used to giving directions...

Actually, not really. California doesn't use mileposts and I don't see any reason why the existing postmiles can't be kept since they're mainly for maintenance use anyway.

As for the exit numbers, I-40 has a whopping 21 exits despite its 155 mile length in California so I don't think it's too much of an ask to change them, and since most of those are in the middle of the desert I doubt much confusion would ensue from changing them either.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on February 13, 2020, 10:45:09 AM
Quote from: stevashe on February 13, 2020, 10:36:56 AM
Quote from: kkt on February 12, 2020, 01:09:01 AM

Modified:  Also, the mileage signs and exit numbers for I-40 start at Barstow.  If CA 58 is made in CA 40 or I-40, it'll be a lot of work to change them, and confuse people who are used to giving directions...

Actually, not really. California doesn't use mileposts and I don't see any reason why the existing postmiles can't be kept since they're mainly for maintenance use anyway.

As for the exit numbers, I-40 has a whopping 21 exits despite its 155 mile length in California so I don't think it's too much of an ask to change them, and since most of those are in the middle of the desert I doubt much confusion would ensue from changing them either.

The problem is the Post Mile paddles would still refer to Route 58.  Almost all freeway interchange exits in California now have conventional mileage based exit numbers.  To that end the reworking of even the minor signage would substantial. 
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: vdeane on February 13, 2020, 12:52:17 PM
If the postmiles are used for maintenance purposes, not traveler navigation, would they need to change?  NY's reference markers don't (they actually can't, because there are numerous paper records, PDF documents, word/excel files, etc. referencing them).
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: kkt on February 13, 2020, 05:31:46 PM
So as you roam around NY there are lots of reference markers kept with the routes as they were in the 1910s even if they have changed many times since?  That sounds like it would confuse everybody, travelers and maintenance workers alike.

All of current I-40 in California is in San Bernadino County.  The current postmiles are from I-15 in Barstow.  If I-40 were extended along CA 58 to I-5, the convention would be for all the postmiles in San Bernadino County to be measured from the Kern-San Bernadino County Line, so they'd either all need to be changed or live with a confusing situation of the first 30 miles or so being duplicated.

Some exits on CA 58 have exit numbers as well.

I'm not saying these changes would be impossible, but they will make the project a bit more expensive and they should definitely try to do it only once rather than once as far west as CA 99 and then again to I-5 in a few years.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sparker on February 13, 2020, 05:58:15 PM
^^^^^^^^^^
All existing green mileposts and exit signage on CA 58 are based upon that route's western terminus at US 101 near Santa Margarita in San Luis Obispo County.   It'll be interesting to see if exit numbers on the Westside, once completed at least east to CA 99, follow in that fashion -- and whether they will reflect any multiplex with I-5 as well.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: vdeane on February 13, 2020, 08:41:37 PM
Quote from: kkt on February 13, 2020, 05:31:46 PM
So as you roam around NY there are lots of reference markers kept with the routes as they were in the 1910s even if they have changed many times since?  That sounds like it would confuse everybody, travelers and maintenance workers alike.

All of current I-40 in California is in San Bernadino County.  The current postmiles are from I-15 in Barstow.  If I-40 were extended along CA 58 to I-5, the convention would be for all the postmiles in San Bernadino County to be measured from the Kern-San Bernadino County Line, so they'd either all need to be changed or live with a confusing situation of the first 30 miles or so being duplicated.

Some exits on CA 58 have exit numbers as well.

I'm not saying these changes would be impossible, but they will make the project a bit more expensive and they should definitely try to do it only once rather than once as far west as CA 99 and then again to I-5 in a few years.

The system isn't that old... but yes, there are quite a few that reflect the state of the touring route system in the 1960s/70s (I-390 near Wayland reads 245 instead of 390I, for example, because it was part of NY 245 when the system was established).  It doesn't really confuse anyone because they're not intended for travelers - only for internal DOT use.  I imagine most people don't notice them and wouldn't know how to read them if they did.  In any case, they're used to correlate things like accident reports with real-world locations, so they're not supposed to change (although a few have anyways).  Granted, unlike California, New York also uses regular milemarkers on most interstates and major freeways.

Short explanation: http://nysroads.com/ref-markers.php
Long explanation: http://www.empirestateroads.com/rm/
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: ClassicHasClass on February 13, 2020, 10:13:24 PM
QuoteIf the postmiles are used for maintenance purposes, not traveler navigation, would they need to change?

Yes, because the signed route number is the legislative route number (since 1964).

That said, look at how many CA 30 postmiles are still on CA 210. There's a funny view near Redlands on the EB carriageway just before the San Bernardino Ave exit with a CA 210 shield next to an old CA 30 postmile.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on February 13, 2020, 10:32:25 PM
Quote from: ClassicHasClass on February 13, 2020, 10:13:24 PM
QuoteIf the postmiles are used for maintenance purposes, not traveler navigation, would they need to change?

Yes, because the signed route number is the legislative route number (since 1964).

That said, look at how many CA 30 postmiles are still on CA 210. There's a funny view near Redlands on the EB carriageway just before the San Bernardino Ave exit with a CA 210 shield next to an old CA 30 postmile.

And I would add that Post Mile paddles can be a navigational aid if you know how to read them.  The suffixed letters are really handing determining how many realignments have taken place since the 1964 Renumbering.  They aren't anywhere near as intuitive as Mile Markers but offer way more information.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: vdeane on February 14, 2020, 01:17:57 PM
Quote from: ClassicHasClass on February 13, 2020, 10:13:24 PM
QuoteIf the postmiles are used for maintenance purposes, not traveler navigation, would they need to change?

Yes, because the signed route number is the legislative route number (since 1964).

That said, look at how many CA 30 postmiles are still on CA 210. There's a funny view near Redlands on the EB carriageway just before the San Bernardino Ave exit with a CA 210 shield next to an old CA 30 postmile.
But does that matter for something as lowly as a maintenance marker?  Are you telling me that every time California moves/extends/renumbers a road, every single accident report, paving record, etc. that had occurred to that point becomes incorrect?  That's the reason why NY's reference markers aren't supposed to change - so you can look at all the accident reports for a location, and then go out into the field and find the exact location where they occurred.  We're not even supposed to change what they're mounted to, because they're supposed to correlate and exact real-world location to all our records since the beginning of time itself.

They're also not the only mileage inventory.  There's also a milepoint system that is similar but not identical that resets strictly on county lines (not sure what they do if a route enters a county multiple times), and in addition to both of those, the actual signed milemarkers (for routes that have them).

Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 13, 2020, 10:32:25 PM
And I would add that Post Mile paddles can be a navigational aid if you know how to read them.  The suffixed letters are really handing determining how many realignments have taken place since the 1964 Renumbering.  They aren't anywhere near as intuitive as Mile Markers but offer way more information.
I would think that "if you know how to read them" would disqualify them as a navigational aid.  I use reference markers in the same way, though they're really not intended for that.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: stevashe on February 14, 2020, 11:19:28 PM
Yes, I do realize that normally the postmiles would start where current CA 58 crosses into San Bernardino County and count up from there, meaning the pole mile paddle on current I-40 would need to change, but as vdeane has noted, the post miles shouldn't change existing crash records referencing them won't be broken. That's why the realignment suffixes Max mentioned two posts up exist in the first place; so the whole route doesn't need to be re-postmiled with all the post miles continually changing and messing various records up. Now, if Caltrans didn't want CA 58 post miles on I-40, they could just use a suffix is they wish. I think D (for duplication) would work just fine. My point was only referring to the current section of I-40, however, and like I said, nothing would need to change there, just slap a panel over the exit numbers  to update them (there can't be more than 120 signs worst case assuming 3 per exit per direction) and call it a day.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on February 15, 2020, 12:11:51 AM
Quote from: stevashe on February 14, 2020, 11:19:28 PM
Yes, I do realize that normally the postmiles would start where current CA 58 crosses into San Bernardino County and count up from there, meaning the pole mile paddle on current I-40 would need to change, but as vdeane has noted, the post miles shouldn't change existing crash records referencing them won't be broken. That's why the realignment suffixes Max mentioned two posts up exist in the first place; so the whole route doesn't need to be re-postmiled with all the post miles continually changing and messing various records up. Now, if Caltrans didn't want CA 58 post miles on I-40, they could just use a suffix is they wish. I think D (for duplication) would work just fine. My point was only referring to the current section of I-40, however, and like I said, nothing would need to change there, just slap a panel over the exit numbers  to update them (there can't be more than 120 signs worst case assuming 3 per exit per direction) and call it a day.

The irony there is that I-40 and US 66 were part of Legislative Route 58.  I'm not all that familiar with pre-1964 Post Mile paddles but I'm assuming that they used the Legislative Route rather than the Sign Route?
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sparker on February 15, 2020, 12:23:17 AM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 15, 2020, 12:11:51 AM
Quote from: stevashe on February 14, 2020, 11:19:28 PM
Yes, I do realize that normally the postmiles would start where current CA 58 crosses into San Bernardino County and count up from there, meaning the pole mile paddle on current I-40 would need to change, but as vdeane has noted, the post miles shouldn't change existing crash records referencing them won't be broken. That's why the realignment suffixes Max mentioned two posts up exist in the first place; so the whole route doesn't need to be re-postmiled with all the post miles continually changing and messing various records up. Now, if Caltrans didn't want CA 58 post miles on I-40, they could just use a suffix is they wish. I think D (for duplication) would work just fine. My point was only referring to the current section of I-40, however, and like I said, nothing would need to change there, just slap a panel over the exit numbers  to update them (there can't be more than 120 signs worst case assuming 3 per exit per direction) and call it a day.

The irony there is that I-40 and US 66 were part of Legislative Route 58.  I'm not all that familiar with pre-1964 Post Mile paddles but I'm assuming that they used the Legislative Route rather than the Sign Route?

IIRC, there were many fewer paddles but, like the current system, did reset at county lines.  And they did refer to the relevant LRN; the SSR designations were strictly for navigation; all funding and projects were apportioned to an LRN.   Most of the paddles I remember seeing were at or near structures, such as culverts under roadways as well as actual bridges.  Interestingly, there seemed to be more white markers identifying FAP and FAS routes than those delineating LRN's.   But I also remember a couple of FAU paddles along Front Street in downtown Burbank when that street hosted US 99/6 before 1957, when it was "plowed under" to make room for I-5/Golden State Freeway.   
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: ClassicHasClass on February 17, 2020, 12:40:18 AM
QuoteBut does that matter for something as lowly as a maintenance marker?  Are you telling me that every time California moves/extends/renumbers a road, every single accident report, paving record, etc. that had occurred to that point becomes incorrect?

I don't know what they do with old records, but yes, the postmiles are expected to change. If they change the road alignment, it may get marked with an R or M indicating the road was realigned (M is a double realignment) or an L for linking or lengthening.

As an example, former CA 109 in San Diego was absorbed into I-8 as an extension to Nimitz Blvd/Sunset Cliffs Blvd in 1972. Since I-8's original terminus was I-5 and CA 109 extended west of that, Caltrans yanked the Route 109 postmiles and replaced them with Route 8 postmiles marked L so that it didn't have to recompute all the mileage east of that point to the Arizona state line. I have pictures of this but I don't have them posted yet.

However, as another example actually in the field, compare Kearny Villa Rd (former US 395, briefly I-15) with modern I-15: https://www.floodgap.com/roadgap/395/old/u3/#img_30
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: ClassicHasClass on February 17, 2020, 12:43:06 AM
QuoteI'm not all that familiar with pre-1964 Post Mile paddles but I'm assuming that they used the Legislative Route rather than the Sign Route?

No. The current postmile system didn't exist until the 1964 Great Renumbering. Prior to this the Division of Highways used station markers. Here's one on old US 399 next to an even older C-block in Taft: https://www.floodgap.com/roadgap/399/u6/#img_46
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: kkt on February 17, 2020, 09:38:04 PM
Quote from: ClassicHasClass on February 17, 2020, 12:40:18 AM
QuoteBut does that matter for something as lowly as a maintenance marker?  Are you telling me that every time California moves/extends/renumbers a road, every single accident report, paving record, etc. that had occurred to that point becomes incorrect?

I don't know what they do with old records, but yes, the postmiles are expected to change. If they change the road alignment, it may get marked with an R or M indicating the road was realigned (M is a double realignment) or an L for linking or lengthening.

As an example, former CA 109 in San Diego was absorbed into I-8 as an extension to Nimitz Blvd/Sunset Cliffs Blvd in 1972. Since I-8's original terminus was I-5 and CA 109 extended west of that, Caltrans yanked the Route 109 postmiles and replaced them with Route 8 postmiles marked L so that it didn't have to recompute all the mileage east of that point to the Arizona state line. I have pictures of this but I don't have them posted yet.

However, as another example actually in the field, compare Kearny Villa Rd (former US 395, briefly I-15) with modern I-15: https://www.floodgap.com/roadgap/395/old/u3/#img_30

Quote from: ClassicHasClass on February 17, 2020, 12:43:06 AM
QuoteI'm not all that familiar with pre-1964 Post Mile paddles but I'm assuming that they used the Legislative Route rather than the Sign Route?

No. The current postmile system didn't exist until the 1964 Great Renumbering. Prior to this the Division of Highways used station markers. Here's one on old US 399 next to an even older C-block in Taft: https://www.floodgap.com/roadgap/399/u6/#img_46

Thank you, these are both very helpful!  So if CA 58 from Barstow to CA 99 is made into I-40, it might get "L" prefixed numbers with the CA 58 mileage.  Then they'd just need exit numbers, but as pointed out there are not huge numbers of them.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sprjus4 on February 17, 2020, 09:43:07 PM
Wouldn't it just be simpler to renumber all the mile markers and exits? There would be more cost upfront, but better in the long run, continuity, less confusion, etc.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: stevashe on February 17, 2020, 11:08:49 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on February 17, 2020, 09:43:07 PM
Wouldn't it just be simpler to renumber all the mile markers and exits? There would be more cost upfront, but better in the long run, continuity, less confusion, etc.

We are proposing to renumber all the exits. As for mile markers, Caltrans does not post them. If you're referring to post mile paddles, they're only really for maintenance purposes so lack of continuity isn't really an issue.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sparker on February 18, 2020, 12:23:33 AM
Quote from: stevashe on February 17, 2020, 11:08:49 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on February 17, 2020, 09:43:07 PM
Wouldn't it just be simpler to renumber all the mile markers and exits? There would be more cost upfront, but better in the long run, continuity, less confusion, etc.

We are proposing to renumber all the exits. As for mile markers, Caltrans does not post them. If you're referring to post mile paddles, they're only really for maintenance purposes so lack of continuity isn't really an issue.

Caltrans has never bought into the need for mile markers -- hell, it wasn't until 1995 that they started to post exit numbers statewide on both Interstate and longer-distance state routes (as necessary for discontinuous freeways).  Part of the reasons for the reluctance to number exits was, frankly, to single out CA as a place where impersonal references such as exit numbers weren't particularly welcome; a phrase tossed around in CT's Sacramento HQ in the early '90's when pressure was being felt to capitulate to the national standard was: "Hey, we're NOT New Jersey!" in reference to the cliche' that NJ folks described their location by NJT exit numbers, as in "I live off Exit 7!".  But the argument regarding systemic consistency vs. iconoclasm eventually went in favor of the former.

That being said -- ironically, CA 58 is one of the few places where the mile-marker concept was tested (Mojave bypass, 2003) -- but not duplicated. 
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: TheStranger on February 18, 2020, 03:46:05 PM
Quote from: sparker on February 18, 2020, 12:23:33 AM

Caltrans has never bought into the need for mile markers -- hell, it wasn't until 1995 that they started to post exit numbers statewide on both Interstate and longer-distance state routes (as necessary for discontinuous freeways).  Part of the reasons for the reluctance to number exits was, frankly, to single out CA as a place where impersonal references such as exit numbers weren't particularly welcome; a phrase tossed around in CT's Sacramento HQ in the early '90's when pressure was being felt to capitulate to the national standard was: "Hey, we're NOT New Jersey!" in reference to the cliche' that NJ folks described their location by NJT exit numbers, as in "I live off Exit 7!".  But the argument regarding systemic consistency vs. iconoclasm eventually went in favor of the former.


IIRC the first new exit numbering installations in California were ca. 2001 (I remember discussions about this on misc.transport.road back in that era).  Prior to that, there was an experimental program in the Los Angeles metro area in 1971 with center-tabbed mileage based numbers, some of which can still be found near downtown Los Angeles.  For the 1971 project, numbering was installed on the following:

- parts of the Harbor Freeway and Pasadena Freeway (Arroyo Seco Parkway) around the Four-Level Interchange

- the entirety of the US 101 segment of the Santa Ana Freeway

- the portion of Santa Ana Freeway/I-5 from US 101 to just before the Long Beach Freeway

- the San Bernardino Freeway from US 101 to about 5-10 miles east (though 1980s Rand McNally maps showed numbering further out, I can only remember seeing it go for a short distance east)
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sparker on February 18, 2020, 05:09:40 PM
^^^^^^^^^^^^
The current exit sign installation on the Santa Ana/I-5 Freeway was in process about the time I moved from Oregon down to Anaheim Hills in the spring of 1997; it had extended north onto the Golden State portion of I-5 by early 1998.  The 1970-71 Caltrans "experiment" with exit numbers did include portions of the I-10/San Bernardino Freeway, including the segment cited above; a second segment from the CA 57/71/(then) I-210 interchange near Pomona (which was only partially in use then) out to the L.A. County Line (the city limit line of Pomona and Montclair to the east in San Bernardino County) was likewise signed.  The signage commencing at US 101 extended east to the CA 19/Rosemead Blvd. interchange; it's likely it wasn't extended farther because the segment of that freeway through El Monte and West Covina was in the process of being widened at the time, and several ramp configurations were changed as well.   Curiously, the secondary signs on the Rosemead Blvd. C/D lanes straddling the main I-10 carriageways were changed in 1970 to read the actual legislated number of the surface road, CA 164 (although all the reassurance signage on Rosemead still read CA 19!).  That was corrected back to CA 19 in the fall of 1972, and hasn't changed since then, although much of CA 19 has been relinquished (depending upon the local jurisdictions' whims). 
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: ClassicHasClass on February 19, 2020, 12:16:38 AM
QuoteSo if CA 58 from Barstow to CA 99 is made into I-40, it might get "L" prefixed numbers with the CA 58 mileage.

That's one possible solution (to use PMs for Route 40 with L mileage from Barstow west), but the L designation would only have to be to the Kern county line (i.e., Boron) since postmiles reset at county borders.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sparker on February 19, 2020, 12:45:16 AM
Quote from: ClassicHasClass on February 19, 2020, 12:16:38 AM
QuoteSo if CA 58 from Barstow to CA 99 is made into I-40, it might get "L" prefixed numbers with the CA 58 mileage.

That's one possible solution (to use PMs for Route 40 with L mileage from Barstow west), but the L designation would only have to be to the Kern county line (i.e., Boron) since postmiles reset at county borders.

Since the Kern County portion of CA 58 begins at the San Luis Obispo/Kern county line west of McKittrick -- and it's likely I-40 wouldn't extend west of I-5, some 30-odd miles east of there, exit numbers would likely have to be changed in both affected counties -- along with the postmiles within Kern County (of course, the San Bernardino County section wouldn't change save combining the CA 58 and extant I-40 mileages).  But the postmile paddles would need to be themselves changed to reflect the numerical change from "58" to "40", so it's likely that a fresh calculus of mileages reflecting the route from I-5 to the county line near Boron would be reflected in the new set of white postings.  Knowing Caltrans' usual practice here, if the route number changed, new postmile indicators would be cobbled up at the D6 and D8 paint shops to replace the old markers -- a lot more efficient than altering the existing ones in the field.  If that is the case, letter prefixes such as "L" would be moot, at least in Kern County.     








Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: pderocco on February 27, 2020, 12:25:00 AM
Why don't they just use negative mile numbers when the lengthen it to the west? I know there's no precedent for that, but hey, they're just numbers. You can still subtract to find the distance between any two exits.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: pderocco on February 27, 2020, 12:31:07 AM
BTW, I drove through the construction zone on 2/15, and the Truxton Ave OC is structurally mostly done, but it ends in a big pile of dirt. Not much to show for the California Ave OC. It looks like the freeway will dip down in order to go underneath (I think) Marella Way. Not much work yet on the Stockdale Hwy OC, but the Real Rd OC is pretty far along.

All in all, it seems to be going pretty slowly, compared to the Kramer Junction Bypass project.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sprjus4 on February 27, 2020, 07:02:05 AM
Quote from: pderocco on February 27, 2020, 12:25:00 AM
Why don't they just use negative mile numbers when the lengthen it to the west? I know there's no precedent for that, but hey, they're just numbers. You can still subtract to find the distance between any two exits.
Confusion with positive mile numbers.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sparker on February 27, 2020, 02:06:47 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on February 27, 2020, 07:02:05 AM
Quote from: pderocco on February 27, 2020, 12:25:00 AM
Why don't they just use negative mile numbers when the lengthen it to the west? I know there's no precedent for that, but hey, they're just numbers. You can still subtract to find the distance between any two exits.
Confusion with positive mile numbers.

If the number "40" is applied to the entirety of CA 58 -- regardless of the final configuration of the Westside -- it'll likely include a resetting of mileage-based exit numbers to the 5/40 interchange, wherever that is, and proceeding east from there all the way to the AZ state line, like with all Interstates.  CA doesn't worry about mileposts, so it's just the exit numbers that would be affected -- and there are damn few of them currently posted between I-15 and AZ.  That being said -- all this is purely speculative; if Caltrans can't be bothered to sign currently appropriate Interstate mileage (do remember that much of that is in D8, the home of most of CA 210!), the prospects for an I-40 are indeed presently "fictional" in nature -- especially since it isn't all freeway, and plans to upgrade it to such don't currently exist.  The chances of my avatar being posted west of Barstow are under today's circumstances slim and none!  :-(
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: BakoCondors on February 29, 2020, 10:37:23 AM
Quote from: sparker on February 13, 2020, 05:58:15 PM
^^^^^^^^^^
All existing green mileposts and exit signage on CA 58 are based upon that route's western terminus at US 101 near Santa Margarita in San Luis Obispo County.   It'll be interesting to see if exit numbers on the Westside, once completed at least east to CA 99, follow in that fashion...

I would think they would. The existing signage has space reserved for exit numbers. My guess based on the 58/99 interchange currently being exit 110: the exits at Mohawk St would be 108, Coffee Rd 107, Calloway Dr 105 and Allen Rd 104. That's incumbent on the Parkway being transferred from City of Bakersfield to CalTrans control.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: coatimundi on March 07, 2020, 10:46:41 PM
Quote from: BakoCondors on February 29, 2020, 10:37:23 AM
Quote from: sparker on February 13, 2020, 05:58:15 PM
^^^^^^^^^^
All existing green mileposts and exit signage on CA 58 are based upon that route's western terminus at US 101 near Santa Margarita in San Luis Obispo County.   It'll be interesting to see if exit numbers on the Westside, once completed at least east to CA 99, follow in that fashion...

I would think they would. The existing signage has space reserved for exit numbers. My guess based on the 58/99 interchange currently being exit 110: the exits at Mohawk St would be 108, Coffee Rd 107, Calloway Dr 105 and Allen Rd 104. That's incumbent on the Parkway being transferred from City of Bakersfield to CalTrans control.

And maybe I'm missing in this thread where the info is on Caltrans (or anyone) actually wishing CA 58 to be moved. Because it's not just about putting it onto the Westside Parkway, but also onto Stockdale Highway, which would be a big deal considering that Stockdale is a county road and not really up to state highway standards in a lot of places. I think Caltrans is just as cognizant as others as to the fact that route numbers are less significant than they once were since most people will just plug it in to their GPS. Personally, I think the exit numbers of the Westside Parkway will be sequential, going east to west, for a long time after it's finished. I realize that will create a discrepancy between the numbers west of 99 and east of 99, but they won't overlap, and I don't think anyone will be too confused by it.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sparker on March 08, 2020, 03:40:17 AM
Quote from: coatimundi on March 07, 2020, 10:46:41 PM
Quote from: BakoCondors on February 29, 2020, 10:37:23 AM
Quote from: sparker on February 13, 2020, 05:58:15 PM
^^^^^^^^^^
All existing green mileposts and exit signage on CA 58 are based upon that route's western terminus at US 101 near Santa Margarita in San Luis Obispo County.   It'll be interesting to see if exit numbers on the Westside, once completed at least east to CA 99, follow in that fashion...

I would think they would. The existing signage has space reserved for exit numbers. My guess based on the 58/99 interchange currently being exit 110: the exits at Mohawk St would be 108, Coffee Rd 107, Calloway Dr 105 and Allen Rd 104. That's incumbent on the Parkway being transferred from City of Bakersfield to CalTrans control.

And maybe I'm missing in this thread where the info is on Caltrans (or anyone) actually wishing CA 58 to be moved. Because it's not just about putting it onto the Westside Parkway, but also onto Stockdale Highway, which would be a big deal considering that Stockdale is a county road and not really up to state highway standards in a lot of places. I think Caltrans is just as cognizant as others as to the fact that route numbers are less significant than they once were since most people will just plug it in to their GPS. Personally, I think the exit numbers of the Westside Parkway will be sequential, going east to west, for a long time after it's finished. I realize that will create a discrepancy between the numbers west of 99 and east of 99, but they won't overlap, and I don't think anyone will be too confused by it.

If the Westside Freeway were to continue to exist as a stand-alone locally maintained facility, I'd venture that it wouldn't employ exit numbers at all.  But because it's going to be a functional western extension of CA 58 when the connecting freeway is finished, it'll likely simply use exit numbers counting backwards, mileage-wise, from 110, the current 58/99 interchange number from the 58 POV.  Whether those numbers will post only over the new section under construction at this time or extend over the previously constructed Westside all the way out to the terminus at Stockdale will likely depend upon any maintenance negotiations between the city and Caltrans.   
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: BakoCondors on March 08, 2020, 10:26:40 PM
Stockdale Hwy is is much better condition that the current two-lane 58 west of Bakersfield. If it's not up to state highway standards, it's close to them. I've driven it many times. It wouldn't take much work or dollars to bring it up to standard. Rerouting 58 onto Stockdale would also eliminate the discontinuity at Enos Lane (Hwy 43).

I'll have to do some research to confirm but I believe the plan for the Parkway has always been transferring operational control to CalTrans upon the completion of the Centennial Corridor. We'll see... :cool:
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: skluth on March 08, 2020, 10:36:03 PM
Quote from: coatimundi on March 07, 2020, 10:46:41 PM
And maybe I'm missing in this thread where the info is on Caltrans (or anyone) actually wishing CA 58 to be moved. Because it's not just about putting it onto the Westside Parkway, but also onto Stockdale Highway, which would be a big deal considering that Stockdale is a county road and not really up to state highway standards in a lot of places. I think Caltrans is just as cognizant as others as to the fact that route numbers are less significant than they once were since most people will just plug it in to their GPS.

Honestly, I don't think it matters if anyone wants CA 58 or a new number on the Westside Parkway and Stockdale Highway. You're right that it doesn't matter if GPS units direct drivers to the route and make it the de facto route. I'm more concerned as to whether the current Stockdale Highway will be able to handle the increased traffic, especially truck traffic which might outstrip the current road's design. 
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sparker on March 09, 2020, 02:40:22 AM
Quote from: skluth on March 08, 2020, 10:36:03 PM
Quote from: coatimundi on March 07, 2020, 10:46:41 PM
And maybe I'm missing in this thread where the info is on Caltrans (or anyone) actually wishing CA 58 to be moved. Because it's not just about putting it onto the Westside Parkway, but also onto Stockdale Highway, which would be a big deal considering that Stockdale is a county road and not really up to state highway standards in a lot of places. I think Caltrans is just as cognizant as others as to the fact that route numbers are less significant than they once were since most people will just plug it in to their GPS.

Honestly, I don't think it matters if anyone wants CA 58 or a new number on the Westside Parkway and Stockdale Highway. You're right that it doesn't matter if GPS units direct drivers to the route and make it the de facto route. I'm more concerned as to whether the current Stockdale Highway will be able to handle the increased traffic, especially truck traffic which might outstrip the current road's design. 

Truck traffic has been using CA 58 between I-5 and CA 99 for 40+ years now, including the "jog" on CA 43 requiring a couple of right-angle turns.  Unless the underpinning of Stockdale is significantly less robust than that of the current highway, there should be no issues (save some as of yet unknown loss of business for the roadside businesses at the current 5/58 junction) with trucks using Stockdale west to I-5.  But with Caltrans' historic reluctance to assume maintenance of county roads, I wouldn't be at all surprised if, at least in the interim until plans for the Westside to extend all the way to I-5 are finalized, they only assume ownership of Stockdale west to CA 43, functionally extending the aforementioned "jog" southward, which would, if some traffic continues to use the signed route, keep the Buttonwillow businesses happy for the time being -- although many GPS-equipped folks, commercial drivers included, may simply stay on Stockdale to I-5 anyway.  At that point Caltrans could go ahead and relinquish all of present 58 between 43 and 99, not just that segment within Bakersfield city limits. 
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: coatimundi on March 10, 2020, 12:43:25 PM
Quote from: skluth on March 08, 2020, 10:36:03 PM
Quote from: coatimundi on March 07, 2020, 10:46:41 PM
And maybe I'm missing in this thread where the info is on Caltrans (or anyone) actually wishing CA 58 to be moved. Because it's not just about putting it onto the Westside Parkway, but also onto Stockdale Highway, which would be a big deal considering that Stockdale is a county road and not really up to state highway standards in a lot of places. I think Caltrans is just as cognizant as others as to the fact that route numbers are less significant than they once were since most people will just plug it in to their GPS.

Honestly, I don't think it matters if anyone wants CA 58 or a new number on the Westside Parkway and Stockdale Highway. You're right that it doesn't matter if GPS units direct drivers to the route and make it the de facto route. I'm more concerned as to whether the current Stockdale Highway will be able to handle the increased traffic, especially truck traffic which might outstrip the current road's design.

I would imagine the people who bought into that stretch of Stockdale west of the parkway's current end would be pretty resistant to the concept of increased truck traffic behind them. There are some very nice houses over there, and that money would cause a lot of noise. At the same time,

Stockdale Highway was a grade railroad crossing, and I think that alone would be too much for the state to take on considering the engineering changes. Just looking at it, and the fact that it's diagonal (which changes the design guidelines), you can already see the sight lines aren't there, but I'm sure there's a lot more. If they ever build the freeway to I-5, there's a chance of routing change for 58 since an overpass would be necessary anyway, but I still think there would be a lot noise from the local residents.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Bobby5280 on March 10, 2020, 01:46:19 PM
What's going on with the plots of farm land to the South of Stockdale Highway immediately West of the Westside Parkway end? Are those already being gobbled up by retail/residential real estate developers?

As long as a bunch of new properties didn't immediately pop up on that land it would seem possible to sink a new freeway extension into a trench and/or erect sound walls. The existing Stockdale Highway could be converted into a parallel service road for that stretch. But if the South side of Stockdale Highway is going to get quickly covered up by a bunch of new properties that would make it a whole lot harder to create an Interstate quality connection between I-5 and Westside Parkway. That would be too bad for everyone because heavy trucks are still going to be on that route big time.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sparker on March 14, 2020, 03:51:26 PM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on March 10, 2020, 01:46:19 PM
What's going on with the plots of farm land to the South of Stockdale Highway immediately West of the Westside Parkway end? Are those already being gobbled up by retail/residential real estate developers?

As long as a bunch of new properties didn't immediately pop up on that land it would seem possible to sink a new freeway extension into a trench and/or erect sound walls. The existing Stockdale Highway could be converted into a parallel service road for that stretch. But if the South side of Stockdale Highway is going to get quickly covered up by a bunch of new properties that would make it a whole lot harder to create an Interstate quality connection between I-5 and Westside Parkway. That would be too bad for everyone because heavy trucks are still going to be on that route big time.

Since the City of Bakersfield-controlled (at least until ceded to Caltrans) Westside Parkway leaves the city limits to terminate in an unincorporated area of Kern County, there may be no existing agreement to preserve ROW west of the present terminus -- which is definitely a problem.  OTOH, any developer with triple-digit IQ would realize that the area's property values would only increase once the Westside is extended west to I-5 and would hedge their bets by either (a) arranging for an ample corridor for the facility between their developable tracts or (b) simply working with Caltrans, the Kern/Bakersfield MPO, and any other relevant agency to hold off actual housing/commercial construction until an alignment was finalized.  The (b) choice would be optimal -- and likely the choice of all concerned, including Caltrans and the local jurisdiction, but unless they act promptly to reserve their choice of alignment, the owners of the land can and probably will act within their legal rights.  Being a locally-initiated facility rather as part of a longer pre-planned Caltrans corridor is definitely a drawback here, since it doesn't seem to have incorporated definitive extension plans into its "brief". 
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: don1991 on May 30, 2020, 03:03:02 AM
Quote from: skluth on March 08, 2020, 10:36:03 PM
Quote from: coatimundi on March 07, 2020, 10:46:41 PM
And maybe I'm missing in this thread where the info is on Caltrans (or anyone) actually wishing CA 58 to be moved. Because it's not just about putting it onto the Westside Parkway, but also onto Stockdale Highway, which would be a big deal considering that Stockdale is a county road and not really up to state highway standards in a lot of places. I think Caltrans is just as cognizant as others as to the fact that route numbers are less significant than they once were since most people will just plug it in to their GPS.

Honestly, I don't think it matters if anyone wants CA 58 or a new number on the Westside Parkway and Stockdale Highway. You're right that it doesn't matter if GPS units direct drivers to the route and make it the de facto route. I'm more concerned as to whether the current Stockdale Highway will be able to handle the increased traffic, especially truck traffic which might outstrip the current road's design.

Westside Parkway and the Centennial Corridor under construction definitely will become CA-58 upon completion.  Because the 99 / 58 interchange will be missing a couple of connectors, there will be some use of Rosedale Highway to Mohawk until those connectors are eventually built (there are no firm plans for those missing connectors right now).  I have read about the decision though I can't find the source as of right now.  Also, notice that the signs on Westside Parkway have the greened out areas ready for the exit numbers once the freeway is complete and the state takes over maintenance.  Rosedale Hwy has already been decommissioned, though as I noted, portions will be used as a de facto route until the missing connectors are built.

Stockdale Highway will become the new 58 once the freeway ends.  That is one reason for the new round-a-bout at CA-43 Enos Lane and Stockdale Highway.  Stockdale Hwy will be 58 until the freeway is completed to I-5.  There are no current firm plans for that freeway yet nor will there be ROW preservation (for now) but the intent is there to finish the 58 to I-5.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: don1991 on May 30, 2020, 03:08:05 AM
By the way, if you search on YouTube, there is a local resident who flies a drone over the entire Centennial construction corridor about once a month or so and provides excellent overhead views of the construction.  His last update was just 4 days ago.  Very cool since I haven't had the time to go up there lately.  They are quite deep into the construction at this point.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5lpEtF74NqI

Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sparker on May 30, 2020, 05:58:53 PM
Quote from: don1991 on May 30, 2020, 03:03:02 AM
Stockdale Highway will become the new 58 once the freeway ends.  That is one reason for the new round-a-bout at CA-43 Enos Lane and Stockdale Highway.  Stockdale Hwy will be 58 until the freeway is completed to I-5.  There are no current firm plans for that freeway yet nor will there be ROW preservation (for now) but the intent is there to finish the 58 to I-5.

Question:  Is the current intent to continue the revised CA 58 west over Stockdale west of the CA 43 roundabout, or will it "jog" north on CA 43 to the current westward 58 alignment toward Buttonwillow? 
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: SeriesE on May 30, 2020, 06:56:07 PM
What was the original freeway plan for CA-58 west of CA-99 before Westside Parkway and Centennial Corridor?
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sparker on May 30, 2020, 07:48:54 PM
Quote from: SeriesE on May 30, 2020, 06:56:07 PM
What was the original freeway plan for CA-58 west of CA-99 before Westside Parkway and Centennial Corridor?

There actually was no particular favored, much less adopted, alignment; prior to the Westside's development.  The most recent publicized CA 58 extension plans, circa 1990, included departing the CA 58 alignment between CA 184 and CA 204 (Union Ave.), looping around the north side of town, crossing CA 99 near the CA 65 interchange, and paralleling 7th Standard Road west to I-5 at an interchange just north of Buttonwillow.  CA 58 between the divergence point and CA 99 would have been redesignated.   That plan was favored by Bakersfield preservationists as being least disruptive to the city center (it also would have provided CA 178 with a direct freeway connection as well).  But those plans simply dissipated over time, likely because they were overly costly and ambitious, requiring numerous system interchanges plus a Kern River crossing.  Eventually the Westside locally-instigated plan was hatched, which effectively closed out the other options.     
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: don1991 on May 30, 2020, 09:13:09 PM
Quote from: sparker on May 30, 2020, 05:58:53 PM
Quote from: don1991 on May 30, 2020, 03:03:02 AM
Stockdale Highway will become the new 58 once the freeway ends.  That is one reason for the new round-a-bout at CA-43 Enos Lane and Stockdale Highway.  Stockdale Hwy will be 58 until the freeway is completed to I-5.  There are no current firm plans for that freeway yet nor will there be ROW preservation (for now) but the intent is there to finish the 58 to I-5.

Question:  Is the current intent to continue the revised CA 58 west over Stockdale west of the CA 43 roundabout, or will it "jog" north on CA 43 to the current westward 58 alignment toward Buttonwillow?

So far as I know, it is to continue straight along Stockdale to I-5.  I imagine the future freeway would roughly follow this same alignment but of course that would be subject to a full-on environmental and project study review before that was determined.  But it would be most likely something like this because Stockdale would be adopted as the new 58 by the legislature.  It hasn't yet but this is the intent.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: don1991 on May 30, 2020, 09:16:04 PM
Quote from: BakoCondors on February 29, 2020, 10:37:23 AM
Quote from: sparker on February 13, 2020, 05:58:15 PM
^^^^^^^^^^
All existing green mileposts and exit signage on CA 58 are based upon that route's western terminus at US 101 near Santa Margarita in San Luis Obispo County.   It'll be interesting to see if exit numbers on the Westside, once completed at least east to CA 99, follow in that fashion...

I would think they would. The existing signage has space reserved for exit numbers. My guess based on the 58/99 interchange currently being exit 110: the exits at Mohawk St would be 108, Coffee Rd 107, Calloway Dr 105 and Allen Rd 104. That's incumbent on the Parkway being transferred from City of Bakersfield to CalTrans control.

Agreed.  Exit numbers are always based on the entire state highway, not just the freeway portion.  The only way it would be different is if there was positive intent to abandon any portion of Route 58; I don't think there is any such intent.  The entire state highway serves an important purpose and none of it is just an ordinary urban street, which is the usual reason for turning over former state highways to counties or cities.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: don1991 on May 30, 2020, 09:19:45 PM
Quote from: sparker on May 30, 2020, 07:48:54 PM
Quote from: SeriesE on May 30, 2020, 06:56:07 PM
What was the original freeway plan for CA-58 west of CA-99 before Westside Parkway and Centennial Corridor?

There actually was no particular favored, much less adopted, alignment; prior to the Westside's development.  The most recent publicized CA 58 extension plans, circa 1990, included departing the CA 58 alignment between CA 184 and CA 204 (Union Ave.), looping around the north side of town, crossing CA 99 near the CA 65 interchange, and paralleling 7th Standard Road west to I-5 at an interchange just north of Buttonwillow.  CA 58 between the divergence point and CA 99 would have been redesignated.   That plan was favored by Bakersfield preservationists as being least disruptive to the city center (it also would have provided CA 178 with a direct freeway connection as well).  But those plans simply dissipated over time, likely because they were overly costly and ambitious, requiring numerous system interchanges plus a Kern River crossing.  Eventually the Westside locally-instigated plan was hatched, which effectively closed out the other options.     

There was also a "Kern River Freeway" at one point (1990s / 2000s).  This may have been the same as the one you are describing?  Once the Thomas road money came in, a number of different ideas developed.  Centennial actually was at one point more of a crosstown freeway concept including 178 (this is likely what you are describing below) but later morphed into the current version of connecting Westside Parkway (also part of Thomas Roads Improvement Program, or "TRIP") to CA-99.  Although Westside Parkway was always intended to form part of new 58 one way or the other with the intent of providing a continuous route one way or the other for Route 58.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sparker on May 31, 2020, 01:28:42 AM
Quote from: don1991 on May 30, 2020, 09:19:45 PM
There was also a "Kern River Freeway" at one point (1990s / 2000s).  This may have been the same as the one you are describing?  Once the Thomas road money came in, a number of different ideas developed.  Centennial actually was at one point more of a crosstown freeway concept including 178 (this is likely what you are describing below) but later morphed into the current version of connecting Westside Parkway (also part of Thomas Roads Improvement Program, or "TRIP") to CA-99.  Although Westside Parkway was always intended to form part of new 58 one way or the other with the intent of providing a continuous route one way or the other for Route 58.

Quote from: sparker on May 30, 2020, 07:48:54 PM
Quote from: SeriesE on May 30, 2020, 06:56:07 PM
What was the original freeway plan for CA-58 west of CA-99 before Westside Parkway and Centennial Corridor?

There actually was no particular favored, much less adopted, alignment; prior to the Westside's development.  The most recent publicized CA 58 extension plans, circa 1990, included departing the CA 58 alignment between CA 184 and CA 204 (Union Ave.), looping around the north side of town, crossing CA 99 near the CA 65 interchange, and paralleling 7th Standard Road west to I-5 at an interchange just north of Buttonwillow.  CA 58 between the divergence point and CA 99 would have been redesignated.   That plan was favored by Bakersfield preservationists as being least disruptive to the city center (it also would have provided CA 178 with a direct freeway connection as well).  But those plans simply dissipated over time, likely because they were overly costly and ambitious, requiring numerous system interchanges plus a Kern River crossing.  Eventually the Westside locally-instigated plan was hatched, which effectively closed out the other options.     

IIRC, the "Kern River Freeway" would have been a linear extension of the original Westside alignment east on the riverbank to CA 99; one of the options there would have been to continue that trajectory northeast past Golden State Ave. (CA 204) and curling it down as an effective CA 178 extension.  CA 58 would have simply MPX'd south on CA 99 to its eastward alignment (like it has done for 41 years!).  That was one of the alternate options to the north loop/7th Standard alignment I described earlier; but that loop became the "last corridor standing" after studies showed that shoring up the Kern banks to support a freeway on a berm would be problematic in any situation exceeding a 25-year-flood standard (the '97 floods, definitely within that category, would have rendered such a road impassable during the event and requiring extensive repairs afterward).   But freeway plans in the area have always tended to favor the untenable (the costs of the north loop) over the merely doable -- the Westside Parkway was locally hatched to break that impasse and, regardless of jurisdiction, actually build something that could conceivably be extended (although the east end of the original parkway certainly didn't make an eastward connection easy!).

Regarding the new CA 43/CA 58 roundabout -- since CA 58 is part of a major interregional truck corridor, a roundabout with the capacity to handle tractor/trailer combos would surely be appropriate.  But D6, like a few others, seems intent on slapping down circles at every rebuild regardless of whether it's the best choice for a particular situation -- the classic case of a "prefab" solution looking for an identified problem.   But it would be amusingly ironic if CA 58 full freeway development out to I-5 were to be advanced by a series of incidents at said roundabout.  :cool:   
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: don1991 on May 31, 2020, 06:04:54 PM
Quote from: sparker on May 31, 2020, 01:28:42 AM
Quote from: don1991 on May 30, 2020, 09:19:45 PM
There was also a "Kern River Freeway" at one point (1990s / 2000s).  This may have been the same as the one you are describing?  Once the Thomas road money came in, a number of different ideas developed.  Centennial actually was at one point more of a crosstown freeway concept including 178 (this is likely what you are describing below) but later morphed into the current version of connecting Westside Parkway (also part of Thomas Roads Improvement Program, or "TRIP") to CA-99.  Although Westside Parkway was always intended to form part of new 58 one way or the other with the intent of providing a continuous route one way or the other for Route 58.

Quote from: sparker on May 30, 2020, 07:48:54 PM
Quote from: SeriesE on May 30, 2020, 06:56:07 PM
What was the original freeway plan for CA-58 west of CA-99 before Westside Parkway and Centennial Corridor?

There actually was no particular favored, much less adopted, alignment; prior to the Westside's development.  The most recent publicized CA 58 extension plans, circa 1990, included departing the CA 58 alignment between CA 184 and CA 204 (Union Ave.), looping around the north side of town, crossing CA 99 near the CA 65 interchange, and paralleling 7th Standard Road west to I-5 at an interchange just north of Buttonwillow.  CA 58 between the divergence point and CA 99 would have been redesignated.   That plan was favored by Bakersfield preservationists as being least disruptive to the city center (it also would have provided CA 178 with a direct freeway connection as well).  But those plans simply dissipated over time, likely because they were overly costly and ambitious, requiring numerous system interchanges plus a Kern River crossing.  Eventually the Westside locally-instigated plan was hatched, which effectively closed out the other options.     

IIRC, the "Kern River Freeway" would have been a linear extension of the original Westside alignment east on the riverbank to CA 99; one of the options there would have been to continue that trajectory northeast past Golden State Ave. (CA 204) and curling it down as an effective CA 178 extension.  CA 58 would have simply MPX'd south on CA 99 to its eastward alignment (like it has done for 41 years!).  That was one of the alternate options to the north loop/7th Standard alignment I described earlier; but that loop became the "last corridor standing" after studies showed that shoring up the Kern banks to support a freeway on a berm would be problematic in any situation exceeding a 25-year-flood standard (the '97 floods, definitely within that category, would have rendered such a road impassable during the event and requiring extensive repairs afterward).   But freeway plans in the area have always tended to favor the untenable (the costs of the north loop) over the merely doable -- the Westside Parkway was locally hatched to break that impasse and, regardless of jurisdiction, actually build something that could conceivably be extended (although the east end of the original parkway certainly didn't make an eastward connection easy!).

Regarding the new CA 43/CA 58 roundabout -- since CA 58 is part of a major interregional truck corridor, a roundabout with the capacity to handle tractor/trailer combos would surely be appropriate.  But D6, like a few others, seems intent on slapping down circles at every rebuild regardless of whether it's the best choice for a particular situation -- the classic case of a "prefab" solution looking for an identified problem.   But it would be amusingly ironic if CA 58 full freeway development out to I-5 were to be advanced by a series of incidents at said roundabout.  :cool:   

Unfortunately the roundabout fetish is not just District 6, though they seem to be early adopters.   This is becoming a big thing in all of California.  Arizona is absolutely in love with them.  I don't like them - you feel almost dizzy if there are too many.  AZ-179 into Sedona (I go there a lot with extended family) is a terrible example - almost the entire route is littered with them.  When AZ-260 was widened into Cottonwood, AZ, it also received about 10 new roundabouts.  You really lose speed on what could otherwise be a nice 4-lane divided highway.

I much prefer signals.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sprjus4 on May 31, 2020, 06:09:47 PM
Quote from: don1991 on May 31, 2020, 06:04:54 PM
Unfortunately the roundabout fetish is not just District 6, though they seem to be early adopters.   This is becoming a big thing in all of California.  Arizona is absolutely in love with them.  I don't like them - you feel almost dizzy if there are too many.  AZ-179 into Sedona (I go there a lot with extended family) is a terrible example - almost the entire route is littered with them.  When AZ-260 was widened into Cottonwood, AZ, it also received about 10 new roundabouts.  You really lose speed on what could otherwise be a nice 4-lane divided highway.

I much prefer signals.
You may not like Carmel, Indiana (https://www.google.com/maps/place/Carmel,+IN/@39.9633875,-86.1674034,13708m/data=!3m2!1e3!4b1!4m5!3m4!1s0x8814ad973033fa1d:0x43b9095f5f7b38fc!8m2!3d39.9783698!4d-86.1180443) then.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on June 08, 2020, 12:06:23 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on May 31, 2020, 06:09:47 PM
Quote from: don1991 on May 31, 2020, 06:04:54 PM
Unfortunately the roundabout fetish is not just District 6, though they seem to be early adopters.   This is becoming a big thing in all of California.  Arizona is absolutely in love with them.  I don't like them - you feel almost dizzy if there are too many.  AZ-179 into Sedona (I go there a lot with extended family) is a terrible example - almost the entire route is littered with them.  When AZ-260 was widened into Cottonwood, AZ, it also received about 10 new roundabouts.  You really lose speed on what could otherwise be a nice 4-lane divided highway.

I much prefer signals.
You may not like Carmel, Indiana (https://www.google.com/maps/place/Carmel,+IN/@39.9633875,-86.1674034,13708m/data=!3m2!1e3!4b1!4m5!3m4!1s0x8814ad973033fa1d:0x43b9095f5f7b38fc!8m2!3d39.9783698!4d-86.1180443) then.
Holy shit! That is insane lol! Almost every single intersection is a roundabout. Wow

I have come around to roundabouts a bit and I wouldn't mind seeing them in certain places but overall I prefer signals as well.

Regarding 179, I have a love-hate relationship with that road. Why on earth it isn't two lanes each way throughout the town of Sedona is beyond me. The space exists. I always get stuck behind someone going 10 under(usually tourist) who often have a hard time negotiating a roundabout, not knowing where they want to go, or coming to a complete stop and getting mad when they honked at. Very bad move on AZ's part not making that road 4 lanes.

I would be much happier with roundabouts if they had a "bypass" in the form of an over or underpass on the heaviest traveled road. I'm not sure if anything like that exists.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sprjus4 on June 08, 2020, 12:21:22 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 08, 2020, 12:06:23 PM
I would be much happier with roundabouts if they had a "bypass" in the form of an over or underpass on the heaviest traveled road. I'm not sure if anything like that exists.
In Bakersfield in fact, there's at least one at SH-204 and Chester Ave.

Another example that comes to mind is I-85 Business / SH-56 in Spartanburg, SC.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on June 08, 2020, 12:46:11 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 08, 2020, 12:06:23 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on May 31, 2020, 06:09:47 PM
Quote from: don1991 on May 31, 2020, 06:04:54 PM
Unfortunately the roundabout fetish is not just District 6, though they seem to be early adopters.   This is becoming a big thing in all of California.  Arizona is absolutely in love with them.  I don't like them - you feel almost dizzy if there are too many.  AZ-179 into Sedona (I go there a lot with extended family) is a terrible example - almost the entire route is littered with them.  When AZ-260 was widened into Cottonwood, AZ, it also received about 10 new roundabouts.  You really lose speed on what could otherwise be a nice 4-lane divided highway.

I much prefer signals.
You may not like Carmel, Indiana (https://www.google.com/maps/place/Carmel,+IN/@39.9633875,-86.1674034,13708m/data=!3m2!1e3!4b1!4m5!3m4!1s0x8814ad973033fa1d:0x43b9095f5f7b38fc!8m2!3d39.9783698!4d-86.1180443) then.
Holy shit! That is insane lol! Almost every single intersection is a roundabout. Wow

I have come around to roundabouts a bit and I wouldn't mind seeing them in certain places but overall I prefer signals as well.

Regarding 179, I have a love-hate relationship with that road. Why on earth it isn't two lanes each way throughout the town of Sedona is beyond me. The space exists. I always get stuck behind someone going 10 under(usually tourist) who often have a hard time negotiating a roundabout, not knowing where they want to go, or coming to a complete stop and getting mad when they honked at. Very bad move on AZ's part not making that road 4 lanes.

I would be much happier with roundabouts if they had a "bypass" in the form of an over or underpass on the heaviest traveled road. I'm not sure if anything like that exists.

Amusingly I've always found AZ 260 and AZ 89A to be the faster way into Sedona over AZ 179.  Those roundabouts just made the gawking worse whereas the stop lights "mostly"  kept traffic focused.  AZ 179 is great now if you're a cyclist though.   
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on June 08, 2020, 01:10:06 PM
I'm thinking of doing a cycling run with my friend from Phoenix to Flag stopping through Sedona will be a change of perspective I'm sure.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: skluth on June 08, 2020, 04:43:50 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 08, 2020, 12:06:23 PM
I would be much happier with roundabouts if they had a "bypass" in the form of an over or underpass on the heaviest traveled road. I'm not sure if anything like that exists.

It's not unusual around the DC area
Dupont Circle, DC (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.9097342,-77.0443557,17.4z?hl=en)
Washington Circle, DC (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.9025108,-77.050856,17.4z?hl=en)
I-395/Shirlington in Arlington, VA (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.8399257,-77.086875,16.34z?hl=en)

It's frequently seen in interchanges in Europe.
Hyde Park Corner (https://www.google.com/maps/@51.5025958,-0.1529708,16.78z?hl=en), London
M1 near Nottingham (https://www.google.com/maps/@52.8419433,-1.30248,14.73z?hl=en)
M1 near Rugby (https://www.google.com/maps/@52.3493413,-1.1606989,14.81z?hl=en)
AP-7 near Torremolinos (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.6375377,-4.5139945,15.12z?hl=en)
A-7 exit to Gibraltar (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.2069011,-5.3884724,16.16z?hl=en)
A 96 west of München (https://www.google.com/maps/@48.0464937,10.8288938,13.93z?hl=en)
A20/E25 in Rotterdam (https://www.google.com/maps/@51.9379967,4.4565127,15.58z?hl=en)

This is my favorite form of interchange for rural areas. The wide curve of these roundabouts allow trucks to navigate the curve better than the tighter curve of smaller roundabouts. It requires either an extra-long overpass above the roundabout or two bridges for the roundabout and often a little more right-of-way along the main road, so the designs can be more expensive than a simple diamond, A2/B2 parclo, SPUI, or DDI. The price should be comparable to anything more complex though. It can handle a lot of traffic with little slowing down for anyone using the roundabout. They usually don't require significantly more space than a traditional diamond, so they're good for handling a lot of traffic in tight spaces. Drivers going through the roundabout may complain about slowing down a bit, but it beats having a stoplight or all-way stop. I don't understand why we don't use these in the US more frequently instead of the accurately-named dumbbell interchanges, like this ugly mess near me (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.9209043,-116.8102028,16.07z?hl=en) at the Cabazon Outlet Mall.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sparker on June 08, 2020, 10:40:35 PM
Quote from: skluth on June 08, 2020, 04:43:50 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 08, 2020, 12:06:23 PM
I would be much happier with roundabouts if they had a "bypass" in the form of an over or underpass on the heaviest traveled road. I'm not sure if anything like that exists.

It's not unusual around the DC area
Dupont Circle, DC (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.9097342,-77.0443557,17.4z?hl=en)
Washington Circle, DC (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.9025108,-77.050856,17.4z?hl=en)
I-395/Shirlington in Arlington, VA (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.8399257,-77.086875,16.34z?hl=en)

It's frequently seen in interchanges in Europe.
Hyde Park Corner (https://www.google.com/maps/@51.5025958,-0.1529708,16.78z?hl=en), London
M1 near Nottingham (https://www.google.com/maps/@52.8419433,-1.30248,14.73z?hl=en)
M1 near Rugby (https://www.google.com/maps/@52.3493413,-1.1606989,14.81z?hl=en)
AP-7 near Torremolinos (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.6375377,-4.5139945,15.12z?hl=en)
A-7 exit to Gibraltar (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.2069011,-5.3884724,16.16z?hl=en)
A 96 west of München (https://www.google.com/maps/@48.0464937,10.8288938,13.93z?hl=en)
A20/E25 in Rotterdam (https://www.google.com/maps/@51.9379967,4.4565127,15.58z?hl=en)

This is my favorite form of interchange for rural areas. The wide curve of these roundabouts allow trucks to navigate the curve better than the tighter curve of smaller roundabouts. It requires either an extra-long overpass above the roundabout or two bridges for the roundabout and often a little more right-of-way along the main road, so the designs can be more expensive than a simple diamond, A2/B2 parclo, SPUI, or DDI. The price should be comparable to anything more complex though. It can handle a lot of traffic with little slowing down for anyone using the roundabout. They usually don't require significantly more space than a traditional diamond, so they're good for handling a lot of traffic in tight spaces. Drivers going through the roundabout may complain about slowing down a bit, but it beats having a stoplight or all-way stop. I don't understand why we don't use these in the US more frequently instead of the accurately-named dumbbell interchanges, like this ugly mess near me (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.9209043,-116.8102028,16.07z?hl=en) at the Cabazon Outlet Mall.

That type of interchange would be a godsend for many urban/suburban situations.  Large enough circle radius to ameliorate severe slowing issues while providing enough peripheral length to allow maneuvering to get where one wants to go.  But today's Caltrans seems to be in the thrall of planners whose goal appears to be a general slowing of traffic, whether in urban or rural situations (the CA 12/113 roundabout west of Rio Vista is a prime example of that "philosophy" manifested).  IMO the roundabout concept as an alternative to signals is eminently workable in an urban setting -- but since Caltrans is also busy shedding urban mileage, they seem to be satisfying their "solution looking for a problem" mode by utilizing the concept for rural situations better served by other methods.  Some ideas just aren't all that "portable"! :banghead:
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: don1991 on June 09, 2020, 01:37:10 AM
Quote from: sparker on June 08, 2020, 10:40:35 PM
Quote from: skluth on June 08, 2020, 04:43:50 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 08, 2020, 12:06:23 PM
I would be much happier with roundabouts if they had a "bypass" in the form of an over or underpass on the heaviest traveled road. I'm not sure if anything like that exists.

It's not unusual around the DC area
Dupont Circle, DC (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.9097342,-77.0443557,17.4z?hl=en)
Washington Circle, DC (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.9025108,-77.050856,17.4z?hl=en)
I-395/Shirlington in Arlington, VA (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.8399257,-77.086875,16.34z?hl=en)

It's frequently seen in interchanges in Europe.
Hyde Park Corner (https://www.google.com/maps/@51.5025958,-0.1529708,16.78z?hl=en), London
M1 near Nottingham (https://www.google.com/maps/@52.8419433,-1.30248,14.73z?hl=en)
M1 near Rugby (https://www.google.com/maps/@52.3493413,-1.1606989,14.81z?hl=en)
AP-7 near Torremolinos (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.6375377,-4.5139945,15.12z?hl=en)
A-7 exit to Gibraltar (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.2069011,-5.3884724,16.16z?hl=en)
A 96 west of München (https://www.google.com/maps/@48.0464937,10.8288938,13.93z?hl=en)
A20/E25 in Rotterdam (https://www.google.com/maps/@51.9379967,4.4565127,15.58z?hl=en)

This is my favorite form of interchange for rural areas. The wide curve of these roundabouts allow trucks to navigate the curve better than the tighter curve of smaller roundabouts. It requires either an extra-long overpass above the roundabout or two bridges for the roundabout and often a little more right-of-way along the main road, so the designs can be more expensive than a simple diamond, A2/B2 parclo, SPUI, or DDI. The price should be comparable to anything more complex though. It can handle a lot of traffic with little slowing down for anyone using the roundabout. They usually don't require significantly more space than a traditional diamond, so they're good for handling a lot of traffic in tight spaces. Drivers going through the roundabout may complain about slowing down a bit, but it beats having a stoplight or all-way stop. I don't understand why we don't use these in the US more frequently instead of the accurately-named dumbbell interchanges, like this ugly mess near me (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.9209043,-116.8102028,16.07z?hl=en) at the Cabazon Outlet Mall.

That type of interchange would be a godsend for many urban/suburban situations.  Large enough circle radius to ameliorate severe slowing issues while providing enough peripheral length to allow maneuvering to get where one wants to go.  But today's Caltrans seems to be in the thrall of planners whose goal appears to be a general slowing of traffic, whether in urban or rural situations (the CA 12/113 roundabout west of Rio Vista is a prime example of that "philosophy" manifested).  IMO the roundabout concept as an alternative to signals is eminently workable in an urban setting -- but since Caltrans is also busy shedding urban mileage, they seem to be satisfying their "solution looking for a problem" mode by utilizing the concept for rural situations better served by other methods.  Some ideas just aren't all that "portable"! :banghead:

A big issue with roundabouts in urban areas is real estate.  Especially for wide-radius circles.  Also, it interferes with shopping center driveways / gas station driveways that we often see in urban setting intersections.  I think they are favored more in rural settings.  That being said, they are used on the semi-urban intersections in the Village of Oak Creek and Sedona along AZ-179, where ADOT and the locals fell in love with them.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: don1991 on June 09, 2020, 01:40:58 AM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on June 08, 2020, 12:46:11 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 08, 2020, 12:06:23 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on May 31, 2020, 06:09:47 PM
Quote from: don1991 on May 31, 2020, 06:04:54 PM
Unfortunately the roundabout fetish is not just District 6, though they seem to be early adopters.   This is becoming a big thing in all of California.  Arizona is absolutely in love with them.  I don't like them - you feel almost dizzy if there are too many.  AZ-179 into Sedona (I go there a lot with extended family) is a terrible example - almost the entire route is littered with them.  When AZ-260 was widened into Cottonwood, AZ, it also received about 10 new roundabouts.  You really lose speed on what could otherwise be a nice 4-lane divided highway.

I much prefer signals.
You may not like Carmel, Indiana (https://www.google.com/maps/place/Carmel,+IN/@39.9633875,-86.1674034,13708m/data=!3m2!1e3!4b1!4m5!3m4!1s0x8814ad973033fa1d:0x43b9095f5f7b38fc!8m2!3d39.9783698!4d-86.1180443) then.
Holy shit! That is insane lol! Almost every single intersection is a roundabout. Wow

I have come around to roundabouts a bit and I wouldn't mind seeing them in certain places but overall I prefer signals as well.

Regarding 179, I have a love-hate relationship with that road. Why on earth it isn't two lanes each way throughout the town of Sedona is beyond me. The space exists. I always get stuck behind someone going 10 under(usually tourist) who often have a hard time negotiating a roundabout, not knowing where they want to go, or coming to a complete stop and getting mad when they honked at. Very bad move on AZ's part not making that road 4 lanes.

I would be much happier with roundabouts if they had a "bypass" in the form of an over or underpass on the heaviest traveled road. I'm not sure if anything like that exists.

Amusingly I've always found AZ 260 and AZ 89A to be the faster way into Sedona over AZ 179.  Those roundabouts just made the gawking worse whereas the stop lights "mostly"  kept traffic focused.  AZ 179 is great now if you're a cyclist though.

It was pure politics.  Sedona fought a 4-lane highway tooth and nail so the compromise allowed two one-lane sections in areas and the two lanes with bike lanes and wide sidewalks in others - with roundabouts everywhere.  It really is awful during holidays and other peak tourist times.  It can take 1/2 hour sometimes to go the 10 miles or so from the Village of Oak Creek to Sedona.

My parents often rent a family set of timeshares in the Village.  If going there, I use AZ-179.  If Sedona, then you are right - often AZ-260 to AZ-89A is faster.  Or, go up AZ-179 to County Road 78 West and cut up to AZ-89 eastbound.   Almost every time I go, I curse the lack of 4 lanes on 179.

Even worse is when they began urbanizing AZ-89A east of AZ-179 in Downtown Sedona and tearing up the pavement, putting in more bulb-outs, parking, etc.  A real mess.  It isn't a lot of fun going through that area in a car.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: skluth on June 11, 2020, 07:53:37 PM
Quote from: don1991 on June 09, 2020, 01:37:10 AM
Quote from: sparker on June 08, 2020, 10:40:35 PM
Quote from: skluth on June 08, 2020, 04:43:50 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 08, 2020, 12:06:23 PM
I would be much happier with roundabouts if they had a "bypass" in the form of an over or underpass on the heaviest traveled road. I'm not sure if anything like that exists.

It's not unusual around the DC area
Dupont Circle, DC (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.9097342,-77.0443557,17.4z?hl=en)
Washington Circle, DC (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.9025108,-77.050856,17.4z?hl=en)
I-395/Shirlington in Arlington, VA (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.8399257,-77.086875,16.34z?hl=en)

It's frequently seen in interchanges in Europe.
Hyde Park Corner (https://www.google.com/maps/@51.5025958,-0.1529708,16.78z?hl=en), London
M1 near Nottingham (https://www.google.com/maps/@52.8419433,-1.30248,14.73z?hl=en)
M1 near Rugby (https://www.google.com/maps/@52.3493413,-1.1606989,14.81z?hl=en)
AP-7 near Torremolinos (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.6375377,-4.5139945,15.12z?hl=en)
A-7 exit to Gibraltar (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.2069011,-5.3884724,16.16z?hl=en)
A 96 west of München (https://www.google.com/maps/@48.0464937,10.8288938,13.93z?hl=en)
A20/E25 in Rotterdam (https://www.google.com/maps/@51.9379967,4.4565127,15.58z?hl=en)

This is my favorite form of interchange for rural areas. The wide curve of these roundabouts allow trucks to navigate the curve better than the tighter curve of smaller roundabouts. It requires either an extra-long overpass above the roundabout or two bridges for the roundabout and often a little more right-of-way along the main road, so the designs can be more expensive than a simple diamond, A2/B2 parclo, SPUI, or DDI. The price should be comparable to anything more complex though. It can handle a lot of traffic with little slowing down for anyone using the roundabout. They usually don't require significantly more space than a traditional diamond, so they're good for handling a lot of traffic in tight spaces. Drivers going through the roundabout may complain about slowing down a bit, but it beats having a stoplight or all-way stop. I don't understand why we don't use these in the US more frequently instead of the accurately-named dumbbell interchanges, like this ugly mess near me (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.9209043,-116.8102028,16.07z?hl=en) at the Cabazon Outlet Mall.

That type of interchange would be a godsend for many urban/suburban situations.  Large enough circle radius to ameliorate severe slowing issues while providing enough peripheral length to allow maneuvering to get where one wants to go.  But today's Caltrans seems to be in the thrall of planners whose goal appears to be a general slowing of traffic, whether in urban or rural situations (the CA 12/113 roundabout west of Rio Vista is a prime example of that "philosophy" manifested).  IMO the roundabout concept as an alternative to signals is eminently workable in an urban setting -- but since Caltrans is also busy shedding urban mileage, they seem to be satisfying their "solution looking for a problem" mode by utilizing the concept for rural situations better served by other methods.  Some ideas just aren't all that "portable"! :banghead:

A big issue with roundabouts in urban areas is real estate.  Especially for wide-radius circles.  Also, it interferes with shopping center driveways / gas station driveways that we often see in urban setting intersections.  I think they are favored more in rural settings.  That being said, they are used on the semi-urban intersections in the Village of Oak Creek and Sedona along AZ-179, where ADOT and the locals fell in love with them.

I moved here from St Louis. MoDOT has been installing the smaller, dumbbell-style roundabouts at freeway exits everywhere. (I also have to deal with them when I go back to my hometown, including this cluster along Shawano Ave/ Cardinal Lane about two miles from my brother's home. (https://www.google.com/maps/@44.5394655,-88.0786347,15.97z?hl=en)) I really hate them, because they're usually a bad solution in search of a problem to fix. A wide-radius roundabout interchange is really not much more real estate than a diamond or DDI, although they can't be squeezed into a lot of urban areas due to pre-existing road patterns. They actually use less real estate than most other interchanges, including parclos, because much of the extra roadway is in the freeway ROW.  It's a shame DOTs don't consider them very often, as they can be very practical.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: CtrlAltDel on April 29, 2021, 04:02:20 PM
While browsing You Tube, I came across the following video, showing drone footage of the progress that has been made on the Centennial Corridor.



As you can see, it's overall a raised freeway, and I'm amazed at the dirt they've placed for the project. 
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sparker on April 29, 2021, 04:38:02 PM
Quote from: CtrlAltDel on April 29, 2021, 04:02:20 PM
While browsing You Tube, I came across the following video, showing drone footage of the progress that has been made on the Centennial Corridor.



As you can see, it's overall a raised freeway, and I'm amazed at the dirt they've placed for the project. 
Quote from: CtrlAltDel on April 29, 2021, 04:02:20 PM
While browsing You Tube, I came across the following video, showing drone footage of the progress that has been made on the Centennial Corridor.



As you can see, it's overall a raised freeway, and I'm amazed at the dirt they've placed for the project. 

Nice footage; wish it had gone further northwest toward the Kern River.  Has anyone in a position to know forwarded a completion date (even an approximation would be welcome) for the project?  Seems like it's been a couple of years since the first posted drone pass-over during the ROW clearance process; while there's been a lot of progress, the whole project seems to be dragging on a bit.  Also -- any plans been released/posted for a full build-out west to I-5?  Certainly hope that laurels will not be rested upon when the in-town connection is opened -- particularly since the remainder of CA 58 out in the desert is now fully 4-lane freeway/expressway; it would seem a shame to procrastinate this relatively small corridor remnant!   
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Concrete Bob on April 30, 2021, 12:24:17 AM
There are long-term plans to extend the freeway on the Centennial Corridor from its current western terminus out to I-5.  It's in the 2018 Kern County Regional Transportation Plan.  The future freeway will be located a bit south of the existing Stockdale Highway, and curve a bit to the southwest as it gets closer to I-5.  The connection is projected to be built after 2030.

https://www.kerncog.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/2018_RTP.pdf
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: stevashe on April 30, 2021, 12:30:10 AM
As for the timeline of the current construction, this article (https://www.bakersfield.com/news/progress-reported-for-centennial-corridor-but-much-remains-to-be-done/article_cd09555e-6d89-11eb-8eeb-43eec44f3fec.html) from February says the Centennial Corridor is projected to be complete in Fall 2022.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: kkt on April 30, 2021, 04:09:33 AM
Quote from: Concrete Bob on April 30, 2021, 12:24:17 AM
There are long-term plans to extend the freeway on the Centennial Corridor from its current western terminus out to I-5.  It's in the 2018 Kern County Regional Transportation Plan.  The future freeway will be located a bit south of the existing Stockdale Highway, and curve a bit to the southwest as it gets closer to I-5.  The connection is projected to be built after 2030.

https://www.kerncog.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/2018_RTP.pdf

I see not wanting to rebuild the Stockdale Highway interchange, but if I were doing it I'd put the new interchange north of Stockdale Highway and south of where CA 58 is now.  Most of the traffic from Bakersfield to I-5 will be turning north.  Most of the traffic heading for the south from Bakersfield would head south on CA 99 instead of heading west to I-5.  That way for the primary travel direction it's a little shorter, and a gentler curve from westbound Centennial Corridor to northbound I-5 and vice versa.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sparker on April 30, 2021, 05:08:20 AM
Quote from: kkt on April 30, 2021, 04:09:33 AM
Quote from: Concrete Bob on April 30, 2021, 12:24:17 AM
There are long-term plans to extend the freeway on the Centennial Corridor from its current western terminus out to I-5.  It's in the 2018 Kern County Regional Transportation Plan.  The future freeway will be located a bit south of the existing Stockdale Highway, and curve a bit to the southwest as it gets closer to I-5.  The connection is projected to be built after 2030.

https://www.kerncog.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/2018_RTP.pdf

I see not wanting to rebuild the Stockdale Highway interchange, but if I were doing it I'd put the new interchange north of Stockdale Highway and south of where CA 58 is now.  Most of the traffic from Bakersfield to I-5 will be turning north.  Most of the traffic heading for the south from Bakersfield would head south on CA 99 instead of heading west to I-5.  That way for the primary travel direction it's a little shorter, and a gentler curve from westbound Centennial Corridor to northbound I-5 and vice versa.


OTOH, if the proposed alignment curves somewhat in a SW direction as it approaches I-5, that seems to indicate that it may well be a free-flow/reasonably high-speed interchange; possibly a trumpet -- with enough distance from the current Stockdale interchange as not to impinge upon the small business center in the SE quadrant.  If "normal" Caltrans practice is applied, the WB 58>NB 5 movement would become an additional lane on I-5 exiting at Stockdale, and the SB on-ramp from Stockdale would become a dedicated exit lane to EB 58.  While the overall multiplexed distance of I-5 with CA 58 would be a mile or so longer, it would slightly shorten the alignment of the CA 58/Westside freeway -- likely one of the rationales for such a configuration.  Too bad it's at least nine years away from development! 
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: brad2971 on May 01, 2021, 04:38:21 AM
Quote from: sparker on April 30, 2021, 05:08:20 AM
Quote from: kkt on April 30, 2021, 04:09:33 AM
Quote from: Concrete Bob on April 30, 2021, 12:24:17 AM
There are long-term plans to extend the freeway on the Centennial Corridor from its current western terminus out to I-5.  It's in the 2018 Kern County Regional Transportation Plan.  The future freeway will be located a bit south of the existing Stockdale Highway, and curve a bit to the southwest as it gets closer to I-5.  The connection is projected to be built after 2030.

https://www.kerncog.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/2018_RTP.pdf

I see not wanting to rebuild the Stockdale Highway interchange, but if I were doing it I'd put the new interchange north of Stockdale Highway and south of where CA 58 is now.  Most of the traffic from Bakersfield to I-5 will be turning north.  Most of the traffic heading for the south from Bakersfield would head south on CA 99 instead of heading west to I-5.  That way for the primary travel direction it's a little shorter, and a gentler curve from westbound Centennial Corridor to northbound I-5 and vice versa.


OTOH, if the proposed alignment curves somewhat in a SW direction as it approaches I-5, that seems to indicate that it may well be a free-flow/reasonably high-speed interchange; possibly a trumpet -- with enough distance from the current Stockdale interchange as not to impinge upon the small business center in the SE quadrant.  If "normal" Caltrans practice is applied, the WB 58>NB 5 movement would become an additional lane on I-5 exiting at Stockdale, and the SB on-ramp from Stockdale would become a dedicated exit lane to EB 58.  While the overall multiplexed distance of I-5 with CA 58 would be a mile or so longer, it would slightly shorten the alignment of the CA 58/Westside freeway -- likely one of the rationales for such a configuration.  Too bad it's at least nine years away from development! 

Considering that Kern County is the home of the current House GOP leader (Kevin McCarthy), and considering that earmarks are likely coming back, that 9-year timeframe could be greatly shortened. Because frankly, that west end of the Parkway will be quite the traffic mess within a few months of the Centennial corridor opening. Especially with the development at the end of the Parkway: https://www.google.com/maps/@35.3551869,-119.1755325,3a,15y,242.16h,88.37t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sDblzDiCJRariXBVmlJ8aBw!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DDblzDiCJRariXBVmlJ8aBw%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D126.065125%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sparker on May 01, 2021, 04:10:51 PM
Quote from: brad2971 on May 01, 2021, 04:38:21 AM
Quote from: sparker on April 30, 2021, 05:08:20 AM
Quote from: kkt on April 30, 2021, 04:09:33 AM
Quote from: Concrete Bob on April 30, 2021, 12:24:17 AM
There are long-term plans to extend the freeway on the Centennial Corridor from its current western terminus out to I-5.  It's in the 2018 Kern County Regional Transportation Plan.  The future freeway will be located a bit south of the existing Stockdale Highway, and curve a bit to the southwest as it gets closer to I-5.  The connection is projected to be built after 2030.

https://www.kerncog.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/2018_RTP.pdf

I see not wanting to rebuild the Stockdale Highway interchange, but if I were doing it I'd put the new interchange north of Stockdale Highway and south of where CA 58 is now.  Most of the traffic from Bakersfield to I-5 will be turning north.  Most of the traffic heading for the south from Bakersfield would head south on CA 99 instead of heading west to I-5.  That way for the primary travel direction it's a little shorter, and a gentler curve from westbound Centennial Corridor to northbound I-5 and vice versa.


OTOH, if the proposed alignment curves somewhat in a SW direction as it approaches I-5, that seems to indicate that it may well be a free-flow/reasonably high-speed interchange; possibly a trumpet -- with enough distance from the current Stockdale interchange as not to impinge upon the small business center in the SE quadrant.  If "normal" Caltrans practice is applied, the WB 58>NB 5 movement would become an additional lane on I-5 exiting at Stockdale, and the SB on-ramp from Stockdale would become a dedicated exit lane to EB 58.  While the overall multiplexed distance of I-5 with CA 58 would be a mile or so longer, it would slightly shorten the alignment of the CA 58/Westside freeway -- likely one of the rationales for such a configuration.  Too bad it's at least nine years away from development! 

Considering that Kern County is the home of the current House GOP leader (Kevin McCarthy), and considering that earmarks are likely coming back, that 9-year timeframe could be greatly shortened. Because frankly, that west end of the Parkway will be quite the traffic mess within a few months of the Centennial corridor opening. Especially with the development at the end of the Parkway: https://www.google.com/maps/@35.3551869,-119.1755325,3a,15y,242.16h,88.37t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sDblzDiCJRariXBVmlJ8aBw!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DDblzDiCJRariXBVmlJ8aBw%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D126.065125%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192

It certainly appears that Bakersfield and environs are positioning themselves as the next warehouse/logistics center in the southern half of the state -- plenty of available land for warehouse structures plus what passes for affordable CA housing these days.  Now....whether McCarthy would elect to please and enhance his own constituents with earmarked projects (such as the CA 58 extension freeway out to I-5) or whether he pivots (as he seems wont to do on a dime) and chooses to align with those in his party with a longstanding disdain for public-sector expenditure remains to be seen -- that's the problem with being in a high-visibility position like minority leader.  Either choice will bring catcalls from one sector or another; in that respect, I certainly don't envy him.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: nexus73 on May 02, 2021, 11:23:48 AM
Since the Bakersfield city limits do hit I-5, it would be interesting to see the development of that city once Freeway 58 to I-5 is completed.

Rick
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sprjus4 on May 02, 2021, 11:28:12 AM
Quote from: nexus73 on May 02, 2021, 11:23:48 AM
Since the Bakersfield city limits do hit I-5, it would be interesting to see the development of that city once Freeway 58 to I-5 is completed.

Rick
City limits technically do, but any new freeway beyond where the current Parkway terminates would be built outside (north of) those limits.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: nexus73 on May 02, 2021, 11:39:44 AM
It would be in Bakersfield's interest to annex the land which will be developed.  Cities love to collect those taxes! 

Rick
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: kkt on May 02, 2021, 01:33:35 PM
Quote from: nexus73 on May 02, 2021, 11:39:44 AM
It would be in Bakersfield's interest to annex the land which will be developed.  Cities love to collect those taxes! 

Rick

The bit of Bakersfield city limits that reaches SW to touch I-5 is just a thin strip along the Kern River - city park?

I'm sure Kern County would also love to collect the taxes!
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: nexus73 on May 03, 2021, 12:28:09 PM
Quote from: kkt on May 02, 2021, 01:33:35 PM
Quote from: nexus73 on May 02, 2021, 11:39:44 AM
It would be in Bakersfield's interest to annex the land which will be developed.  Cities love to collect those taxes! 

Rick

The bit of Bakersfield city limits that reaches SW to touch I-5 is just a thin strip along the Kern River - city park?

I'm sure Kern County would also love to collect the taxes!


That sliver of land strikes me as the toe under the tent.  It does set up the city of Bakersfield for further expansion.  There is a lot of ground there to be had between I-5 and 99, then add in a Freeway 58 to see how the backbone of a transportation system would set up a huge amount of development in the south end of the San Joaquin Valley. 

Wouldn't it be fun to see what 2050 looks like over there?

Rick
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: fungus on May 03, 2021, 01:35:45 PM
The sphere of influence of Bakersfield goes all the way down to Highway 223. This is the area that the city could presumptively annex if the land owners are fine with it. https://maps.princeton.edu/catalog/berkeley-s7vd6m
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: mrsman on May 03, 2021, 07:20:52 PM
Quote from: nexus73 on May 03, 2021, 12:28:09 PM
Quote from: kkt on May 02, 2021, 01:33:35 PM
Quote from: nexus73 on May 02, 2021, 11:39:44 AM
It would be in Bakersfield's interest to annex the land which will be developed.  Cities love to collect those taxes! 

Rick

The bit of Bakersfield city limits that reaches SW to touch I-5 is just a thin strip along the Kern River - city park?

I'm sure Kern County would also love to collect the taxes!


That sliver of land strikes me as the toe under the tent.  It does set up the city of Bakersfield for further expansion.  There is a lot of ground there to be had between I-5 and 99, then add in a Freeway 58 to see how the backbone of a transportation system would set up a huge amount of development in the south end of the San Joaquin Valley. 

Wouldn't it be fun to see what 2050 looks like over there?

Rick

Could Bakersfield finally become the affordable LA suburb?  The last bastion for Republicans in SoCal?  Too far to commute daily, obviously, but perhaps with a new WFH model that would have folks only needing to come in once a week or less, folks can move here and Bakersfield can grow.  Perhaps a west Bakersfield along I-5 would be about as far from LA as the main Bakersfield along 99.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: fungus on May 03, 2021, 07:31:30 PM
Victorville/Hesperia at least have proximity to Las Vegas as a selling point. And for the one or two days a week of a commute the drive up the Grapevine, to me, seems much more brutal over the Cajon Pass, which is much lower and which I've crossed often.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: kkt on May 03, 2021, 09:04:40 PM
Quote from: mrsman on May 03, 2021, 07:20:52 PM
Quote from: nexus73 on May 03, 2021, 12:28:09 PM
Quote from: kkt on May 02, 2021, 01:33:35 PM
Quote from: nexus73 on May 02, 2021, 11:39:44 AM
It would be in Bakersfield's interest to annex the land which will be developed.  Cities love to collect those taxes! 

Rick

The bit of Bakersfield city limits that reaches SW to touch I-5 is just a thin strip along the Kern River - city park?

I'm sure Kern County would also love to collect the taxes!


That sliver of land strikes me as the toe under the tent.  It does set up the city of Bakersfield for further expansion.  There is a lot of ground there to be had between I-5 and 99, then add in a Freeway 58 to see how the backbone of a transportation system would set up a huge amount of development in the south end of the San Joaquin Valley. 

Wouldn't it be fun to see what 2050 looks like over there?

Rick

Could Bakersfield finally become the affordable LA suburb?  The last bastion for Republicans in SoCal?  Too far to commute daily, obviously, but perhaps with a new WFH model that would have folks only needing to come in once a week or less, folks can move here and Bakersfield can grow.  Perhaps a west Bakersfield along I-5 would be about as far from LA as the main Bakersfield along 99.

Seems quite possible.  Maybe Barstow too.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Concrete Bob on May 03, 2021, 11:53:13 PM
When I lived in Los Angeles between late 1988 and early 1990, I remember hearing/viewing several reports in the daily news regarding people who worked in Los Angeles who lived in Bakersfield.  Los Angeles was already expensive back in the late 1980s. 

I can easily envision Bakersfield becoming the next Phoenix, in terms of exploding into a mega city, assuming our nation's economy is not drastically altered in the future.  Phoenix had a population of 105,000 in 1950.  Look what has happened in Phoenix over the past 70 years. 

Bakersfield/Kern County has other proposed freeways planned.  One will run north south from SR 99/7th Standard Road, south to I-5 (West Beltway).  Another will run east-west and north-south from the West Beltway east to 99, then curve north past SR 58 up toward SR 178.  Whether those routes get built is anyone's guess.       
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sparker on May 04, 2021, 03:55:57 AM
Quote from: mrsman on May 03, 2021, 07:20:52 PM
Could Bakersfield finally become the affordable LA suburb?  The last bastion for Republicans in SoCal?  Too far to commute daily, obviously, but perhaps with a new WFH model that would have folks only needing to come in once a week or less, folks can move here and Bakersfield can grow.  Perhaps a west Bakersfield along I-5 would be about as far from LA as the main Bakersfield along 99.

Last bastion for Republicans?  Shit, most inland regions of CA not part of the greater LA metro area or the Bay Area and Sacramento, including the commute zones in and around Tracy and Lathrop, are rife with registered GOP types.  And they dominate much of far northern CA from Redding to the OR state line -- hence the sporadic push for the establishment of the "State of Jefferson" in NorCal and Southern Oregon, far afield from CA and OR's "blue state" political bent.  When I lived down in Hesperia, most of the people I ran into -- and even those with whom I worked -- leaned decidedly right of center.   Bakersfield just happens to be the largest separate CA metro area not classified as an exurb that displays a markedly conservative leaning (although population-wise, the epicenter of Republicanism in CA would arguably be the area consisting of suburban San Diego, southern Orange County, and the south end of the Inland Empire (Temecula, Murietta, etc.)).  Bakersfield is decidedly Republican and will likely stay that way for the foreseeable future -- but it definitely isn't anything like a "last bastion" for them by any means.






Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Henry on May 04, 2021, 09:54:47 AM
After hearing of the Centennial Corridor extension plans, I'm hoping it will spur completion of the existing CA 58 freeway to Barstow, with or without I-40 (here's wishing for the former).
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: skluth on May 04, 2021, 11:31:35 AM
Quote from: Henry on May 04, 2021, 09:54:47 AM
After hearing of the Centennial Corridor extension plans, I'm hoping it will spur completion of the existing CA 58 freeway to Barstow, with or without I-40 (here's wishing for the former).

There's no real point to extending I-40 west of Barstow. CA 58 may run directly west from Barstow, but the traffic flow on I-40 is mostly along I-15 to/from Cajon Pass. Other than the CA 223 intersection and possibly California City Blvd, there are no full interchanges needed. Extending I-40 west is more desired by those obsessed with completing a grid than the actual users who are just happy to finally have a non-stop four-lane highway connecting Bakersfield and Barstow. It's fine as an expressway, much like WI 29 in Wisconsin and US 60 in Missouri.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sprjus4 on May 04, 2021, 11:33:18 AM
Quote from: skluth on May 04, 2021, 11:31:35 AM
Quote from: Henry on May 04, 2021, 09:54:47 AM
After hearing of the Centennial Corridor extension plans, I'm hoping it will spur completion of the existing CA 58 freeway to Barstow, with or without I-40 (here's wishing for the former).

There's no real point to extending I-40 west of Barstow. CA 58 may run directly west from Barstow, but the traffic flow on I-40 is mostly along I-15 to/from Cajon Pass. Other than the CA 223 intersection and possibly California City Blvd, there are no full interchanges needed. Extending I-40 west is more desired by those obsessed with completing a grid than the actual users who are just happy to finally have a non-stop four-lane highway connecting Bakersfield and Barstow. It's fine as an expressway, much like WI 29 in Wisconsin and US 60 in Missouri.
It would be nice if California could at least authorize a 70 mph limit throughout, even with the at-grade intersections, but unfortunately is restricted to 65 mph due to state law. Caltrans could at least increase some of the freeway mileage that is still 65 mph to 70 mph - Mojave Bypass, Tehachapi Bypass, Hinkley Bypass, and the Kramer Junction Bypass.

The Boron Bypass has been posted at 70 mph for some time, so that's a start.

Over time, remaining at-grade intersections should be closed piece by piece, similar to how SH-99 has been improved over the years, but that should not be the top priority. At this point, extending the freeway from Bakersfield to I-5 should be the top priority.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on May 04, 2021, 11:35:38 AM
Quote from: skluth on May 04, 2021, 11:31:35 AM
Quote from: Henry on May 04, 2021, 09:54:47 AM
After hearing of the Centennial Corridor extension plans, I'm hoping it will spur completion of the existing CA 58 freeway to Barstow, with or without I-40 (here's wishing for the former).

There's no real point to extending I-40 west of Barstow. CA 58 may run directly west from Barstow, but the traffic flow on I-40 is mostly along I-15 to/from Cajon Pass. Other than the CA 223 intersection and possibly California City Blvd, there are no full interchanges needed. Extending I-40 west is more desired by those obsessed with completing a grid than the actual users who are just happy to finally have a non-stop four-lane highway connecting Bakersfield and Barstow. It's fine as an expressway, much like WI 29 in Wisconsin and US 60 in Missouri.
the amount of truck traffic I've experienced if I had unlimited money I'd extend I-40 to the PCH somewhere between San Louis Obispo and Santa Barbra. I get that is a pipe dream at this point but it seems like a no brainer to extend I-40 to I-5.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: skluth on May 04, 2021, 12:02:36 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on May 04, 2021, 11:35:38 AM
Quote from: skluth on May 04, 2021, 11:31:35 AM
Quote from: Henry on May 04, 2021, 09:54:47 AM
After hearing of the Centennial Corridor extension plans, I'm hoping it will spur completion of the existing CA 58 freeway to Barstow, with or without I-40 (here's wishing for the former).

There's no real point to extending I-40 west of Barstow. CA 58 may run directly west from Barstow, but the traffic flow on I-40 is mostly along I-15 to/from Cajon Pass. Other than the CA 223 intersection and possibly California City Blvd, there are no full interchanges needed. Extending I-40 west is more desired by those obsessed with completing a grid than the actual users who are just happy to finally have a non-stop four-lane highway connecting Bakersfield and Barstow. It's fine as an expressway, much like WI 29 in Wisconsin and US 60 in Missouri.
the amount of truck traffic I've experienced if I had unlimited money I'd extend I-40 to the PCH somewhere between San Louis Obispo and Santa Barbra. I get that is a pipe dream at this point but it seems like a no brainer to extend I-40 to I-5.

Upgrading CA 46 to the same standard as CA 58 would accomplish the same thing. Short freeway segments near US 101 and I-5 with interchange bypasses like Blackwells Corner would satisfy most drivers at a lot less cost.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: ClassicHasClass on May 04, 2021, 02:20:10 PM
I agree. I see more of a need for CA 46 to be upgraded now than CA 58. There's a lot of I-5 (and CA 99) to US 101 cutover traffic that is not well-served on the current facility.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on May 04, 2021, 04:04:27 PM
Quote from: skluth on May 04, 2021, 12:02:36 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on May 04, 2021, 11:35:38 AM
Quote from: skluth on May 04, 2021, 11:31:35 AM
Quote from: Henry on May 04, 2021, 09:54:47 AM
After hearing of the Centennial Corridor extension plans, I'm hoping it will spur completion of the existing CA 58 freeway to Barstow, with or without I-40 (here's wishing for the former).

There's no real point to extending I-40 west of Barstow. CA 58 may run directly west from Barstow, but the traffic flow on I-40 is mostly along I-15 to/from Cajon Pass. Other than the CA 223 intersection and possibly California City Blvd, there are no full interchanges needed. Extending I-40 west is more desired by those obsessed with completing a grid than the actual users who are just happy to finally have a non-stop four-lane highway connecting Bakersfield and Barstow. It's fine as an expressway, much like WI 29 in Wisconsin and US 60 in Missouri.
the amount of truck traffic I've experienced if I had unlimited money I'd extend I-40 to the PCH somewhere between San Louis Obispo and Santa Barbra. I get that is a pipe dream at this point but it seems like a no brainer to extend I-40 to I-5.

Upgrading CA 46 to the same standard as CA 58 would accomplish the same thing. Short freeway segments near US 101 and I-5 with interchange bypasses like Blackwells Corner would satisfy most drivers at a lot less cost.
Really much of anything would help. That road has some of the most aggressive truckers I've ever seen. I can't remember how many times I've had to yield by pulling off the road to a truck passing or risking a head on collision.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sparker on May 04, 2021, 04:56:19 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on May 04, 2021, 04:04:27 PM
Quote from: skluth on May 04, 2021, 12:02:36 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on May 04, 2021, 11:35:38 AM
Quote from: skluth on May 04, 2021, 11:31:35 AM
Quote from: Henry on May 04, 2021, 09:54:47 AM
After hearing of the Centennial Corridor extension plans, I'm hoping it will spur completion of the existing CA 58 freeway to Barstow, with or without I-40 (here's wishing for the former).

There's no real point to extending I-40 west of Barstow. CA 58 may run directly west from Barstow, but the traffic flow on I-40 is mostly along I-15 to/from Cajon Pass. Other than the CA 223 intersection and possibly California City Blvd, there are no full interchanges needed. Extending I-40 west is more desired by those obsessed with completing a grid than the actual users who are just happy to finally have a non-stop four-lane highway connecting Bakersfield and Barstow. It's fine as an expressway, much like WI 29 in Wisconsin and US 60 in Missouri.
the amount of truck traffic I've experienced if I had unlimited money I'd extend I-40 to the PCH somewhere between San Louis Obispo and Santa Barbra. I get that is a pipe dream at this point but it seems like a no brainer to extend I-40 to I-5.

Upgrading CA 46 to the same standard as CA 58 would accomplish the same thing. Short freeway segments near US 101 and I-5 with interchange bypasses like Blackwells Corner would satisfy most drivers at a lot less cost.
Really much of anything would help. That road has some of the most aggressive truckers I've ever seen. I can't remember how many times I've had to yield by pulling off the road to a truck passing or risking a head on collision.

IMO, CA 46 would certainly benefit from the "midwest expressway" approach -- a divided expressway with interchanges at major junctions, with bypasses of Wasco, Lost Hills (which would almost assuredly include a new interchange with I-5 -- maybe a cloverleaf with full C/D for both routes), and a bypass of the approach to US 101, which is invariably clogged (on weekends), at least in non-COVID times, with L.A. types doing wine-tasting day trips.  A short (<3 miles) freeway section with a trumpet at US 101 would suffice.  If such a facility materialized, it might even draw commercial traffic heading to I-5 or CA 58 away from CA 152 to the north; much less severe gradients, if a few miles longer (and less time on I-5, always a blessing!). 
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: skluth on May 04, 2021, 07:57:31 PM
I agree that CA 58 east of Bakersfield could be 70 mph. I'd rather have a climbing lane for trucks up Tehachapi Pass though.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sparker on May 04, 2021, 09:15:29 PM
Quote from: skluth on May 04, 2021, 07:57:31 PM
I agree that CA 58 east of Bakersfield could be 70 mph. I'd rather have a climbing lane for trucks up Tehachapi Pass though.

That would entail carving out the hillside along the steep section from Woodford east into Tehachapi (passing the famous Tehachapi RR loop) in order to add any extra lanes, since the Tehachapi Creek gully is immediately to the south.  One or two nasty incidents involving slow trucks (especially during winter fog) may prompt D6 to push for funds to do just that.  Since the freeway was pushed through there in the '60's, that section, along with the S-curves just east of the CA 223/Caliente intersections, have been the most physically treacherous parts of the corridor.   Along with grade separation at the aforementioned intersections, those areas are the segments most likely to be tackled in the foreseeable future -- after the "laurel resting" after the 4-lane completion out at Kramer has institutionally passed! 
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sprjus4 on May 04, 2021, 09:18:36 PM
Reconstruction of that mountain pass could also involve bringing it to interstate standards - 6 lane widening, full left and right shoulders, along with removal of any lingering at grade intersections. Aren't the grades steeper than what is traditional as well?
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: kkt on May 04, 2021, 09:26:25 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on May 04, 2021, 09:18:36 PM
Reconstruction of that mountain pass could also involve bringing it to interstate standards - 6 lane widening, full left and right shoulders, along with removal of any lingering at grade intersections. Aren't the grades steeper than what is traditional as well?

AADT in the Tehachepi area is around 20,000 to 25,000.  I'm not sure that justifies 6 lanes.  Maybe a climbing lane if the grade is steep.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: ClassicHasClass on May 04, 2021, 11:24:20 PM
Quote from: kkt on May 04, 2021, 09:26:25 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on May 04, 2021, 09:18:36 PM
Reconstruction of that mountain pass could also involve bringing it to interstate standards - 6 lane widening, full left and right shoulders, along with removal of any lingering at grade intersections. Aren't the grades steeper than what is traditional as well?

AADT in the Tehachepi area is around 20,000 to 25,000.  I'm not sure that justifies 6 lanes.  Maybe a climbing lane if the grade is steep.

There are definitely sections that could use a climbing lane, especially when you get clustertrucks when one's passing the other on the grade up to CA 203.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sparker on May 05, 2021, 04:35:39 AM
Quote from: sprjus4 on May 04, 2021, 09:18:36 PM
Reconstruction of that mountain pass could also involve bringing it to interstate standards - 6 lane widening, full left and right shoulders, along with removal of any lingering at grade intersections. Aren't the grades steeper than what is traditional as well?

The prevailing EB grade through the steepest section between Woodford and the CA 202 junction west of Tehachapi is a little steeper than most freeway grades at about 6.5%; hence my suggestion that there would be the most appropriate location for a climbing lane.  BTW, Cuesta on US 101 is a bit steeper at just under 7% NB.  Although they never reach an elevation much over 7K even at the mountaintops, the Tehachapis are deceptively nasty -- just ask the SP surveyors who laid out the tracks back in 1876 -- and the RR tops out at 2.5% grade EB directly across the canyon from the steepest part of 58.  And to get up (and down) the hill the tracks are almost continuously on 10-degree curvature; between the start of the real climb in Caliente and the last mile into Tehachapi, there's hardly a straight stretch over 1000 yards -- as one who as a kid rode the late lamented San Joaquin Daylight at least once a year, I can certainly attest to the difficulty of the line; even downhill the train rarely topped 30 mph -- but once down the hill at Caliente, the engineers certainly hauled ass all the way into Bakersfield (which was the crew change point)!
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: mgk920 on May 05, 2021, 09:39:11 PM
I'm just a bit mind-blown over the fact that a new-ROW urban freeway that involved the acquisition and clearing of an existing post-WWII neighborhood is under construction in *California*.

Let that thought sink in for a bit.

:wow:

Mike
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: kkt on May 05, 2021, 11:24:46 PM
I'm still mind blown by Bakersfield's failure in the 1950s to reserve right of way for such an obvious need.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: TheStranger on May 06, 2021, 02:18:59 AM
Quote from: kkt on May 05, 2021, 11:24:46 PM
I'm still mind blown by Bakersfield's failure in the 1950s to reserve right of way for such an obvious need.


Not sure if it was as obvious of a need in the 1950s as it would be decades later:

1. no West Side Freeway I-5 alignment until 1958
1A. main priority at the time was the 99 bypass to the west of downtown Bakersfield

2. The through route east-west, 466, went up US 99 (204, 99) and then along today's Route 46 rather than directly west of Bakersfield itself.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sparker on May 06, 2021, 04:28:13 AM
Quote from: mgk920 on May 05, 2021, 09:39:11 PM
I'm just a bit mind-blown over the fact that a new-ROW urban freeway that involved the acquisition and clearing of an existing post-WWII neighborhood is under construction in *California*.

Let that thought sink in for a bit.

:wow:

Mike

The fact that the planning for the route was promulgated locally rather than by a DOH committee in Sacramento (even with the ensuing public review process, that was the way things were done before the 1973 amalgamation of Caltrans) likely means extensive public vetting -- and probably exceptionally generous payments for 60-to-70-year-old housing stock were part of the package.  It's also likely that there was no singular identifiable grouping, ethnic or otherwise, that dominated the particular neighborhood through which the corridor extended, so any grievances that cropped up during the ROW acquisition period could be dealt with on an individual or aggregate basis rather than having to contend with a vocal collective opposition.  And it's Bakersfield -- where property values, while increasing over the years along with the entire state, lagged behind not only the state's major metro areas but also those areas of the Valley more conducive to becoming commuter exurbs of said metro areas (e.g. the 99 corridor from Merced to Sacramento).  Given inducements such as the opportunity to relocate to a "better" area of town for little or no money out of pocket, it's likely a sizeable portion of the several hundred uprooted residents viewed the freeway process as, on balance, a benefit. 

That being said, it is California; I for one wouldn't be a bit surprised to see some sort of negative "post-mortem" regarding this particular process crop up in academic and/or activist circles at some point in the near future.   
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: compdude787 on May 12, 2021, 05:33:10 PM
Quote from: ClassicHasClass on May 04, 2021, 11:24:20 PM
Quote from: kkt on May 04, 2021, 09:26:25 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on May 04, 2021, 09:18:36 PM
Reconstruction of that mountain pass could also involve bringing it to interstate standards - 6 lane widening, full left and right shoulders, along with removal of any lingering at grade intersections. Aren't the grades steeper than what is traditional as well?

AADT in the Tehachepi area is around 20,000 to 25,000.  I'm not sure that justifies 6 lanes.  Maybe a climbing lane if the grade is steep.

There are definitely sections that could use a climbing lane, especially when you get clustertrucks when one's passing the other on the grade up to CA 203.

I'm in full agreement that CA 58 absolutely needs to have a truck climbing lane eastbound over the Tehachapi Pass. It's one of those things that should have been done years ago!

I've only driven Tehachapi Pass once, last October, but when I did, there were tons of trucks going up it in the right lane, and of course, trucks using the left lane to pass slower trucks, causing a backup behind them.

I almost got hit by a truck at one point, too. The truck was in the right lane and I was about to pass him in the left lane when all of a sudden, he changed lanes and cut me off! I had to slam on the brakes, and frankly, I laid on the horn for several seconds. That incident really made me wish that CA 58 had a truck climbing lane.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sparker on May 12, 2021, 06:53:01 PM
^^^^^^^^^^^^
While the composite CA 58 AADT might top out at around 25K, trucks make up a significant percentage of that total.  What the stats don't show is that if winter storms come early along the I-80 (or even I-70 east of Denver) corridor(s) -- as they did last year -- a sizeable amount of that traffic originating in the Bay Area or from Valley agriculture that would normally proceed east over Donner and through SLC shifts south to the latitudes of the I-40 corridor, and more often than not utilizes CA 58 as the initial leg to access eastward I-40.  So on occasion -- and with the climate situation being what it is today those occasions stand a good chance of becoming more frequent -- the truck volume, particularly EB, will spike.  Yeah, it's a good thing that 58 is now fully 4-laned east of Bakersfield, but rather than resting on its laurels Caltrans should recognize by now that the importance of this corridor is only going to increase with time, and that the issues,such as the truck climbing lanes that would be highly beneficial on the steepest gradients, would be best kept on or near the "front burner", along with safety measures such as addressing the CA 223/Caliente intersection zone.  And once any traffic from I-5 is added to the mix when the Westside connector is completed, some sort of critical mass might be reached!   D6 -- and D8 to a lesser extent -- better be prepared for all this!
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sprjus4 on May 12, 2021, 06:57:25 PM
While it can be argued merely a climbing lane would work, I could see merit in simply 6 laning that section entirely (for both downhill and uphill) to definitely future-proof it and eliminate those truck conflicts entirely (climbing lane ending going up a hill, etc.)
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: skluth on June 05, 2021, 07:30:45 PM
Now that travel is becoming easier, I thought it might be fun to start planning some trips this summer. I was curious about driving to SF. I prefer going through the desert over the standard CA/I-210 around LA Basin from Palm Springs. When I moved the routing through Landers, Google sent me through the west side of Bakersfield on the Westside Parkway via CA 99/ California Av/ Oak St/ Truxton Av. If I had any questions regarding future traffic E-W through Bakersfield to I-5 after the Westside Parkway is connected to CA 99, it was just answered. I don't know if the Westside Parkway has any truck restrictions right now, but it's going to be quickly torn up once it opens fully without any restrictions.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sparker on June 07, 2021, 04:03:27 AM
Quote from: skluth on June 05, 2021, 07:30:45 PM
Now that travel is becoming easier, I thought it might be fun to start planning some trips this summer. I was curious about driving to SF. I prefer going through the desert over the standard CA/I-210 around LA Basin from Palm Springs. When I moved the routing through Landers, Google sent me through the west side of Bakersfield on the Westside Parkway via CA 99/ California Av/ Oak St/ Truxton Av. If I had any questions regarding future traffic E-W through Bakersfield to I-5 after the Westside Parkway is connected to CA 99, it was just answered. I don't know if the Westside Parkway has any truck restrictions right now, but it's going to be quickly torn up once it opens fully without any restrictions.

If Google, Sirius, and other in-car mapping services start routing CA 58 traffic via the Westside Parkway (whether fully opened or not), pavement wear will be only one of several local issues that will inevitably crop up.   IIRC a roundabout at Stockdale and CA 43 is planned; continuous truck traffic might just overwhelm that design.  Even if it's not currently a state or local STIP item, it's a good chance that local pressure (if not incident levels) will drive the push to complete the freeway all the way west to I-5; there's nothing like a string of publicized incidents to convert public sentiment to actual development.   
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Occidental Tourist on June 07, 2021, 10:25:37 PM
The roundabout has been there for awhile.  I took it last December on the way back from a business meeting.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sparker on June 08, 2021, 12:37:59 AM
Quote from: Occidental Tourist on June 07, 2021, 10:25:37 PM
The roundabout has been there for awhile.  I took it last December on the way back from a business meeting.

D6 sure likes placing roundabouts on CA 43; if my count is correct, that one makes three -- Stockdale, Corcoran, and northeast of Hanford (any info about additional circles is welcome!).  Nevertheless, IMO in rural areas the concept is a solution in search of a problem (unless an underlying goal is to simply slow down traffic in an aggregate sense, which seems a bit gratuitous). 
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Occidental Tourist on June 08, 2021, 10:39:53 PM
Yep. It seemed completely unnecessary at that intersection.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on June 08, 2021, 11:06:57 PM
Quote from: sparker on June 08, 2021, 12:37:59 AM
Quote from: Occidental Tourist on June 07, 2021, 10:25:37 PM
The roundabout has been there for awhile.  I took it last December on the way back from a business meeting.

D6 sure likes placing roundabouts on CA 43; if my count is correct, that one makes three -- Stockdale, Corcoran, and northeast of Hanford (any info about additional circles is welcome!).  Nevertheless, IMO in rural areas the concept is a solution in search of a problem (unless an underlying goal is to simply slow down traffic in an aggregate sense, which seems a bit gratuitous).

The one in Hanford at Lacey at the very least was an improvement over the signalized intersection.   
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: cahwyguy on June 08, 2021, 11:13:58 PM
Quote from: sparker on June 08, 2021, 12:37:59 AM
D6 sure likes placing roundabouts on CA 43; if my count is correct, that one makes three -- Stockdale, Corcoran, and northeast of Hanford (any info about additional circles is welcome!).  Nevertheless, IMO in rural areas the concept is a solution in search of a problem (unless an underlying goal is to simply slow down traffic in an aggregate sense, which seems a bit gratuitous). 

Roundabouts are something I catch for my pages, so any would be included on that route's pages. The ostensible reason for the roundabouts is not slowing traffic, but eliminating collisions (roundabouts typically have slow-speed collisions; intersections get serious T-boning).
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sparker on June 09, 2021, 05:19:27 AM
Quote from: cahwyguy on June 08, 2021, 11:13:58 PM
Quote from: sparker on June 08, 2021, 12:37:59 AM
D6 sure likes placing roundabouts on CA 43; if my count is correct, that one makes three -- Stockdale, Corcoran, and northeast of Hanford (any info about additional circles is welcome!).  Nevertheless, IMO in rural areas the concept is a solution in search of a problem (unless an underlying goal is to simply slow down traffic in an aggregate sense, which seems a bit gratuitous). 

Roundabouts are something I catch for my pages, so any would be included on that route's pages. The ostensible reason for the roundabouts is not slowing traffic, but eliminating collisions (roundabouts typically have slow-speed collisions; intersections get serious T-boning).


I do understand the safety aspect of a roundabout vis-a-vis a standard 4-way intersection (and even some isolated signalized ones) -- but placing one along a rural highway with a high level of truck traffic, particularly if that same traffic doesn't have any other obstacles, such as populated areas with lower speed limits, to effect a general slowdown that in essence readies the traffic for the lower speeds required to negotiate a roundabout might be a questionable concept.  Now two of the three along CA 43, Corcoran and Lacey Blvd./Hanford, are in relatively populated areas or, in the case of the latter, close to the signalized CA 198 interchange, so slowing to roundabout-appropriate speeds is likely occurring in any case.  I haven't been on CA 43 south of present CA 58 for a long time (since the late '80's), so I haven't traversed the area of the Stockdale circle and am therefore unfamiliar with its present environment.  Nevertheless, while there's probably quite a bit of agricultural traffic using that stretch of highway, 43 isn't serving as a major interregional commercial connector that far south, so a sizeable amount of truck traffic accustomed to rolling along at 55+ probably doesn't constitute a major issue.  But when it comes to rural roundabouts I'm always coming back to the CA 12/113 junction west of Rio Vista as an example of a misplaced roundabout, a point driven home by the fatal incident shortly after that facility opened to traffic.  Maybe the design of these isn't specifically meant to slow down traffic in general, but that design does intrinsically require considerably slower speeds, something that can be problematic when placed along an interregional connector (like CA 12 in that area) where overall traffic speeds exceed the 55mph mark on a regular basis, including that of large trucks.  I'm just not a fan of counterintuitive design! 

I'll probably make it a point to head north on CA 43 through all of the roundabouts on the return leg of my next trip south just to get an idea of what is actually happening in the field; but I doubt it'll hold any major surprises. 
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: pderocco on August 06, 2021, 12:14:37 AM
I was perusing Google Earth just now, and noticed they have new imagery for the Centennial Corridor from a few months ago. But at the other end of the Westside Parkway, I noticed they've cleared ROW for extending it across Stockdale to a new alignment 1/2 mile south, as far as the railroad tracks. This may lie fallow for years, but it's exciting to see some activity related to extending the route to I-5. This imagery isn't in Google Maps, by the way.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on August 06, 2021, 12:40:16 AM
I'm still getting the same old imagery outdated by years. Is the Hinkley Bypass updated on your end yet? It's not on mine.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: NE2 on August 06, 2021, 01:48:45 AM
The land for the extension across Stockdale Highway, curving alongside the canal, was bought in 2018: http://assessor.co.kern.ca.us/propertydetails.php?srctext=53401125&srctype=apn I see nothing west of an extension of Wegis Avenue.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: pderocco on August 06, 2021, 08:02:49 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on August 06, 2021, 12:40:16 AM
I'm still getting the same old imagery outdated by years. Is the Hinkley Bypass updated on your end yet? It's not on mine.
You're not seeing imagery of the west end of the Westside Parkway from April of this year? Do you have 3D Buildings on? That's older imagery.

They don't have any current imagery of either the Hinkley Bypass or the Kramer Junction Bypass, the former being almost 7 years out of date. The satellite imagery that it shows while it's loading the higher res imagery shows the new roads, though.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: vdeane on August 06, 2021, 11:02:38 PM
It's worth noting that this is only in Earth, not Maps.  Maps still uses the old imagery.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: ARMOURERERIC on August 07, 2021, 07:20:37 AM
Check out the YouTube channel for Heightened Perspective, he does regular flyover of the Westside Parkway, Centennial  Corridor
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: TheStranger on August 20, 2021, 03:25:38 PM
Just saw a "Freeway Entrance - 58 East" sign at Stockdale and Westside Parkway!

Don't remember that being there when I was here in November.

Also saw a "To 58" trailblazer at Mohawk ramp.

SM-G973U1
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Daniel Fiddler on August 20, 2021, 03:27:17 PM
Isn't this going to eventually be incorporated into I-40 or am I imaging things?
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sprjus4 on August 20, 2021, 03:34:05 PM
^ There are currently zero plans for anything of I-40 west of I-15.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sparker on August 20, 2021, 05:17:36 PM
Quote from: TheStranger on August 20, 2021, 03:25:38 PM
Just saw a "Freeway Entrance - 58 East" sign at Stockdale and Westside Parkway!

Don't remember that being there when I was here in November.

Also saw a "To 58" trailblazer at Mohawk ramp.

SM-G973U1


Any ETA on the connector to CA 99?  Also, any signage on Stockdale west of the freeway terminus?  It'll be interesting to see if D6 (a) gets Stockdale adopted out all the way to CA 5 or just as far as CA 43 in the interim, shunting 58 north to its original alignment for the time being.  Suppose it's too much -- or too early -- to ask about any concrete (or asphalt!) plans for the final freeway extension to I-5. 

Quote from: Daniel Fiddler on August 20, 2021, 03:27:17 PM
Isn't this going to eventually be incorporated into I-40 or am I imaging things?
Quote from: sprjus4 on August 20, 2021, 03:34:05 PM
^ There are currently zero plans for anything of I-40 west of I-15.

The last time anything formal about CA 58 becoming I-40 was back in 1968, when the corridor was a part of the original 4500-mile configuration of that year's Interstate additions; submitted by DOH the previous year.  Of course, when the cut-down to 1500 miles occurred, this was one of the deletions.  Nothing since then, although a conversation I had with Caltrans planners back in 1987 indicated that 58 was about the only corridor that they would even consider submitting for such status.  But Caltrans and their political handlers have had several opportunities with the various federal omnibus bills since that time (ISTEA, NHS, SAFETEA-LU, etc.) to get such a corridor concept on the books, but haven't done so to date, which seems to indicate that official enthusiasm for such an action is presently negligible.  And since 58's currently fully a free-flow freeway/expressway for the entire length between I-15 and CA 99, it probably won't get short-term attention unless safety issues stemming from the CA 223 interchange or any of the other remaining at-grade crossings become publicly problematic, prompting "spot" fixes, including grade separations/interchanges, as needed.  But the chances of an end-to-end upgrade program at this time are pretty slim.     
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on August 20, 2021, 06:14:16 PM
Quote from: Daniel Fiddler on August 20, 2021, 03:27:17 PM
Isn't this going to eventually be incorporated into I-40 or am I imaging things?

The whole road world is imagining things.  The fact that nonsense made to the CA 58 Wikipedia is a travesty.  Sparker spelled out the history of the corridor as a prospective Interstate in full detail. 
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: 74/171FAN on August 20, 2021, 06:41:23 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on August 20, 2021, 06:14:16 PM
Quote from: Daniel Fiddler on August 20, 2021, 03:27:17 PM
Isn't this going to eventually be incorporated into I-40 or am I imaging things?

The whole road world is imagining things.  The fact that nonsense made to the CA 58 Wikipedia is a travesty.  Sparker spelled out the history of the corridor as a prospective Interstate in full detail. 

We imagine CA 58 becoming I-40 out west like we imagine NJ 42 and the Atlantic City Expressway becoming I-76 out east.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on August 20, 2021, 07:42:10 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on August 20, 2021, 06:41:23 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on August 20, 2021, 06:14:16 PM
Quote from: Daniel Fiddler on August 20, 2021, 03:27:17 PM
Isn't this going to eventually be incorporated into I-40 or am I imaging things?

The whole road world is imagining things.  The fact that nonsense made to the CA 58 Wikipedia is a travesty.  Sparker spelled out the history of the corridor as a prospective Interstate in full detail. 

We imagine CA 58 becoming I-40 out west like we imagine NJ 42 and the Atlantic City Expressway becoming I-76 out east.

But it's like the Mandela Effect.  People are renumbering some sort of recent exploration of the current CA 58 corridor as part of I-40 when in reality it was last seriously considered half a century ago.  Interestingly someone edited it off the Wikipedia page during April:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=California_State_Route_58&action=history
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: kkt on August 20, 2021, 08:03:55 PM
Half the roadgeeks from here to Key West look at CA 58 and think "I-40".  But Caltrans looks at CA 58 and wonders, what would be in it for us?

Someday maybe Bakersfield or Central Valley boosters will lean on their members of congress to get it put in a bill.  "Eventually" is a long time, it could happen.  I wouldn't look for it until the freeway CA 58 is extended to I-5.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on August 20, 2021, 08:22:41 PM
Quote from: kkt on August 20, 2021, 08:03:55 PM
Half the roadgeeks from here to Key West look at CA 58 and think "I-40".  But Caltrans looks at CA 58 and wonders, what would be in it for us?

Someday maybe Bakersfield or Central Valley boosters will lean on their members of congress to get it put in a bill.  "Eventually" is a long time, it could happen.  I wouldn't look for it until the freeway CA 58 is extended to I-5.

Aside from a full interchange at CA 223 what other improvements on CA 58 between CA 99 and I-15 are actually needed?   Sealing off a bunch of surface intersections and widening/paving the shoulders don't really add any value.  At look at corridors like US 101 between Santa Barbara-Gilroy and see way more more of a need to close off expressway intersections with freeway interchange.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sparker on August 20, 2021, 08:33:11 PM
It's kinda ironic that someone with the prominence of House minority leader McCarthy hasn't pressed for something of the sort at the federal level for his own hometown.  Hell, with CA 99 formally considered by the Feds as a future Interstate, his home district could be sitting at a significant Interstate junction!  But it seems he's almost always super-busy covering his ass by waffling about just about anything about which he's issued pronouncements; he probably doesn't have the time to tend to his own back yard.  Hell, it took the local MPO to initiate the Westside project without significant support from the higher strata of the governmental food chain (although D6 did step up in terms of helping out with the engineering/technical aspects of the project).  One of us could write the proposal and even the authorizing language and drop it on Kevin M's desk, and it would likely end up in a bottom drawer of a filing cabinet (and yes, I've thought about it!); he seems to care more about maintaining his status than doing much for his constituents. 

Quote from: Max Rockatansky on August 20, 2021, 08:22:41 PM
Quote from: kkt on August 20, 2021, 08:03:55 PM
Half the roadgeeks from here to Key West look at CA 58 and think "I-40".  But Caltrans looks at CA 58 and wonders, what would be in it for us?

Someday maybe Bakersfield or Central Valley boosters will lean on their members of congress to get it put in a bill.  "Eventually" is a long time, it could happen.  I wouldn't look for it until the freeway CA 58 is extended to I-5.

Aside from a full interchange at CA 223 what other improvements on CA 58 between CA 99 and I-15 are actually needed?   Sealing off a bunch of surface intersections and widening/paving the shoulders don't really add any value.  At look at corridors like US 101 between Santa Barbara-Gilroy and see way more more of a need to close off expressway intersections with freeway interchange.

I think this has been mentioned before, but uphill climbing and downhill dedicated truck lanes on the steep section between Tehachapi and Woodford/Keene would certainly be helpful to commercial traffic -- both to make it more efficient and to make the interface between heavy-commercial and other traffic considerably safer.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: The Ghostbuster on August 20, 2021, 08:42:13 PM
Is the Stockdale Highway-to-CA 58 freeway conversion going to be constructed anytime soon? Or is the freeway conversion construction date far into the future?
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sparker on August 21, 2021, 01:18:52 AM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on August 20, 2021, 08:42:13 PM
Is the Stockdale Highway-to-CA 58 freeway conversion going to be constructed anytime soon? Or is the freeway conversion construction date far into the future?

Probably too early to tell.  D6 installed a roundabout at the intersection of Stockdale and CA 43 a couple of years back, but otherwise nada as far as physical construction.  Apparently there's a designated ROW that diverges from Stockdale west of 43 and sits a bit north of the Kern River channel, intersecting I-5 between 1-2 miles south of the present Stockdale interchange.  But as of yet no timetable -- nor hints at such -- from either Caltrans or the Bakersfield MPO.  And the earlier comment about no action regarding any potential Interstate aspirations being taken until this segment is at least let is probably more true than not -- although my comments on the lack of vision from the local congressional district and its occupant stand -- even if his name appears in the cites of any future legislation to such effect, it's likely in reality he'll simply serve as a "rubber stamp" -- at most a passive conduit for more determined local players.  It's not his political leanings at issue here; it's his utility to his constituency. 
Title: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: jrouse on August 21, 2021, 12:05:29 PM
Quote from: sparker on August 20, 2021, 05:17:36 PM

Any ETA on the connector to CA 99?  Also, any signage on Stockdale west of the freeway terminus?  It'll be interesting to see if D6 (a) gets Stockdale adopted out all the way to CA 5 or just as far as CA 43 in the interim, shunting 58 north to its original alignment for the time being.  Suppose it's too much -- or too early -- to ask about any concrete (or asphalt!) plans for the final freeway extension to I-5. 


The California Transportation Commission, which is responsible for handling the adoption and relinquishment of State highways, approved the adoption of Stockdale Highway from I-5 to the western end of the Westside Parkway and the majority of the Westside Parkway (from its western end up to Coffee) as CA-58 in late 2020. 

https://catc.ca.gov/-/media/ctc-media/documents/ctc-meetings/2020/2020-12/45-2-3a1.pdf

https://catc.ca.gov/-/media/ctc-media/documents/ctc-meetings/2020/2020-12/46-2-3a2.pdf

The city of Bakersfield subsequently transferred this portion of the Westside Parkway to Caltrans on February 5. That would explain why people are seeing CA-58 shields along Westside Parkway.

https://twitter.com/bakersfieldchp/status/1351311393455267844?s=21

Long term plans call for a new freeway alignment to be built for CA-58 between I-5 and the western end of the Westside Parkway,  but that project is not funded.  It's in the 2018 Kern County Regional Transportation Plan.  The future freeway will be located a bit south of the existing Stockdale Highway, and curve a bit to the southwest as it gets closer to I-5.  The connection is projected to be built after 2030.

https://content.civicplus.com/api/assets/1ce8ceae-022c-4c81-84de-ede490743edb?version=0&q=d13cc4e5-fa66-67c5-bcb3-777ec5e1700e

https://www.kerncog.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/2018_RTP.pdf

The Centennial Corridor project, which will connect Westside Parkway with the existing CA-58 freeway at CA-99, is scheduled for completion by 2023.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sparker on August 21, 2021, 07:37:15 PM
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Thanks for the updated info.  Since nothing regarding the I-5 extension will be let for at least another 9 years, specific plans/features of the extension probably haven't been finalized yet -- such as the new 5/58 interchange.  Let's hope they're thinking to the future and planning a free-flow (directional or higher-speed trumpet) for that facility (no parclos/DDI's/SPUI's, please!). 
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sprjus4 on August 21, 2021, 07:43:21 PM
^ If I-15's junction is any indication... we can only hope.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: pderocco on August 22, 2021, 12:40:09 AM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on August 20, 2021, 08:22:41 PM
Aside from a full interchange at CA 223 what other improvements on CA 58 between CA 99 and I-15 are actually needed?   Sealing off a bunch of surface intersections and widening/paving the shoulders don't really add any value.  At look at corridors like US 101 between Santa Barbara-Gilroy and see way more more of a need to close off expressway intersections with freeway interchange.
Probably a diamond at Bealville Rd and another at Cal City Blvd. They're not busy, but they can be dangerous.

On the other hand, as soon as the Westside Parkway reaches I-5, there will be less truck traffic on 223, making that interchange upgrade less pressing.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sparker on August 22, 2021, 02:25:53 AM
Quote from: pderocco on August 22, 2021, 12:40:09 AM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on August 20, 2021, 08:22:41 PM
Aside from a full interchange at CA 223 what other improvements on CA 58 between CA 99 and I-15 are actually needed?   Sealing off a bunch of surface intersections and widening/paving the shoulders don't really add any value.  At look at corridors like US 101 between Santa Barbara-Gilroy and see way more more of a need to close off expressway intersections with freeway interchange.
Probably a diamond at Bealville Rd and another at Cal City Blvd. They're not busy, but they can be dangerous.

On the other hand, as soon as the Westside Parkway reaches I-5, there will be less truck traffic on 223, making that interchange upgrade less pressing.


Bealville Road is only 0.8 miles from the 223 intersection; both intersecting roads are connected by a "frontage road" which includes part of the alignment of old US 466.  Chances are that if an interchange is planned, it'll address both roads within the same interchange complex.  While some truck traffic does bypass old 58 in the western part of Bakersfield, which can be a real slog with a nasty string of signals, by using 223 as an alternative, not that many do it multiple times; Arvin has had a reputation as a speed trap for over a half-century now, so most truckers avoid it (quiet a few using either CA 46 or 7th Standard Road between I-5 and CA 99, then simply down to the 58 freeway.  And regarding Cal City Blvd., I've never seen more than one or two vehicles waiting at the stop for a break in 58 traffic.  Nonetheless, I understand more than a few US Borax employees do reside there, so maybe there's a mini-rush-hour happening, although I personally haven't seen it.  But that would definitely be the most obvious candidate for upgrade to an interchange after 223/Bealville; traffic on the few other grade crossings between Boron and Mojave is negligible.   
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: theroadwayone on September 10, 2021, 09:54:36 PM
If and when I-40 is extended west, how are they going to do exit numbers; for Bakersfield-Barstow, will they start from 0 or pick up on CA-58's mileposts, and then adjust the Barstow-Needles segment accordingly?
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sparker on September 11, 2021, 04:16:08 AM
Quote from: theroadwayone on September 10, 2021, 09:54:36 PM
If and when I-40 is extended west, how are they going to do exit numbers; for Bakersfield-Barstow, will they start from 0 or pick up on CA-58's mileposts, and then adjust the Barstow-Needles segment accordingly?

In the unlikely -- at least in the near term -- event that I-40 gets extended west through Bakersfield to I-5; it's almost a certainty that new exit numbers for the entirety of I-40 in CA, old and new, will be erected.  Since Caltrans doesn't really do statewide mileposts as such -- and there aren't all that many exits on current I-40 between I-15 and the state line, it would be a considerably less complex and disruptive undertaking than many other Interstate conversions.   Exit numbering would likely proceed east from the I-5 junction/terminus; chances are that the CA 58 surface route west of I-5 would retain its number (the agency is loath to renumber routes if it doesn't have to). 
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: brad2971 on September 26, 2021, 03:14:14 PM
Go to about 4:55 in this video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xkyHsrWTibo

Does the city of Bakersfield consider the Westdie Pkwy/Centennial Corridor/CA 58 an eventual part of I-40?
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: roadfro on September 26, 2021, 04:34:42 PM
^ I think that's a comment from the contractor creating the flyover videos and not a city-endorsed statement. Seems like an odd thing to say in the video though...

As far as anyone is aware, Caltrans has no desire to pursue making the freeway portion of SR 58 as a westward extension of I-40–or at least nothing immediate. It's clear the roadgeek community would like to see this just by the conversation in this and other threads.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: brad2971 on September 26, 2021, 04:42:58 PM
Quote from: roadfro on September 26, 2021, 04:34:42 PM
^ I think that's a comment from the contractor creating the flyover videos and not a city-endorsed statement. Seems like an odd thing to say in the video though...

As far as anyone is aware, Caltrans has no desire to pursue making the freeway portion of SR 58 as a westward extension of I-40–or at least nothing immediate. It's clear the roadgeek community would like to see this just by the conversation in this and other threads.

It's always astounded me that Bakersfield, Kern County, and House GOP leader Kevin McCarthy (who represents Bakersfield) have never said anything about either expanding I-40 from I-15 to I-5 OR designating SR99 as I-7. One would think that local leaders in both Bakersfield and Fresno would prefer to be directly connnected to the Interstate system, but....
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: mrsman on September 26, 2021, 08:38:26 PM
^^^^^^

"The Centennial corridor mainline connects the Westside Parkway with a 2600 mile freeway system that ends in Wilmington, NC."

This statement is true whether or not there are any future plans for CA-58 to become I-40.  CA-58 is absolutely known as a major truck route to connect Bakersfield and the SJ Valley to I-40 and I-15.  The further connection of the new freeway will facilitate development of Bakersfield's west side and also facilitate connection to I-5 and the northern reaches of the SJ Valley.  Any and all traffic from the Bay Area to the entire southeast of the country is likely to pass through as well.

[I still agree that CA-58 deserves an interstate upgrade.  It really serves a heavy truck and commerce corridor, without a good substitute.]
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: mrsman on February 21, 2022, 12:13:18 PM
Another thread had me looking at some stuff on GSV in the Bakersfield area.

Bakersfield's really growing as more housing and new streets are being put in on the outskirts of town, especially on the west side.  The current terminus of the Westside Parkway (partially responsible for growth on the west side) is now about 8 miles west of 99 and about 9 miles east of I-5.  Certainly people in that area would not have a hard time to drive to I-5 for trips north and may find it even more convenient than 99.

But what is upsetting, especially to those of us who hope to see the Westside Parkway extended to I-5 as a freeway (as CA-58 and with a total pipedream as I-40) is that Caltrans has now put up a recent roundabout (in 2019 or 2020 based on GSV images) at the intersection of Stockdale/CA-43.  Certainly, there is enough traffic here now to merit better control than the old 4-way stop, but does building a roundabout mean that we will never see a grade-separated interchange here with a Westside Parkway extension taking over for Stockdale Hwy?  If grade separation were on the horizon, Caltrans would likely not put up a roundabout here.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: kkt on February 21, 2022, 02:00:01 PM
Quote from: mrsman on February 21, 2022, 12:13:18 PM
Another thread had me looking at some stuff on GSV in the Bakersfield area.

Bakersfield's really growing as more housing and new streets are being put in on the outskirts of town, especially on the west side.  The current terminus of the Westside Parkway (partially responsible for growth on the west side) is now about 8 miles west of 99 and about 9 miles east of I-5.  Certainly people in that area would not have a hard time to drive to I-5 for trips north and may find it even more convenient than 99.

But what is upsetting, especially to those of us who hope to see the Westside Parkway extended to I-5 as a freeway (as CA-58 and with a total pipedream as I-40) is that Caltrans has now put up a recent roundabout (in 2019 or 2020 based on GSV images) at the intersection of Stockdale/CA-43.  Certainly, there is enough traffic here now to merit better control than the old 4-way stop, but does building a roundabout mean that we will never see a grade-separated interchange here with a Westside Parkway extension taking over for Stockdale Hwy?  If grade separation were on the horizon, Caltrans would likely not put up a roundabout here.

I expect any freeway extending the Westside Parkway to I-5 would be parallel to the Stockdale Highway, not overlayed on top of it.  The Stockdale Highway is used for surface access to fields and businesses and if it were turned into a freeway, another road would need to be built to connect them.  Easier to keep the original highway and build the freeway parallel.  That's what's indicated as the plan on

https://content.civicplus.com/api/assets/1ce8ceae-022c-4c81-84de-ede490743edb?version=0&q=d13cc4e5-fa66-67c5-bcb3-777ec5e1700e

that JRouse posted upthread.

Putting the I-5 to I-5 connector interchange a couple of miles south of the I-5-Stockdale Highway interchange also doesn't require knocking down a cluster of the commercial buildings that cluster around exits - hotels, restaurants, gas, etc.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Bobby5280 on February 21, 2022, 03:00:51 PM
I think the new roundabout at the intersection of the current Stockdale Highway and CA-43 would not affected a further extension of the Westside Parkway. The 4/22/2021 imagery in Google Earth appears to show ROW being preserved past the current end of the Westside Parkway, which would shift an extension toward I-5 at least half a mile South of the current Stockdale Highway.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: The Ghostbuster on February 21, 2022, 04:50:34 PM
Nice roundabout! Almost looks like one of the countless roundabouts you would find here in Wisconsin.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: andy3175 on July 10, 2022, 10:15:27 PM
Noticed several new SR 58 signs today at the Stockdale Highway interchange with Interstate 5. I didn't get pictures as I didn't realize there would be any there. No 58 shields on 5 itself but I could see several 58 signs on Stockdale Highway.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: dbz77 on July 10, 2022, 11:27:17 PM
Quote from: andy3175 on July 10, 2022, 10:15:27 PM
Noticed several new SR 58 signs today at the Stockdale Highway interchange with Interstate 5. I didn't get pictures as I didn't realize there would be any there. No 58 shields on 5 itself but I could see several 58 signs on Stockdale Highway.
So it seems that there will be a short concurrency along I-5 between Stockdale hwy and westbound SR 58.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: andy3175 on July 11, 2022, 12:58:29 AM
Quote from: dbz77 on July 10, 2022, 11:27:17 PM
Quote from: andy3175 on July 10, 2022, 10:15:27 PM
Noticed several new SR 58 signs today at the Stockdale Highway interchange with Interstate 5. I didn't get pictures as I didn't realize there would be any there. No 58 shields on 5 itself but I could see several 58 signs on Stockdale Highway.
So it seems that there will be a short concurrency along I-5 between Stockdale hwy and westbound SR 58.
Yes. Based on what I saw, there was a small guide sign pointing to the continuation of SR 58 west by following I-5 north to the current alignment of the state highway. That said, 58 is also signed on its original alignment, but I suspect this situation will be temporary.

SM-S908U

Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: The Ghostbuster on July 11, 2022, 12:50:53 PM
When the Westside Parkway opens between Truxtun Ave. and the CA 99 freeway, what will the individual exits be numbered?
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: NE2 on July 11, 2022, 06:48:00 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on July 11, 2022, 12:50:53 PM
When the Westside Parkway opens between Truxtun Ave. and the CA 99 freeway, what will the individual exits be numbered?
69
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: oscar on July 11, 2022, 08:01:18 PM
Quote from: NE2 on July 11, 2022, 06:48:00 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on July 11, 2022, 12:50:53 PM
When the Westside Parkway opens between Truxtun Ave. and the CA 99 freeway, what will the individual exits be numbered?
69

Almost certainly based on the relocated CA 58's mileage from its west end at US 101. Since it's about 86 miles on CA 58 from US 101 to I-5, 69 would be too low. Probably in the 100-110 range, based on the assignment of 111 to CA 58's first exit east of CA 99.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Concrete Bob on July 11, 2022, 10:40:11 PM
Per Google Maps, On Route 58 West, the exit(s) to Route 99 are Exit 110(A) for 99 North and 110(B) for 99 South. 
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: brad2971 on August 01, 2022, 09:33:46 PM
Quote from: andy3175 on July 10, 2022, 10:15:27 PM
Noticed several new SR 58 signs today at the Stockdale Highway interchange with Interstate 5. I didn't get pictures as I didn't realize there would be any there. No 58 shields on 5 itself but I could see several 58 signs on Stockdale Highway.


Thanks be given to Google Street View for an updated look at the signage just off the freeway ramp at Stockdale Hwy: https://www.google.com/maps/@35.3548899,-119.3337418,3a,37.5y,116.48h,90.67t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s1PpcwYofqoj07jm0EaQB5Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192


Even more interesting: https://www.google.com/maps/@35.3548773,-119.3312848,3a,37.5y,313.53h,91.49t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1skyWdTgSjyV-FgJy_mCBD-g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

BTW, with all those new homes/apartments at Stockdale River Ranch at the end of the current Westside Pkwy, Caltrans D6 and Kern County (with likely assistance from Kevin McCarthy and USDOT) are going to have to get the EA/PEL going on the extension to I-5 fairly quickly.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: ClassicHasClass on August 01, 2022, 11:58:23 PM
Interesting. Guess they're going to multiplex 58 over I-5 back to the old alignment.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: oscar on August 02, 2022, 01:16:01 AM
^ That's what I expect, once the Centennial Corridor is finished (hopefully next year) to fill the gap between the Westside Pkwy and CA 58 east of CA 99.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on August 02, 2022, 07:57:44 AM
Stockdale Highway now appears in the Caltrans Postmile Tool as approximately KER R33.00 to KER R44.00.  Interestingly none of Rosedale Highway appears as CA 58 also. 
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: oscar on August 02, 2022, 08:14:35 AM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on August 02, 2022, 07:57:44 AM
Stockdale Highway now appears in the Caltrans Postmile Tool as approximately KER R33.00 to KER R44.00.  Interestingly none of Rosedale Highway appears as CA 58 also. 

Except the part east of Mohawk St.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on August 02, 2022, 09:24:21 AM
Quote from: oscar on August 02, 2022, 08:14:35 AM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on August 02, 2022, 07:57:44 AM
Stockdale Highway now appears in the Caltrans Postmile Tool as approximately KER R33.00 to KER R44.00.  Interestingly none of Rosedale Highway appears as CA 58 also. 

Except the part east of Mohawk St.

Correct, that measurement I gave is approximately I-5 to the West Side Parkway. 
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: The Ghostbuster on August 02, 2022, 07:01:22 PM
Does anyone know why there will be no new exits along the Westside Parkway between Truxtun Ave. and CA 99?
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: jdbx on August 03, 2022, 12:17:43 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on August 02, 2022, 07:01:22 PM
Does anyone know why there will be no new exits along the Westside Parkway between Truxtun Ave. and CA 99?

My guess for the reason is that it's less than 2 miles between Truxton and CA 99, and if you include ramps at both interchanges, you're looking at barely more than a mile.  Short-spaced exits create weaving conflicts and congestion, especially when adjacent to a freeway-to-freeway interchange.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: skluth on August 03, 2022, 01:10:28 PM
Quote from: jdbx on August 03, 2022, 12:17:43 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on August 02, 2022, 07:01:22 PM
Does anyone know why there will be no new exits along the Westside Parkway between Truxtun Ave. and CA 99?

My guess for the reason is that it's less than 2 miles between Truxton and CA 99, and if you include ramps at both interchanges, you're looking at barely more than a mile.  Short-spaced exits create weaving conflicts and congestion, especially when adjacent to a freeway-to-freeway interchange.

Ghostbuster should know better if he's in Madison. I lived there four years in the late 70s. The Beltline, which has a bunch of too-close exits, is basically a land-locked mess between Verona Road and John Nolan Drive, especially east of the Arboretum. Even with updates and widening, it was still a mess last time I went through there (about five years ago).
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: The Ghostbuster on August 03, 2022, 02:39:20 PM
I concede that the Beltline here in Madison has a lot of closely spaced exits. Unfortunately, the area around the Beltline is so built-up it is nearly impossible to make any improvements without widespread condemning of homes and businesses. If right-of-way wasn't an issue, I'd add collector-distributor lanes and braided ramps to some interchanges, and definitely more grade-seperations between interchanges. I'm not a huge proponent of the new flex lanes, but given the limited right-of-way, there were few alternative options.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: CtrlAltDel on August 03, 2022, 11:07:40 PM
Quote from: oscar on August 02, 2022, 01:16:01 AM
^ That's what I expect, once the Centennial Corridor is finished (hopefully next year) to fill the gap between the Westside Pkwy and CA 58 east of CA 99.

Did you mean west of CA 99?
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Occidental Tourist on August 04, 2022, 01:32:54 AM
Quote from: jdbx on August 03, 2022, 12:17:43 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on August 02, 2022, 07:01:22 PM
Does anyone know why there will be no new exits along the Westside Parkway between Truxtun Ave. and CA 99?

My guess for the reason is that it's less than 2 miles between Truxton and CA 99, and if you include ramps at both interchanges, you're looking at barely more than a mile.  Short-spaced exits create weaving conflicts and congestion, especially when adjacent to a freeway-to-freeway interchange.
I'd also assume it's a mitigation measure for running it through a residential neighborhood.  Plus given the residential neighborhood and the resultant lack of projected ADT for potential interchanges other than California Ave and Real Road, and the availability of alternate routes to California Ave, it wasn't worth the bother.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: pderocco on August 04, 2022, 02:28:00 AM
Quote from: CtrlAltDel on August 03, 2022, 11:07:40 PM
Quote from: oscar on August 02, 2022, 01:16:01 AM
^ That's what I expect, once the Centennial Corridor is finished (hopefully next year) to fill the gap between the Westside Pkwy and CA 58 east of CA 99.

Did you mean west of CA 99?

The "gap" is what is being filled in by the current construction between the Westside Pkwy and the existing portion of CA-58 east of CA-99.

I wonder if they're going to call it part of the Westside Pkwy. But since it's all full freeway, it makes me wonder why they call any of it a parkway.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: CtrlAltDel on August 05, 2022, 02:34:22 AM
Quote from: pderocco on August 04, 2022, 02:28:00 AM
Quote from: CtrlAltDel on August 03, 2022, 11:07:40 PM
Quote from: oscar on August 02, 2022, 01:16:01 AM
^ That's what I expect, once the Centennial Corridor is finished (hopefully next year) to fill the gap between the Westside Pkwy and CA 58 east of CA 99.

Did you mean west of CA 99?

The "gap" is what is being filled in by the current construction between the Westside Pkwy and the existing portion of CA-58 east of CA-99.

Ah, I parsed it as the gap is east of CA 99 and not the existing portion.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: jtespi on August 09, 2022, 05:21:47 AM
Quote from: mrsman on February 21, 2022, 12:13:18 PM
But what is upsetting, especially to those of us who hope to see the Westside Parkway extended to I-5 as a freeway (as CA-58 and with a total pipedream as I-40) is that Caltrans has now put up a recent roundabout (in 2019 or 2020 based on GSV images) at the intersection of Stockdale/CA-43.  Certainly, there is enough traffic here now to merit better control than the old 4-way stop, but does building a roundabout mean that we will never see a grade-separated interchange here with a Westside Parkway extension taking over for Stockdale Hwy?  If grade separation were on the horizon, Caltrans would likely not put up a roundabout here.

I wonder if CalTrans eventually makes the Stockdale Hwy (CA-58) a full freeway, could they just do something similar to what KDOT did with I-35 in Emporia, Kansas (https://goo.gl/maps/LSLUM7CpMoo7fGZ3A)?
KDOT made the freeway go over the roundabout to create a nice compact interchange. It uses a lot less space than a dumbbell interchange (2 roundabouts at the end of a normal diamond).
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on August 09, 2022, 07:53:50 AM
Quote from: jtespi on August 09, 2022, 05:21:47 AM
Quote from: mrsman on February 21, 2022, 12:13:18 PM
But what is upsetting, especially to those of us who hope to see the Westside Parkway extended to I-5 as a freeway (as CA-58 and with a total pipedream as I-40) is that Caltrans has now put up a recent roundabout (in 2019 or 2020 based on GSV images) at the intersection of Stockdale/CA-43.  Certainly, there is enough traffic here now to merit better control than the old 4-way stop, but does building a roundabout mean that we will never see a grade-separated interchange here with a Westside Parkway extension taking over for Stockdale Hwy?  If grade separation were on the horizon, Caltrans would likely not put up a roundabout here.

I wonder if CalTrans eventually makes the Stockdale Hwy (CA-58) a full freeway, could they just do something similar to what KDOT did with I-35 in Emporia, Kansas (https://goo.gl/maps/LSLUM7CpMoo7fGZ3A)?
KDOT made the freeway go over the roundabout to create a nice compact interchange. It uses a lot less space than a dumbbell interchange (2 roundabouts at the end of a normal diamond).

CA 204 and Garces Traffic Circle exist in Bakersfield if you want an ancient example nearby to CA 58.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Occidental Tourist on August 10, 2022, 01:56:07 AM
I believe they're planning to align a freeway routing of 58 from the current end of Westside Parkway to I-5 on an alignment south of Stockdale Highway.  The question is whether they'll ever need it or if it will get cancelled before it gets built.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: cahwyguy on August 10, 2022, 12:35:53 PM
Related to all of these. Seen today while gathering headlines: https://bakersfieldnow.com/news/local/southbound-hwy-99s-stockdale-hwy-exit-to-be-closed-permanently

The southbound Highway 99 to Stockdale Highway off-ramp will be closed permanently on Thursday, August 11, according to the City of Bakersfield.

The closure is set to begin at 8 p.m.

Drivers heading south will need to use the 99 off-ramps at California Avenue or White Lane said the city.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: jdbx on August 10, 2022, 01:41:44 PM
Quote from: cahwyguy on August 10, 2022, 12:35:53 PM
Related to all of these. Seen today while gathering headlines: https://bakersfieldnow.com/news/local/southbound-hwy-99s-stockdale-hwy-exit-to-be-closed-permanently

The southbound Highway 99 to Stockdale Highway off-ramp will be closed permanently on Thursday, August 11, according to the City of Bakersfield.

The closure is set to begin at 8 p.m.

Drivers heading south will need to use the 99 off-ramps at California Avenue or White Lane said the city.

Probably to allow for the construction of the interchange between 99, existing CA-58 and the Westside Parkway
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Bobby5280 on August 10, 2022, 01:57:09 PM
Quote from: Occidental TouristI believe they're planning to align a freeway routing of 58 from the current end of Westside Parkway to I-5 on an alignment south of Stockdale Highway.  The question is whether they'll ever need it or if it will get cancelled before it gets built.

Judging by the overhead imagery in Google Earth it looks pretty obvious they've reserved ROW for a future extension going about half a mile South of Stockdale Highway. It looks like the extension would run roughly parallel to a canal moving farther West out of Bakersfield. It doesn't look like all the required ROW has been secured however. Still, some new residential developments getting built near the end of the Westside Parkway are respecting the boundaries of that possible freeway extension.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: skluth on August 10, 2022, 05:47:25 PM
I found this which either is the 2014 Regional Transportation Plan (http://www.ca-ilg.org/sites/main/files/file-attachments/chapter-5-strategic-investments_v5_04-10-13_js_revised_cip.pdf) or is at least referencing the document. It's from the Kern Council of Governments, whatever that entity may be. On page 3, there are maps of Kern County and Bakersfield; it shows the Westside Parkway is intended to run to the southwest towards I-5 and not directly west. However, on page 68 is a map of the Bakersfield Beltway System which shows it running straight west to I-5 and is backed by this text (bold text mine).

Quote
The SR 58 Connector will include operational improvements from Cottonwood Road to SR 99, and a new freeway will extend from the western terminus of the SR 58 Gap Closure to Westside Parkway. Westside Parkway begins about 1 mile east of SR 99, extends across the Kern River at Truxtun Avenue, and continues along the north side of the river, connecting with Stockdale Highway near Heath Road. The I-5 Connector will extend from the western terminus of Westside Parkway to I-5, parallel to Stockdale Highway. Initially, this section will consist of operational improvements on the existing Stockdale Highway. Together, these three projects constitute the Centennial Corridor.

It wouldn't surprise me if either option is chosen though the parallel route seems more likely than the SW alignment.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: pderocco on August 10, 2022, 07:55:04 PM
Quote from: jtespi on August 09, 2022, 05:21:47 AM
I wonder if CalTrans eventually makes the Stockdale Hwy (CA-58) a full freeway, could they just do something similar to what KDOT did with I-35 in Emporia, Kansas (https://goo.gl/maps/LSLUM7CpMoo7fGZ3A)?
KDOT made the freeway go over the roundabout to create a nice compact interchange. It uses a lot less space than a dumbbell interchange (2 roundabouts at the end of a normal diamond).

The Boston area has lots of those. They call them "rotaries" though, and they're usually a bit bigger.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: pderocco on August 10, 2022, 08:01:48 PM
This new project seems to have a certain clumsiness to it. If you're coming down 99 and want to take the Westside Pkwy, there is no connection between 99 and Truxton Ave, and there will be no connection between Westside and California Ave, so you'll have to go way down and way back up. And now, no connection between Stockdale Hwy and either Westside or 99.

They shoulda built 58 as a straight line west decades ago, when they had the chance.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: DTComposer on December 29, 2022, 03:11:47 PM
Apologies if this has already been mentioned...didn't see it upthread:

Signs on I-5 southbound have been updated to reflect the realignment. Mileage signs previously listed junction CA-58, then Los Angeles, now broken out to CA-58 West, CA-58 East, Los Angeles.

Exit 257 is now signed as CA-58 West/Buttonwillow; Exit 253 is now signed as CA-58 East/Stockdale Highway/Bakersfield.

In-the-mirror glances looked like signs on northbound I-5 have not been changed, but I'll confirm on my return trip.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: SeriesE on December 29, 2022, 03:44:26 PM
Quote from: DTComposer on December 29, 2022, 03:11:47 PM
Apologies if this has already been mentioned...didn't see it upthread:

Signs on I-5 southbound have been updated to reflect the realignment. Mileage signs previously listed junction CA-58, then Los Angeles, now broken out to CA-58 West, CA-58 East, Los Angeles.

Exit 257 is now signed as CA-58 West/Buttonwillow; Exit 253 is now signed as CA-58 East/Stockdale Highway/Bakersfield.

In-the-mirror glances looked like signs on northbound I-5 have not been changed, but I'll confirm on my return trip.

I can confirm northbound exit signs have been changed as well since I drove that section recently.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: andy3175 on December 31, 2022, 12:15:23 AM
Quote from: SeriesE on December 29, 2022, 03:44:26 PM
Quote from: DTComposer on December 29, 2022, 03:11:47 PM
Apologies if this has already been mentioned...didn't see it upthread:

Signs on I-5 southbound have been updated to reflect the realignment. Mileage signs previously listed junction CA-58, then Los Angeles, now broken out to CA-58 West, CA-58 East, Los Angeles.

Exit 257 is now signed as CA-58 West/Buttonwillow; Exit 253 is now signed as CA-58 East/Stockdale Highway/Bakersfield.

In-the-mirror glances looked like signs on northbound I-5 have not been changed, but I'll confirm on my return trip.

I can confirm northbound exit signs have been changed as well since I drove that section recently.
Agreed.  I saw those changes as well but was not able to get pictures. I did see an SR 58 east reassurance shield on Stockdale Highway east of Interstate 5.

SM-S908U

Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: rschen7754 on December 31, 2022, 12:25:02 PM
I went through a few days ago, and I did not see any sign changes on CA 99.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on December 31, 2022, 12:26:53 PM
Quote from: rschen7754 on December 31, 2022, 12:25:02 PM
I went through a few days ago, and I did not see any sign changes on CA 99.

There definitely isn't any changes on CA 99.  I'm in Bakersfield for one thing or another every month.  I doubt any changes will take place until the Centennial Corridor gap is closed.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: pderocco on January 06, 2023, 02:29:54 AM
Has the legislature already changed the definition of route 58, in anticipation of the completion of the corridor?
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: oscar on January 06, 2023, 07:18:46 AM
Quote from: pderocco on January 06, 2023, 02:29:54 AM
Has the legislature already changed the definition of route 58, in anticipation of the completion of the corridor?

Not yet. (https://casetext.com/statute/california-codes/california-streets-and-highways-code/division-1-state-highways/chapter-2-the-state-highway-system/article-3-the-state-highway-routes/section-358-route-58-relinquishment) Maybe later this year, since the legislature reconvened just a few days ago, and completion of the corridor is not imminent. Also, it's not obvious that the route definition needs to be changed before the new corridor is opened to traffic. For a recent example, part of route 132 in Modesto was relocated in September, but the legislative definition remains unchanged.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: thsftw on January 06, 2023, 03:11:55 PM
Any guesses on how long it'll take the traffic volume on Stockdale increasing to warrant the final leg over to I-5? Especially since they've pretty much abandoned the push to get I-40 extended since it can't be chargeable for funding.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on January 06, 2023, 03:17:13 PM
Quote from: thsftw on January 06, 2023, 03:11:55 PM
Any guesses on how long it'll take the traffic volume on Stockdale increasing to warrant the final leg over to I-5? Especially since they've pretty much abandoned the push to get I-40 extended since it can't be chargeable for funding.

The last time any serious exploration of extending I-40 west took place was 1968.  In that sense the "they"  would be the long defunct Division of Highways and California Highway Commission.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Henry on January 06, 2023, 08:47:32 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 06, 2023, 03:17:13 PM
Quote from: thsftw on January 06, 2023, 03:11:55 PM
Any guesses on how long it'll take the traffic volume on Stockdale increasing to warrant the final leg over to I-5? Especially since they've pretty much abandoned the push to get I-40 extended since it can't be chargeable for funding.

The last time any serious exploration of extending I-40 west took place was 1968.  In that sense the "they"  would be the long defunct Division of Highways and California Highway Commission.
If the Westside Parkway extension to I-5 ever comes to be, it'll likely take several decades before it actually gets constructed. Considering how Caltrans still hasn't signed I-210 and I-905 over their respective SR designations and will probably not pursue I-7/I-9 for the CA 99 upgrades, most of us will be dead by then.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on January 06, 2023, 09:03:47 PM
Quote from: Henry on January 06, 2023, 08:47:32 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 06, 2023, 03:17:13 PM
Quote from: thsftw on January 06, 2023, 03:11:55 PM
Any guesses on how long it'll take the traffic volume on Stockdale increasing to warrant the final leg over to I-5? Especially since they've pretty much abandoned the push to get I-40 extended since it can't be chargeable for funding.

The last time any serious exploration of extending I-40 west took place was 1968.  In that sense the "they"  would be the long defunct Division of Highways and California Highway Commission.
If the Westside Parkway extension to I-5 ever comes to be, it'll likely take several decades before it actually gets constructed. Considering how Caltrans still hasn't signed I-210 and I-905 over their respective SR designations and will probably not pursue I-7/I-9 for the CA 99 upgrades, most of us will be dead by then.

Interesting to note that Caltrans withdrew their AASHTO and FHWA applications to extend I-210 back during the late 1990s.  They never bothered to reapply and don't have approval to swap CA 210 shields out for I-210. 

Regarding CA 99, I likely will be close enough to Interstate standard in the next decade or two.  I doubt it's worth the effort for modern Caltrans and the CTC to pursue a non-chargeable Interstate designation.  That's a lot of signage to swap for a highway that is getting close to carrying the same number for a century. 
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: rschen7754 on January 07, 2023, 01:29:40 AM
Quote from: Henry on January 06, 2023, 08:47:32 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 06, 2023, 03:17:13 PM
Quote from: thsftw on January 06, 2023, 03:11:55 PM
Any guesses on how long it'll take the traffic volume on Stockdale increasing to warrant the final leg over to I-5? Especially since they've pretty much abandoned the push to get I-40 extended since it can't be chargeable for funding.

The last time any serious exploration of extending I-40 west took place was 1968.  In that sense the "they"  would be the long defunct Division of Highways and California Highway Commission.
If the Westside Parkway extension to I-5 ever comes to be, it'll likely take several decades before it actually gets constructed. Considering how Caltrans still hasn't signed I-210 and I-905 over their respective SR designations and will probably not pursue I-7/I-9 for the CA 99 upgrades, most of us will be dead by then.

There's still two at-grade intersections between Bakersfield and Mojave (1 of which is CA 223), and several minor ones between Mojave and Kramer Junction. Those would have to be addressed as well.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: brad2971 on January 07, 2023, 01:39:17 AM
Quote from: rschen7754 on January 07, 2023, 01:29:40 AM
Quote from: Henry on January 06, 2023, 08:47:32 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 06, 2023, 03:17:13 PM
Quote from: thsftw on January 06, 2023, 03:11:55 PM
Any guesses on how long it'll take the traffic volume on Stockdale increasing to warrant the final leg over to I-5? Especially since they've pretty much abandoned the push to get I-40 extended since it can't be chargeable for funding.

The last time any serious exploration of extending I-40 west took place was 1968.  In that sense the "they"  would be the long defunct Division of Highways and California Highway Commission.
If the Westside Parkway extension to I-5 ever comes to be, it'll likely take several decades before it actually gets constructed. Considering how Caltrans still hasn't signed I-210 and I-905 over their respective SR designations and will probably not pursue I-7/I-9 for the CA 99 upgrades, most of us will be dead by then.

There's still two at-grade intersections between Bakersfield and Mojave (1 of which is CA 223), and several minor ones between Mojave and Kramer Junction. Those would have to be addressed as well.

As far as the at-grade intersections between the East Mojave interchange and I-15, there are cost-effective ways of closing those intersections without affecting the side-traffic that much. It would all depend on how Caltrans feels about putting triple-cable barrier in the median of CA 58, and using Jersey barriers to close the side roads off. In one instance, an at-grade intersection connects California City Blvd with CA 58, and the city or Kern County can easily direct traffic to the interchange that serves Edwards AFB a mile east of that intersection.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sprjus4 on January 07, 2023, 05:07:30 AM
^ You can close off intersections, but how would you provide access to all of those properties now being severed from CA-58?
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Concrete Bob on January 07, 2023, 12:01:33 PM
Frontage roads?
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on January 07, 2023, 01:20:49 PM
At least east of Mojave there isn't a ton of benefit or enhancement that closing off at-grade intersections is going being.  My wish list would just be CA 223 and Bealville Road. 
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sprjus4 on January 08, 2023, 03:01:53 AM
Quote from: Concrete Bob on January 07, 2023, 12:01:33 PM
Frontage roads?
Exactly, which would be more than just closing off side road. You'd need miles of new construction.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: pderocco on January 08, 2023, 04:16:40 AM
Quote from: Henry on January 06, 2023, 08:47:32 PM
If the Westside Parkway extension to I-5 ever comes to be, it'll likely take several decades before it actually gets constructed. Considering how Caltrans still hasn't signed I-210 and I-905 over their respective SR designations and will probably not pursue I-7/I-9 for the CA 99 upgrades, most of us will be dead by then.

What does the construction of that extension, designated as CA-58, have to do with converting anything to an interstate?

I fully expect we'll see the Parkway extended to I-5 some time in this decade. As soon as trucks can bypass the many traffic lights on Rosedale Hwy, and only suffer a shorter stretch of rural Stockdale Hwy, the demand for the full extension will be much greater. And I think no one will be surprised by that.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on January 08, 2023, 10:24:20 AM
Quote from: pderocco on January 08, 2023, 04:16:40 AM
Quote from: Henry on January 06, 2023, 08:47:32 PM
If the Westside Parkway extension to I-5 ever comes to be, it'll likely take several decades before it actually gets constructed. Considering how Caltrans still hasn't signed I-210 and I-905 over their respective SR designations and will probably not pursue I-7/I-9 for the CA 99 upgrades, most of us will be dead by then.

What does the construction of that extension, designated as CA-58, have to do with converting anything to an interstate?

I fully expect we'll see the Parkway extended to I-5 some time in this decade. As soon as trucks can bypass the many traffic lights on Rosedale Hwy, and only suffer a shorter stretch of rural Stockdale Hwy, the demand for the full extension will be much greater. And I think no one will be surprised by that.

There is a phenomenon going on in the greater road world that somehow has it that I-40 is destined to reach I-5.  I'm not sure how it started, but for awhile it even ended up on the CA 58 Wikipedia page.  I attribute it to the human mind looking for symmetry and patterns, CA 58 seems to be a layup for that kind of thinking. 
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Bobby5280 on January 08, 2023, 03:13:09 PM
That "phenomenon" about CA-58 and I-40 has been going for many years because anyone can look at a road map and clearly see CA-58 is a continuation of that I-40 corridor.

Then there's the issue that Bakersfield (pop 403,000; 909,000 MSA) is arguably a more legit destination for I-40 than Barstow (pop 25,000). For other cities in the central valley I-40 is the main highway outlet going East out of California. Fresno is more populous than Bakersfield. The existing CA-58 highway from Bakersfield to Barstow is a major trucking route.

Signing I-40 to I-5 is one thing. Regardless of whether that ever happens that existing CA-58 corridor between I-5 and Barstow really needs to be 100% limited access and Interstate quality, partly out of the interest of safety. Having at-grade intersections and driveways on that highway is hazardous.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on January 08, 2023, 03:31:26 PM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on January 08, 2023, 03:13:09 PM
That "phenomenon" about CA-58 and I-40 has been going for many years because anyone can look at a road map and clearly see CA-58 is a continuation of that I-40 corridor.

Then there's the issue that Bakersfield (pop 403,000; 909,000 MSA) is arguably a more legit destination for I-40 than Barstow (pop 25,000). For other cities in the central valley I-40 is the main highway outlet going East out of California. Fresno is more populous than Bakersfield. The existing CA-58 highway from Bakersfield to Barstow is a major trucking route.

Signing I-40 to I-5 is one thing. Regardless of whether that ever happens that existing CA-58 corridor between I-5 and Barstow really needs to be 100% limited access and Interstate quality, partly out of the interest of safety. Having at-grade intersections and driveways on that highway is hazardous.

The way I look at the matter is like this:

-  US 101 between Santa Barbara and Gilroy has numerous expressway segments with numerous heavily utilized at-grade intersections.
-  It wasn't until 2016 that the last at-grade intersections on CA 99 between Sacramento and Wheeler Ridge were closed out (between Chowchilla and Merced).

Considering the above, with how little the at-grade intersections on CA 58 are east of CA 14 I don't think there is a chance in hell they are ever going to be closed off. 
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Bobby5280 on January 08, 2023, 05:25:00 PM
Quote from: Max RockatanskyUS 101 between Santa Barbara and Gilroy has numerous expressway segments with numerous heavily utilized at-grade intersections.

US-101 and CA-58/I-40 is an apples to oranges comparison. That section of US-101 doesn't serve the same kind of commercial trunk route purpose as CA-58. There is more in the way of private vehicles on it than heavy trucks. And US-101 had the big disadvantage of being built and very slowly upgraded through already heavily developed areas. It's probably impossible to convert US-101 completely to Interstate standards between LA and San Jose.

CA-58 is a far more remote highway than US-101. That can translate into vehicles and semi trucks driving faster than they would on US-101. And if some random "Cooter Brown" guy with his old pickup truck and trailer of crap is pulling right out into the main lanes of the highway from some at-grade driveway it can create big trouble. That sort of thing happens all the time on divided highways here in Oklahoma. But traffic levels are low enough anyone usually has plenty of room to react and shift lanes. That's not so easy on a far busier "expressway" with more wall to wall semi truck action taking place.

Quote from: Max RockatanskyConsidering the above, with how little the at-grade intersections on CA 58 are east of CA 14 I don't think there is a chance in hell they are ever going to be closed off.

Here in Oklahoma they've tended to perform highway upgrades in response to fatal accidents. Some of the former 2-lane roads in my area were divided for that reason. The concrete Jersey barrier on I-44 was installed in the mid 1990's from Medicine Park to the Missouri border following a multi-fatality head-on collision near Elgin. Maybe action regarding CA-58 will happen via the same template.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on January 08, 2023, 05:32:26 PM
US 101 has a crap ton of freight, especially when you get to agricultural centric areas like Salinas Valley.  Traffic accessing US 101 via CA 166, CA 46, CA 156 and CA 152 is largely freight centric. 
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on January 08, 2023, 08:02:53 PM
I thought this would be worthwhile to add to the discussion.  Below is the 2017 AADTs for US 101 and CA 58.

US 101

https://dot.ca.gov/programs/traffic-operations/census/traffic-volumes/2017/route-101

-  The traffic volumes taper off on US 101 north of Santa Barbara towards southern Salinas Valley where it finally drops below 20,000.  From there they gradually climb northward towards Gilroy where it tops 100,000. 

CA 58

https://dot.ca.gov/programs/traffic-operations/census/traffic-volumes/2017/route-51-59

-  East or CA 14 the amount of traffic on CA 58 is only over 20,000 at California City Boulevard.  CA 58 even at Bealeville Road and CA 223 is in the 22,000-23,000 range.  Worth noting, even in Bakersfield the AADT for CA 58 doesn't top 100,000.

I think some of you might be seriously underestimating the volume of US 101 and likewise overestimating what is on CA 58.

Also worth your consideration, how busy CA 99 is even north of Sacramento to the Chico area:

https://dot.ca.gov/programs/traffic-operations/census/traffic-volumes/2017/route-99
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: skluth on January 08, 2023, 08:23:28 PM
I'll add that I-10 in West Texas has several at-grade ranch access points. I'd guess the traffic levels and truck percentage there are similar but I don't know the AADT numbers.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sprjus4 on January 08, 2023, 08:37:16 PM
Quote from: skluth on January 08, 2023, 08:23:28 PM
I'll add that I-10 in West Texas has several at-grade ranch access points. I'd guess the traffic levels and truck percentage there are similar but I don't know the AADT numbers.
I-40 too, ironically in this case.

To the point Google Maps no longer considers the western section of interstate in Texas to be a "freeway".
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: pderocco on January 08, 2023, 11:03:17 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 08, 2023, 08:02:53 PM
-  East or CA 14 the amount of traffic on CA 58 is only over 20,000 at California City Boulevard.  CA 58 even at Bealeville Road and CA 223 is in the 22,000-23,000 range.  Worth noting, even in Bakersfield the AADT for CA 58 doesn't top 100,000.

I think some of you might be seriously underestimating the volume of US 101 and likewise overestimating what is on CA 58.

I agree. I've driven Bakersfield to Barstow more times than I can count, and never seen anyone use the at-grade intersections, except of course for CA-223, Bealville Rd, and Cal City Blvd. I've personally used Helendale Rd/Harper Lake Rd half a dozen times, but never seen anyone else on those roads, let alone turning or crossing at that intersection. The fact that these crossings (among other issues) prevent the road from joining the interstate highway system doesn't bother me. That isn't to say that I don't want to see grade separations at those intersections, just that I wouldn't want to waste a bunch of money dealing with all the other unimportant issues just to get a red white and blue road shield.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on January 08, 2023, 11:14:25 PM
^^^

And you hit on my point.  While these traffic counts do traditionally justify full limited access it definitely is not the mode of operations for Caltrans do so these days.  Caltrans generally doesn't expand expressways anymore to full limited access unless there is a compulsory push.  If CA 99 didn't get full limited access in Merced County until 2016 and US 101 has expressway segments like Prunedale now, don't hold your breath for fully limited access CA 58 east of Bakersfield. 
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: pderocco on January 08, 2023, 11:22:35 PM
The difference is in the traffic counts on the cross roads, which are mostly negligible out in the desert. I wonder if they ever bother to subtract adjacent AADT figures to estimate the number of vehicles turning, and factor that into their decisions.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on January 08, 2023, 11:51:38 PM
I assume that is a huge consideration.  To that end, there was a ton of side road traffic pulling onto CA 99 in southern Merced County.  The winter fog coupled with the involved traffic volumes really ended up forcing Caltrans D6 to close off the expressway.  I wouldn't be too surprised if the four lane expressway segments of CA 41 and CA 198 are eventually prioritized for similar reasons.  .
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: The Ghostbuster on March 20, 2023, 06:30:06 PM
I'm not sure if anyone has noticed, but Google Maps now lists Stockdale Hwy. and the Westside Parkway as part of CA 58: https://www.google.com/maps/@35.3706244,-119.1103622,9423m/data=!3m1!1e3. Hagemen Rd. (east of Interstate 5), Enos Ln. (CA 43), and Rosedale Hwy. are no longer marked as CA 58. Has signage in these areas been updated to reflect the relocation of CA 58?
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: cl94 on March 20, 2023, 11:07:27 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on March 20, 2023, 06:30:06 PM
I'm not sure if anyone has noticed, but Google Maps now lists Stockdale Hwy. and the Westside Parkway as part of CA 58: https://www.google.com/maps/@35.3706244,-119.1103622,9423m/data=!3m1!1e3. Hagemen Rd. (east of Interstate 5), Enos Ln. (CA 43), and Rosedale Hwy. are no longer marked as CA 58. Has signage in these areas been updated to reflect the relocation of CA 58?

Yes, signs were replaced as of November 2022 when I was in the area. Old route of 58 has no evidence on the ground of its existence, connection between Westside Parkway and SR 99 is signed via Mohawk St and Rosedale Hwy. Only place where signs had not been updated was along the mainline of I-5.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: pderocco on March 21, 2023, 02:50:07 AM
Quote from: cl94 on March 20, 2023, 11:07:27 PM
Yes, signs were replaced as of November 2022 when I was in the area. Old route of 58 has no evidence on the ground of its existence, connection between Westside Parkway and SR 99 is signed via Mohawk St and Rosedale Hwy. Only place where signs had not been updated was along the mainline of I-5.

I would have thought California Ave would have been more efficient than Rosedale Hwy. Or is it just that the latter is already advertised as 58 on the signs along 99?
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: pderocco on March 21, 2023, 02:57:12 AM
Actually, In GSV from Oct/Nov, there's no mention of 58 on the BGSes on I-5, but there are 58 signs at the ends of the ramps. That seems really odd.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: roadfro on March 21, 2023, 12:15:19 PM
Quote from: pderocco on March 21, 2023, 02:50:07 AM
Quote from: cl94 on March 20, 2023, 11:07:27 PM
Yes, signs were replaced as of November 2022 when I was in the area. Old route of 58 has no evidence on the ground of its existence, connection between Westside Parkway and SR 99 is signed via Mohawk St and Rosedale Hwy. Only place where signs had not been updated was along the mainline of I-5.

I would have thought California Ave would have been more efficient than Rosedale Hwy. Or is it just that the latter is already advertised as 58 on the signs along 99?

It's likely because Rosedale Hwy was the existing SR 58 west, so no new temporary signage would have been needed along SR 99. That, and Caltrans likely still has the ROW along Rosedale Hwy, so it minimizes signed temporary diverting of state highway traffic on local streets (just Mohawk).
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: cl94 on March 21, 2023, 03:26:37 PM
Caltrans relinquished west of Mohawk, but kept east of there on the system for the time being.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on March 21, 2023, 03:39:25 PM
Which shows as a gap on the Postmile Tool presently.  Stockdale Highway appears now with R Suffix Postmiles for Route 58.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: roadfro on March 22, 2023, 11:35:55 AM
MOD NOTE: The question posed in response to the previous post about the California postmile system and ensuing discussion was moved to a separate California Postmiles (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=33080.0) thread for potential further discussion. –Roadfro
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: GaryA on March 28, 2023, 05:31:08 PM
Quote from: pderocco on March 21, 2023, 02:57:12 AM
Actually, In GSV from Oct/Nov, there's no mention of 58 on the BGSes on I-5, but there are 58 signs at the ends of the ramps. That seems really odd.

Having driven I-5 this past weekend, I can report that I-5 southbound has been fully resigned regarding CA 58.

Two mileage signs now list Jct (58) West / Jct (58) East / Los Angeles; the previous CA 58 exit is now labelled (58) West / Buttonwillow / McKittrick; and Stockdale Hwy is labelled (58) East / Bakersfield / Stockdale Hwy.

Northbound I-5 has not been updated (aside from the above-mentioned "(58) East -->" at the top of the Stockdale Hwy ramp). But most traffic heading for Bakersfield would have used CA 99 earlier

One remaining oddity in this area is that the exit before CA 58 is now labelled "Buttonwillow / McKittrick", very similar to the CA 58 West signage (this exit can be used as a cutoff to CA 58).
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: cl94 on March 30, 2023, 12:19:22 AM
Quote from: GaryA on March 28, 2023, 05:31:08 PM
Quote from: pderocco on March 21, 2023, 02:57:12 AM
Actually, In GSV from Oct/Nov, there's no mention of 58 on the BGSes on I-5, but there are 58 signs at the ends of the ramps. That seems really odd.

Having driven I-5 this past weekend, I can report that I-5 southbound has been fully resigned regarding CA 58.

Two mileage signs now list Jct (58) West / Jct (58) East / Los Angeles; the previous CA 58 exit is now labelled (58) West / Buttonwillow / McKittrick; and Stockdale Hwy is labelled (58) East / Bakersfield / Stockdale Hwy.

Northbound I-5 has not been updated (aside from the above-mentioned "(58) East -->" at the top of the Stockdale Hwy ramp). But most traffic heading for Bakersfield would have used CA 99 earlier

One remaining oddity in this area is that the exit before CA 58 is now labelled "Buttonwillow / McKittrick", very similar to the CA 58 West signage (this exit can be used as a cutoff to CA 58).

That's new since I was through in November. Nice to see that they've made the changes.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: SeriesE on April 13, 2023, 05:15:30 PM
Apple Maps is now showing the Westside Parkway connected to CA-58, but using a traffic incident to mark the connector as closed.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sprjus4 on April 13, 2023, 10:24:21 PM
When is the extension finally supposed to open?
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: skluth on April 14, 2023, 10:44:56 AM
Quote from: sprjus4 on April 13, 2023, 10:24:21 PM
When is the extension finally supposed to open?

According to this article from last October (https://www.kget.com/news/local-news/1-5-billion-centennial-corridor-enters-the-homestretch-freeway-connector-8-months-to-finish-line/), sometime in July. Or August. Or September. Yeah, they don't know either. The official website  (https://www.bakersfieldcity.us/562/Centennial-Corridor)is pretty useless.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: thsftw on April 17, 2023, 12:09:34 PM
This is the latest flyover I found from Youtube - looks like quite a lot of work still.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nq8BksE75o8&t=247s&pp=ygUmd2VzdHNpZGUgcGFya3dheSBiYWtlcnNmaWVsZCBleHRlbnNpb24%3D
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: cl94 on April 18, 2023, 03:56:09 PM
Quote from: thsftw on April 17, 2023, 12:09:34 PM
This is the latest flyover I found from Youtube - looks like quite a lot of work still.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nq8BksE75o8&t=247s&pp=ygUmd2VzdHNpZGUgcGFya3dheSBiYWtlcnNmaWVsZCBleHRlbnNpb24%3D

The rough winter probably delayed things a bit. Can't do the remaining work if it's raining every day as was the case for a few months.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: brad2971 on June 17, 2023, 03:36:31 PM
Just look at this nice sign Caltrans (District 6) put up at the Stockdale Hwy exit:

https://www.google.com/maps/@35.3579397,-119.3404596,3a,75y,166.84h,76.78t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s289jkjuF2jgLzeIga0EPzw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu

Looks like they're just about finished, if the Memorial Day video from The Heightened Perspective is any indicator.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: ClassicHasClass on June 17, 2023, 06:47:48 PM
Quote from: brad2971 on June 17, 2023, 03:36:31 PM
Just look at this nice sign Caltrans (District 6) put up at the Stockdale Hwy exit:

https://www.google.com/maps/@35.3579397,-119.3404596,3a,75y,166.84h,76.78t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s289jkjuF2jgLzeIga0EPzw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu

Looks like they're just about finished, if the Memorial Day video from The Heightened Perspective is any indicator.

No exit number tab! Burn the witch!
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on June 17, 2023, 06:54:02 PM
Quote from: ClassicHasClass on June 17, 2023, 06:47:48 PM
Quote from: brad2971 on June 17, 2023, 03:36:31 PM
Just look at this nice sign Caltrans (District 6) put up at the Stockdale Hwy exit:

https://www.google.com/maps/@35.3579397,-119.3404596,3a,75y,166.84h,76.78t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s289jkjuF2jgLzeIga0EPzw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu

Looks like they're just about finished, if the Memorial Day video from The Heightened Perspective is any indicator.

No exit number tab! Burn the witch!

Is no exit tab versus no external exit tab a lesser signage sin?  I'm genuinely curious to see what the MUTCD crowd thinks of that. 
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: roadfro on June 18, 2023, 04:16:45 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on June 17, 2023, 06:54:02 PM
Is no exit tab versus no external exit tab a lesser signage sin?  I'm genuinely curious to see what the MUTCD crowd thinks of that.

While I'm not a big fan of the internal exit number tabs Caltrans has used over the last 15-20 years, I'd much rather have that than no exit number at all. When the rest of the highway has exit numbers, no exit tab is the bigger sin.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Bickendan on June 18, 2023, 04:18:12 PM
My personal opinion is
Justified external exit tab (left vs right exit)
ODOT centered external tab <> CalTrans internal exit tab (as room allows)
WashDot internal exit bar
No exit number indicator (as seen above in the link)
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: skluth on June 18, 2023, 04:36:44 PM
Quote from: roadfro on June 18, 2023, 04:16:45 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on June 17, 2023, 06:54:02 PM
Is no exit tab versus no external exit tab a lesser signage sin?  I'm genuinely curious to see what the MUTCD crowd thinks of that.

While I'm not a big fan of the internal exit number tabs Caltrans has used over the last 15-20 years, I'd much rather have that than no exit number at all. When the rest of the highway has exit numbers, no exit tab is the bigger sin.

I don't care if the exit number is on a separate tab. I just want the exit number there. And not an incremental number either but a number based on mileage (or kilometers if we ever go metric like the rest of the planet).
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on June 18, 2023, 04:51:22 PM
To be clear in case my sarcasm didn't convey (sometimes it doesn't), I definitely agree some form an exit number should be present.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: pderocco on June 18, 2023, 07:11:27 PM
Google Earth has new imagery of the interchange from a few weeks ago. I'd guess it would open in September by the looks of it.

It's odd that Google Earth has historic imagery, but Google Maps has historic street view.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: FredAkbar on June 19, 2023, 03:48:17 AM
What I always notice most with the new signs is the small-caps font on the words "EAST" and "WEST" ("E" and "W" is slightly larger than the rest of the word). How common is that?
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: mgk920 on June 19, 2023, 11:15:52 AM
Quote from: FredAkbar on June 19, 2023, 03:48:17 AM
What I always notice most with the new signs is the small-caps font on the words "EAST" and "WEST" ("E" and "W" is slightly larger than the rest of the word). How common is that?

S.O.P. here in Wisconsin.

Mike
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: ClassicHasClass on June 19, 2023, 11:36:01 AM
Quote from: FredAkbar on June 19, 2023, 03:48:17 AM
What I always notice most with the new signs is the small-caps font on the words "EAST" and "WEST" ("E" and "W" is slightly larger than the rest of the word). How common is that?

Isn't that now part of the MUTCD?
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: kurumi on June 19, 2023, 12:04:47 PM
Quote from: ClassicHasClass on June 19, 2023, 11:36:01 AM
Quote from: FredAkbar on June 19, 2023, 03:48:17 AM
What I always notice most with the new signs is the small-caps font on the words "EAST" and "WEST" ("E" and "W" is slightly larger than the rest of the word). How common is that?

Isn't that now part of the MUTCD?

Yes, see table 2E-2 here, search for "First Letters": https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009/part2/part2e.htm#section2E14
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Bobby5280 on June 19, 2023, 12:50:27 PM
Basically it's fake large cap small type treatment. Not a great look when working with typefaces that have very limited typographic capabilities. Quite a few typefaces have native small capitals in their character sets. Small capitals can be faked more gracefully using a variable typeface and adjusting the letter weights so stroke thickness of large caps and small cap letters look uniform.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: dbz77 on June 20, 2023, 02:23:40 PM
I notice the 58 state shield was excluded from the freeway entrance sign.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Concrete Bob on June 21, 2023, 12:31:29 AM
Looks like Caltrans plans to add the last two connector ramps to the 58/99 interchange.  If things go as planned, the final ramps will be operational by 2028.

https://dot.ca.gov/caltrans-near-me/district-6/district-6-projects/06-48468
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Concrete Bob on June 21, 2023, 01:58:51 AM
Or, at least the SB 99 to WB 58 at this point.  I think the funding was shifted from the Hageman Flyover to this project, but I am not 100 percent certain.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: pderocco on June 21, 2023, 03:38:24 AM
That project map shows the little loop from EB 58 to NB 99 as being "under construction", and says that the project is only about the SB 99 to WB 58 connector. Since there isn't a trace of evidence on the ground that that loop is under construction, that would suggest that there's just an error in the map, and there's no plan to do that loop.

I have an old-ish map showing the full plan, and it includes a lane to the right of NB 99 that starts at the Ming Ave on ramp, splits off to the right of the WB 58 flyover, and then merges back into the main line NB 99. This would make sense if that was a segregated lane, but it isn't drawn that way in the plan, looking like weaving is possible between Ming -> NB 99 and NB 99 to WB 58, rendering that extra lane superfluous. But that lane, which you can see on the ground in the latest GE imagery, looks like it would make the little loop impossible. I just don't see how they can connect EB 58 to NB 99, unless they sacrifice that lane and let Ming Ave weave with the WB 58 traffic, or build a flyover on an even higher level, which would be an expensive road for a less important movement.

This has always seemed a badly designed project, given that there is no single surface street connecting 99 to the new 58. It might have been better had they connected the parkway to California Ave instead of Truxtun.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: roadfro on June 21, 2023, 11:29:52 AM
Seems odd that they wouldn't have included the SB 99 to WB 58 connector from the jump. Anybody know why that was excluded?
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: pderocco on June 21, 2023, 07:59:47 PM
That's pretty common for less important connections. CA-210 to I-215 in San Bernardino initially left out the flyovers. I think it's just about spreading out the budget over time.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Lukeisroads on September 01, 2023, 07:49:46 PM
Welcome in a new sign in the family https://cwwp2.dot.ca.gov/vm/loc/d6/ker99somingave.htm
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on September 01, 2023, 07:58:21 PM
Mohawk is now signed as part of interim alignment of CA 58 between West Side Parkway and Rosedale Highway. 

https://www.facebook.com/100063655972258/posts/pfbid02qYDFwNaGY3AVYPMmCACWe9Z5NErKFwnd9DGYc3BpVB1KvgCqWYjzWENTstVM8YA2l/?mibextid=cr9u03
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: kkt on September 01, 2023, 11:11:32 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on September 01, 2023, 07:58:21 PM
Mohawk is now signed as part of interim alignment of CA 58 between West Side Parkway and Rosedale Highway. 

https://www.facebook.com/100063655972258/posts/pfbid02qYDFwNaGY3AVYPMmCACWe9Z5NErKFwnd9DGYc3BpVB1KvgCqWYjzWENTstVM8YA2l/?mibextid=cr9u03

Those CA 58 shields should have directional indicators.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: pderocco on September 02, 2023, 12:54:20 AM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on September 01, 2023, 07:58:21 PM
Mohawk is now signed as part of interim alignment of CA 58 between West Side Parkway and Rosedale Highway. 

https://www.facebook.com/100063655972258/posts/pfbid02qYDFwNaGY3AVYPMmCACWe9Z5NErKFwnd9DGYc3BpVB1KvgCqWYjzWENTstVM8YA2l/?mibextid=cr9u03
Took 'em long enough. I wonder how long it will take them to remove them when the freeway opens up.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Occidental Tourist on September 02, 2023, 02:36:36 AM
Those APL's are thicc.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Quillz on September 03, 2023, 03:31:15 AM
How is this going to change 58 and 178? The way it is right now, there's a short concurrency with 58/99. The new connector eliminates the concurrency, and thus Rosedale Highway between the connector and 99 will no longer be part of a state highway? I believe historically this was all 178, which now technically begins east of Bakersfield.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on September 03, 2023, 10:14:21 AM
It won't, 178 begins at 204. 
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Quillz on September 03, 2023, 11:16:31 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on September 03, 2023, 10:14:21 AM
It won't, 178 begins at 204. 
Doesn't 58 presently run along Rosedale Highwy between 99 and this new connector? So won't that part of the highway no longer be state maintained?
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on September 03, 2023, 11:20:52 PM
Quote from: Quillz on September 03, 2023, 11:16:31 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on September 03, 2023, 10:14:21 AM
It won't, 178 begins at 204. 
Doesn't 58 presently run along Rosedale Highwy between 99 and this new connector? So won't that part of the highway no longer be state maintained?

Nope, that's to be relinquished once the Centennial Corridor is open. The only part of Rosedale that is still 58 is just the segment between Mohawk and 99.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: oscar on September 04, 2023, 01:10:08 AM
^^^ Technically, Caltrans' Postmile Query Tool indicates 178 starts at 99, but that unrelinquished segment ends at mile 0.195 near the north bank of the Kern River. (I don't know how Caltrans managed to relinquish the bridge over the river, since there often is local resistance to taking high-maintenance bridges off Caltrans' hands.) The other unrelinquished 178 segment starts a little bit west of 204 and continues east from there.

Quote from: pderocco on September 02, 2023, 12:54:20 AM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on September 01, 2023, 07:58:21 PM
Mohawk is now signed as part of interim alignment of CA 58 between West Side Parkway and Rosedale Highway. 

https://www.facebook.com/100063655972258/posts/pfbid02qYDFwNaGY3AVYPMmCACWe9Z5NErKFwnd9DGYc3BpVB1KvgCqWYjzWENTstVM8YA2l/?mibextid=cr9u03
Took 'em long enough. I wonder how long it will take them to remove them when the freeway opens up.

Even after the Centennial Corridor is complete enough to connect the Westside Parkway with CA 58 east of CA 99 (making 58 a continuous route between I-5 and I-15), it'll take awhile to finish the direct ramp connections between 99 and the Centennial Corridor/Westside Parkway. My hunch is the detour signage on Mohawk will need to stay up until better connections between 99 and Westside are open to traffic.

Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Lukeisroads on September 04, 2023, 10:04:49 AM
Now what is bakersfield gonna do about naming rosedale hwy something else
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on September 04, 2023, 10:27:02 AM
Why would it need to be?  Rosedale Highway seems pretty adequate given the name has been around for decades. 
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Quillz on September 04, 2023, 05:11:39 PM
Quote from: Lukeisroads on September 04, 2023, 10:04:49 AM
Now what is bakersfield gonna do about naming rosedale hwy something else
They won't and they don't need to.

Local names and route numbers aren't the same thing. "Pacific Coast Highway" is a local name that over the years has been assigned different route numbers: 3, 101 Alt, 1. The numbers changed, the name never did. And it's still often referred to by its local name more so than the number. "Rosedale Highway" will continue to exist. It may not carry a route number anymore, so what? No different than the hundreds of other roads that have been in that position before.

This is also why businesses should always cite local names over numbers when possible. Numbers are more likely to change than names are. Back in the day, a business that gave its address as "Hwy/Rte 3" would have had to update it to "Hwy/Rte 101 Alt." Whereas citing "Pacific Coast Highway" would have caused no issue.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: pderocco on September 04, 2023, 07:46:31 PM
Quote from: oscar on September 04, 2023, 01:10:08 AM
Even after the Centennial Corridor is complete enough to connect the Westside Parkway with CA 58 east of CA 99 (making 58 a continuous route between I-5 and I-15), it'll take awhile to finish the direct ramp connections between 99 and the Centennial Corridor/Westside Parkway. My hunch is the detour signage on Mohawk will need to stay up until better connections between 99 and Westside are open to traffic.
Are there any published plans for this, showing where they intend to squeeze the flyovers?

I always thought this project had an unfortunate flaw. The Parkway connects to Truxton, which doesn't connect to 99. 99 connects to California, which doesn't connect to the Parkway. When I look at historical imagery for the area, it looks like when they built the 58 freeway to 99, it was already a harebrained idea to continue it due west, because there was substantial residential development through there. But further north, along where Truxtun is now, west of 99, there was a whole lotta nuthin. Thy should have planned on putting a freeway interchange right there, between the rail yard and the river, and widening 99 between those two points to accommodate the shared traffic.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: pderocco on September 04, 2023, 07:51:04 PM
I see Google is now labeling Rosedale Hwy also as Old Hwy 58. Is that some sort of "official" alternate name? It's not shown along Hageman Rd.

Also, I still think a lot of people are going to regard CA-223 as a better route between I-5 north and Tehachapi. Especially if they ever turn the 223/58 connection into a trumpet.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on September 04, 2023, 07:57:23 PM
CA 223 was the better routing towards Tehachapi Pass from I-5 until recently.  As things stand now, I would prefer the new alignment of 58 over having to slog through Arvin.  223 gets a fair big annoying Ag traffic east of 99 towards the Arvin city limit.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: The Ghostbuster on September 05, 2023, 07:45:35 PM
Does anyone think there will ever be an interchange constructed on CA 58 at CA 223? Maybe the Bena Rd./Bealville Rd. intersection could also get a grade-separation.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Occidental Tourist on September 06, 2023, 04:06:30 AM
Here's a study (https://www.kerncog.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/SR_58-223_Interchange_2011.pdf) from 12 years ago.  A grade separation for Bena/Bealville Rd and altogether removing the connection to and from 58 are identified as possibilities in conjunction with grade separating the 58 and 223 interchange.

The July 2022 Kern COG report doesn't identify it as a programmed project, though. And it's not on Caltrans radar as a potential project at all. So until it moves up somebody's list, it doesn't look like it's happening anytime soon.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: pderocco on September 08, 2023, 03:27:22 AM
Quote from: Occidental Tourist on September 06, 2023, 04:06:30 AM
Here's a study (https://www.kerncog.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/SR_58-223_Interchange_2011.pdf) from 12 years ago.  A grade separation for Bena/Bealville Rd and altogether removing the connection to and from 58 are identified as possibilities in conjunction with grade separating the 58 and 223 interchange.

I hadn't thought about that fourth alternative, a diamond at 223, and running Bealville Road down the side of 58 to that diamond. If it weren't for Bealville, a trumpet would be the obvious choice, but getting rid of the Bealville intersection would be great. Looks like there's plenty of room for a Starbucks in that plan, too.

Quote from: Occidental Tourist on September 06, 2023, 04:06:30 AM
The July 2022 Kern COG report doesn't identify it as a programmed project, though. And it's not on Caltrans radar as a potential project at all. So until it moves up somebody's list, it doesn't look like it's happening anytime soon.

Some family needs to be wiped out in a head-on. Then, it will happen.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Occidental Tourist on September 08, 2023, 10:14:10 AM
Several families, unfortunately.  I still remember how long the 60 through the Badlands had just a yellow stripe in the median.  They called it "blood alley" for many years even after it got a median barrier.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on September 08, 2023, 10:22:49 AM
And 58 is nowhere near as bad as the Badlands were.  You can actually see what is coming on 58 at 223 and Bealville Road.  You can also pull an improvised Michigan Left in certain circumstances depending on your travel direction.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: mrsman on September 11, 2023, 10:15:08 AM
Quote from: pderocco on September 04, 2023, 07:46:31 PM
Quote from: oscar on September 04, 2023, 01:10:08 AM
Even after the Centennial Corridor is complete enough to connect the Westside Parkway with CA 58 east of CA 99 (making 58 a continuous route between I-5 and I-15), it'll take awhile to finish the direct ramp connections between 99 and the Centennial Corridor/Westside Parkway. My hunch is the detour signage on Mohawk will need to stay up until better connections between 99 and Westside are open to traffic.
Are there any published plans for this, showing where they intend to squeeze the flyovers?

I always thought this project had an unfortunate flaw. The Parkway connects to Truxton, which doesn't connect to 99. 99 connects to California, which doesn't connect to the Parkway. When I look at historical imagery for the area, it looks like when they built the 58 freeway to 99, it was already a harebrained idea to continue it due west, because there was substantial residential development through there. But further north, along where Truxtun is now, west of 99, there was a whole lotta nuthin. Thy should have planned on putting a freeway interchange right there, between the rail yard and the river, and widening 99 between those two points to accommodate the shared traffic.

Your point is certainly valid from a development perspective, but for traffic purposes it is far better to avoid a shared routing and to ideally have one east west freeway cross one north-south freeway without a 1 mile shared portion.  Especially given that this is occurring within the confines of a sizable city.


Even when everything is completed there is still going to be considerable interregional traffic on some of the surface streets.

It is important that adequate signage be used for the following:

Guiding traffic from W Pkwy to Truxton for Downtown Bakersfield (and vice versa)

99 SB to 58 WB and 58 EB to 99 NB should use Mohawk and California [Seems more direct than Rosedale to Mohawk]

99 NB to 58 WB and 58 EB to 99 SB will have a direct connection in final plans, but in the interim signage should use Mohawk and California

I can see that Caltrans probably prefers traffic on Rosedale over California, since that section is at least was/is a state highway.  But Califoria does seem as a more direct connection to get to 99 (and to the 58 freeway to Mojave while the roadway is unfinished).



Other connections that should be signed:

178 WB to 99 NB and 99 SB to 178 EB should be clearly directed to use 204

178 WB to 99 SB and 99 NB to 178 EB should use 23rd and 24th (to some extent this is done, but better signage of this should be indicated along the 178 freeway portion that traffic to 99 SB should follow signs to Downtown Bakersfield)

178 WB to 58 WB and 58 EB to 178 EB should use 23rd/24th to Rosedale to Mohawk

I guess a good control for 58 WB from Bakersfield is also needed.  Is Buttonwillow sufficient? 



Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Occidental Tourist on September 11, 2023, 04:00:08 PM
Quote from: pderocco on September 04, 2023, 07:46:31 PM
Quote from: oscar on September 04, 2023, 01:10:08 AM
Even after the Centennial Corridor is complete enough to connect the Westside Parkway with CA 58 east of CA 99 (making 58 a continuous route between I-5 and I-15), it'll take awhile to finish the direct ramp connections between 99 and the Centennial Corridor/Westside Parkway. My hunch is the detour signage on Mohawk will need to stay up until better connections between 99 and Westside are open to traffic.
Are there any published plans for this, showing where they intend to squeeze the flyovers?


I haven't seen plans, but I've read there will be a loop ramp between e/b 58 and n/b 99.  How they'll squeeze that in with Wible Road and the auxiliary lane there is not evident.  But they did reprogram money from the Hageman Rd bridge project in order to get the loop ramp finished sooner.

The s/b 99 to w/b 58 ramp will be a curved transition ramp that will cause the Stockdale Hwy off ramp to be shut down.  There's no source of funding or timetable for this ramp.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: cahwyguy on September 11, 2023, 04:39:25 PM
Quote from: Occidental Tourist on September 11, 2023, 04:00:08 PM
Quote from: pderocco on September 04, 2023, 07:46:31 PM
Quote from: oscar on September 04, 2023, 01:10:08 AM
Even after the Centennial Corridor is complete enough to connect the Westside Parkway with CA 58 east of CA 99 (making 58 a continuous route between I-5 and I-15), it'll take awhile to finish the direct ramp connections between 99 and the Centennial Corridor/Westside Parkway. My hunch is the detour signage on Mohawk will need to stay up until better connections between 99 and Westside are open to traffic.
Are there any published plans for this, showing where they intend to squeeze the flyovers?


I haven't seen plans, but I've read there will be a loop ramp between e/b 58 and n/b 99.  How they'll squeeze that in with Wible Road and the auxiliary lane there is not evident.  But they did reprogram money from the Hageman Rd bridge project in order to get the loop ramp finished sooner.

The s/b 99 to w/b 58 ramp will be a curved transition ramp that will cause the Stockdale Hwy off ramp to be shut down.  There's no source of funding or timetable for this ramp.

Actually, I think there was something in the CTC minutes (see, this is why I tell folks to read that stuff when I post my updates):

♠ (Aug) (2) Approval of 6 Projects for Future Consideration of Funding: (° indicates items that were below the level of detail for updating the specific route pages)

06-Ker-58, PM T31.7/R55.6 06-Ker-99, PM 21.2/26.2. Centennial Corridor Project. Construct a new alignment for Route 58 to provide a continuous route along Route 58 from Cottonwood Road on existing Route 58, east of Route 99 to I-5. Improvements to Route 99 from Wilson Road to Gilmore Avenue would also be required for the connection with Route 58, in Kern County. (FEIR Addendum) (PPNO 8029) (STIP)

♠ (Jun) 4.5 2022 Trade Corridor Enhancement Program – Adoption Program of Projects. The adoption is generally a very succinct table, and many of the projects are more focused on rail. From the combination of the introductory text and the letters, the following projects could be identified (° indicates projects not in the "recommended for funding" table). Where there was sufficient new information, the appropriate pages have been updated.

Southbound Route 99 to Westbound Route 58 Connector

Reading the tables in the agenda item is difficult, but take a look at https://catc.ca.gov/-/media/ctc-media/documents/ctc-meetings/2023/2023-06/17-4-5.pdf (look on page 9 of the PDF)

Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Quillz on September 11, 2023, 04:45:51 PM
I realized my confusion from earlier. For some reason, I thought this was a short little freeway that just sort of went from 99 to 58 (like a quarter-circle). I didn't realize it's just a straight shot to the 5. So I see now why it won't actually impact where 178 starts.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: FredAkbar on September 12, 2023, 02:55:05 AM
Quote from: mrsman on September 11, 2023, 10:15:08 AM
I guess a good control for 58 WB from Bakersfield is also needed.  Is Buttonwillow sufficient?

From the sign that's there now (https://www.google.com/maps/@35.3528183,-119.0333869,3a,75y,279.6h,87.68t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s9C_BUWLdiuywIp5kVIV6_A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu), it seems like there isn't one? The covered up portion seems like it's only large enough to say 58 West, unless they plan to add more lettering later (but then why put the rest of the text there now).
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on September 12, 2023, 08:06:57 AM
No California Valley fans?  That legitimately is the biggest community on 58 west of Bakersfield even though I guarantee that 99% of travelers don't even realize it exists.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Concrete Bob on September 12, 2023, 01:58:01 PM
I would put this on the overhead sign:

58 WEST To 5
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: DTComposer on September 12, 2023, 02:03:09 PM
Quote from: Concrete Bob on September 12, 2023, 01:58:01 PM
I would put this on the overhead sign:

58 WEST To 5

I thought this as well - and while the completion of CA-58 to freeway is somewhere down the road, wouldn't it make more sense to send Sacramento traffic to I-5 instead of up CA-99 and through Fresno/Modesto/etc.? (fully acknowledging the truck traffic on I-5 may make the two options a wash)
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: thsftw on September 12, 2023, 02:07:52 PM
Quote from: cahwyguy on September 11, 2023, 04:39:25 PM
Quote from: Occidental Tourist on September 11, 2023, 04:00:08 PM
Quote from: pderocco on September 04, 2023, 07:46:31 PM
Quote from: oscar on September 04, 2023, 01:10:08 AM
Even after the Centennial Corridor is complete enough to connect the Westside Parkway with CA 58 east of CA 99 (making 58 a continuous route between I-5 and I-15), it'll take awhile to finish the direct ramp connections between 99 and the Centennial Corridor/Westside Parkway. My hunch is the detour signage on Mohawk will need to stay up until better connections between 99 and Westside are open to traffic.
Are there any published plans for this, showing where they intend to squeeze the flyovers?


I haven't seen plans, but I've read there will be a loop ramp between e/b 58 and n/b 99.  How they'll squeeze that in with Wible Road and the auxiliary lane there is not evident.  But they did reprogram money from the Hageman Rd bridge project in order to get the loop ramp finished sooner.

The s/b 99 to w/b 58 ramp will be a curved transition ramp that will cause the Stockdale Hwy off ramp to be shut down.  There's no source of funding or timetable for this ramp.

Actually, I think there was something in the CTC minutes (see, this is why I tell folks to read that stuff when I post my updates):

♠ (Aug) (2) Approval of 6 Projects for Future Consideration of Funding: (° indicates items that were below the level of detail for updating the specific route pages)

06-Ker-58, PM T31.7/R55.6 06-Ker-99, PM 21.2/26.2. Centennial Corridor Project. Construct a new alignment for Route 58 to provide a continuous route along Route 58 from Cottonwood Road on existing Route 58, east of Route 99 to I-5. Improvements to Route 99 from Wilson Road to Gilmore Avenue would also be required for the connection with Route 58, in Kern County. (FEIR Addendum) (PPNO 8029) (STIP)

♠ (Jun) 4.5 2022 Trade Corridor Enhancement Program — Adoption Program of Projects. The adoption is generally a very succinct table, and many of the projects are more focused on rail. From the combination of the introductory text and the letters, the following projects could be identified (° indicates projects not in the "recommended for funding" table). Where there was sufficient new information, the appropriate pages have been updated.

Southbound Route 99 to Westbound Route 58 Connector

Reading the tables in the agenda item is difficult, but take a look at https://catc.ca.gov/-/media/ctc-media/documents/ctc-meetings/2023/2023-06/17-4-5.pdf (look on page 9 of the PDF)

Interesting they're pushing the I-5 connection already, figured that wouldn't happen for a long time.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Occidental Tourist on September 12, 2023, 06:59:59 PM
Does anyone know what the undeveloped ROW that runs due south from the Westside Parkway's terminus at Stockdale Highway is for?  It does not appear to be for power lines. Underground canal?

(https://i.imgur.com/htYC9HG.jpg)

There's a similar width ROW further south of there on the other side of the Kern River that runs SSE from the same meridian.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on September 12, 2023, 08:34:44 PM
The older and now razed alignment of Stockdale Highway.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: JustDrive on September 12, 2023, 08:51:01 PM
Quote from: FredAkbar on September 12, 2023, 02:55:05 AM
Quote from: mrsman on September 11, 2023, 10:15:08 AM
I guess a good control for 58 WB from Bakersfield is also needed.  Is Buttonwillow sufficient?

From the sign that's there now (https://www.google.com/maps/@35.3528183,-119.0333869,3a,75y,279.6h,87.68t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s9C_BUWLdiuywIp5kVIV6_A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu), it seems like there isn't one? The covered up portion seems like it's only large enough to say 58 West, unless they plan to add more lettering later (but then why put the rest of the text there now).

99 at Rosedale is signed for Buttonwillow, so it wouldn't be odd to put it on the BGS
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Concrete Bob on September 12, 2023, 09:19:42 PM
The right of way heading directly north and south of Stockdale Highway is for an extension of Rudd Road.  Rudd Road is planned to run from 7th Standard Road in the North to SR 119 in the south.  The road will be constructed to either expressway or freeway standards.  Ultimately, the expressway/freeway is slated to run from SR 99 in the north to I-5 on the south end. I believe it will be known as the West Beltway. 
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Occidental Tourist on September 12, 2023, 09:51:09 PM
Quote from: Concrete Bob on September 12, 2023, 09:19:42 PM
The right of way heading directly north and south of Stockdale Highway is for an extension of Rudd Road.  Rudd Road is planned to run from 7th Standard Road in the North to SR 119 in the south.  The road will be constructed to either expressway or freeway standards.  Ultimately, the expressway/freeway is slated to run from SR 99 in the north to I-5 on the south end. I believe it will be known as the West Beltway. 
Thanks
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: cahwyguy on September 12, 2023, 11:26:33 PM
Quote from: Concrete Bob on September 12, 2023, 09:19:42 PM
The right of way heading directly north and south of Stockdale Highway is for an extension of Rudd Road.  Rudd Road is planned to run from 7th Standard Road in the North to SR 119 in the south.  The road will be constructed to either expressway or freeway standards.  Ultimately, the expressway/freeway is slated to run from SR 99 in the north to I-5 on the south end. I believe it will be known as the West Beltway. 

Doing a quick search, I found this: https://www.kerncog.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/W_Beltway_Corridor_Study.pdf

There's also this from 2016: https://www.bakersfield.com/news/where-do-bakersfields-freeway-projects-stand/article_6655d31d-60d1-57d7-a62e-07e97352ee63.html

* West Beltway (7th Standard Road to Highway 119): Route adoption complete.

Construction dependent on future development and funding.

There's also this listing: https://www.loopnet.com/Listing/150000-Rosedale-Hwy-Bakersfield-CA/29394454/

The potential of the West Beltway highway alignment with an interchange on the corner at Rosedale Hwy located in the blooming Rosedale CA is immense. This project will open up a new corridor of development opportunities for businesses, residents, and visitors alike. The new highway will provide a direct connection to the nearby cities of Bakersfield and Fresno, as well as other major cities in the Central Valley. Additionally, the interchange will provide easy access to the local businesses and attractions in Rosedale.


Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: ClassicHasClass on September 13, 2023, 12:37:43 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on September 12, 2023, 08:06:57 AM
No California Valley fans?  That legitimately is the biggest community on 58 west of Bakersfield even though I guarantee that 99% of travelers don't even realize it exists.

SIMMLER FOR CONTROL CITY 2024
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on September 13, 2023, 12:42:59 PM
Quote from: ClassicHasClass on September 13, 2023, 12:37:43 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on September 12, 2023, 08:06:57 AM
No California Valley fans?  That legitimately is the biggest community on 58 west of Bakersfield even though I guarantee that 99% of travelers don't even realize it exists.

SIMMLER FOR CONTROL CITY 2024

Why not La Panza for the OG CA 178 reference?
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: thsftw on September 13, 2023, 01:20:17 PM
Quote from: cahwyguy on September 12, 2023, 11:26:33 PM

Doing a quick search, I found this: https://www.kerncog.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/W_Beltway_Corridor_Study.pdf


Why is the Centennial Corridor so far off its built alignment in this? It was going to connect to 178 originally?
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Concrete Bob on September 13, 2023, 02:52:57 PM
It is probably decided that having the Centennial Corridor tie into SR 58 would serve a greater regional traffic purpose.  178 east will get someone to Lake Isabella, but 58 will get someone to Barstow, Las Vegas and Interstate 40. 
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: ClassicHasClass on September 14, 2023, 12:13:41 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on September 13, 2023, 12:42:59 PM
Quote from: ClassicHasClass on September 13, 2023, 12:37:43 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on September 12, 2023, 08:06:57 AM
No California Valley fans?  That legitimately is the biggest community on 58 west of Bakersfield even though I guarantee that 99% of travelers don't even realize it exists.

SIMMLER FOR CONTROL CITY 2024

Why not La Panza for the OG CA 178 reference?

Fair point. Besides, it's certainly true everything ends up in one's belly.  :sombrero:
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Occidental Tourist on September 14, 2023, 07:55:03 PM
Quote from: ClassicHasClass on September 13, 2023, 12:37:43 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on September 12, 2023, 08:06:57 AM
No California Valley fans?  That legitimately is the biggest community on 58 west of Bakersfield even though I guarantee that 99% of travelers don't even realize it exists.

SIMMLER FOR CONTROL CITY 2024
Quote from: ClassicHasClass on September 13, 2023, 12:37:43 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on September 12, 2023, 08:06:57 AM
No California Valley fans?  That legitimately is the biggest community on 58 west of Bakersfield even though I guarantee that 99% of travelers don't even realize it exists.

SIMMLER FOR CONTROL CITY 2024

I vote for Santa Margarita as the w/b control city.  We have some existing, incorrect signs here in District 12 you are welcome to take to use.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: mrsman on September 21, 2023, 12:14:48 PM
Quote from: cahwyguy on September 12, 2023, 11:26:33 PM
Quote from: Concrete Bob on September 12, 2023, 09:19:42 PM
The right of way heading directly north and south of Stockdale Highway is for an extension of Rudd Road.  Rudd Road is planned to run from 7th Standard Road in the North to SR 119 in the south.  The road will be constructed to either expressway or freeway standards.  Ultimately, the expressway/freeway is slated to run from SR 99 in the north to I-5 on the south end. I believe it will be known as the West Beltway. 

Doing a quick search, I found this: https://www.kerncog.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/W_Beltway_Corridor_Study.pdf

There's also this from 2016: https://www.bakersfield.com/news/where-do-bakersfields-freeway-projects-stand/article_6655d31d-60d1-57d7-a62e-07e97352ee63.html

* West Beltway (7th Standard Road to Highway 119): Route adoption complete.

Construction dependent on future development and funding.

There's also this listing: https://www.loopnet.com/Listing/150000-Rosedale-Hwy-Bakersfield-CA/29394454/

The potential of the West Beltway highway alignment with an interchange on the corner at Rosedale Hwy located in the blooming Rosedale CA is immense. This project will open up a new corridor of development opportunities for businesses, residents, and visitors alike. The new highway will provide a direct connection to the nearby cities of Bakersfield and Fresno, as well as other major cities in the Central Valley. Additionally, the interchange will provide easy access to the local businesses and attractions in Rosedale.

Such a highway would be nice.  Basically a straight line connection btwn 5 and 99 to connect LA to Fresno without going through cenral Bakersfield.

When built, Fresno should not be signed at 5/99 so that traffic to Fresno from 5 could take the West Beltway instead.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Lukeisroads on November 01, 2023, 12:11:09 AM
idk if im allowed to do this but i found a yt video of a time lapse and it showcases a brand new sign! Around 13:07 https://youtu.be/BrpdxW9hR4s?t=787
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: The Ghostbuster on November 02, 2023, 10:35:58 AM
Will the Westside Parkway still be completed by the end of the year? Or will construction continue into 2024?
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: pderocco on November 02, 2023, 09:59:50 PM
Quote from: Lukeisroads on November 01, 2023, 12:11:09 AM
idk if im allowed to do this but i found a yt video of a time lapse and it showcases a brand new sign! Around 13:07
I'm surprised they don't have the westbound part of the sign (actually two of them) covered for now, because you can see that the ramp isn't open yet. But it does imply that it will be Real Soon Now.

Looks like the Ming on ramp is going to merge with the 58W off ramp, and then split into the 58W on ramp and a 99 on ramp, so perhaps it won't be possible to go from Ming to 58E via 99.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: ClassicHasClass on November 05, 2023, 10:20:11 PM
Went by it today on my (nowadays) usual cross-Central Valley run. The WB flyover ramp is fully completed except for striping, but there was still equipment on it. The advance signage did have both 58 west and east as if the exit were open.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: oscar on December 05, 2023, 11:36:36 PM
Local news report holds out hope the Centennial Corridor will be completed by the end of the year, maybe even by Christmas. Or maybe not.

https://bakersfieldnow.com/news/local/centennial-corridor-near-completion-caltrans-bakersfield
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Voyager on December 06, 2023, 04:05:26 PM
Quote from: oscar on December 05, 2023, 11:36:36 PM
Local news report holds out hope the Centennial Corridor will be completed by the end of the year, maybe even by Christmas. Or maybe not.

https://bakersfieldnow.com/news/local/centennial-corridor-near-completion-caltrans-bakersfield

It looks like the most recent SentinelHub images from there a few days ago have cleared out most of the construction equipment, I wouldn't be surprised if it was going to open in the next few weeks.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: The Ghostbuster on December 06, 2023, 08:32:43 PM
It looks like CA 58 signage along Hageman Rd and Rosedale Hwy. was almost non-existent before CA 58 was moved to Stockdale Hwy. and the Westside Parkway. Except for one lone reassurance shield just east of CA 43 on Rosedale, and one just west of 43 on Hageman, the only indications that the roadways were part of CA 58 were Route 58 signs attached to traffic signal poles. Is this the norm for non-freeway highways on California?
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Henry on December 06, 2023, 10:02:52 PM
I find the West Beltway interesting, since I feel that a loop highway (with two or three more sides added to it) would be nice for Bakersfield in the off chance that I-40 gets extended west from Barstow. I, for one, find it hard to believe that no such highways exist in CA. The closest to one would be the I-280/I-680/I-880 around the Bay, and even that's just a 3/4 loop at best.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: kkt on December 06, 2023, 10:23:23 PM
Quote from: mrsman on September 21, 2023, 12:14:48 PM
Quote from: cahwyguy on September 12, 2023, 11:26:33 PM
Quote from: Concrete Bob on September 12, 2023, 09:19:42 PM
The right of way heading directly north and south of Stockdale Highway is for an extension of Rudd Road.  Rudd Road is planned to run from 7th Standard Road in the North to SR 119 in the south.  The road will be constructed to either expressway or freeway standards.  Ultimately, the expressway/freeway is slated to run from SR 99 in the north to I-5 on the south end. I believe it will be known as the West Beltway. 

Doing a quick search, I found this: https://www.kerncog.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/W_Beltway_Corridor_Study.pdf

There's also this from 2016: https://www.bakersfield.com/news/where-do-bakersfields-freeway-projects-stand/article_6655d31d-60d1-57d7-a62e-07e97352ee63.html

* West Beltway (7th Standard Road to Highway 119): Route adoption complete.

Construction dependent on future development and funding.

There's also this listing: https://www.loopnet.com/Listing/150000-Rosedale-Hwy-Bakersfield-CA/29394454/

The potential of the West Beltway highway alignment with an interchange on the corner at Rosedale Hwy located in the blooming Rosedale CA is immense. This project will open up a new corridor of development opportunities for businesses, residents, and visitors alike. The new highway will provide a direct connection to the nearby cities of Bakersfield and Fresno, as well as other major cities in the Central Valley. Additionally, the interchange will provide easy access to the local businesses and attractions in Rosedale.

Such a highway would be nice.  Basically a straight line connection btwn 5 and 99 to connect LA to Fresno without going through cenral Bakersfield.

When built, Fresno should not be signed at 5/99 so that traffic to Fresno from 5 could take the West Beltway instead.

Not CA 43?  or CA 41?  or 269 to 145 to 180?
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on December 06, 2023, 10:45:13 PM
I wouldn't recommend anyone hold their breath for a western beltway in the Bakersfield.  1990 is a long time ago and lot of that land they have in the corridor runs into the Ag Wall.  Besides, it isn't as though the topic has been talked about seriously by any agency in several decades. 

From I-5 the most streamlined routing to Fresno is CA 41.  Even if the western beltway was built I don't see a point in not signing Fresno as a control city along with Bakersfield for 99.  The local commercial traffic is going to stick to 99 just like it always has. 
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on December 06, 2023, 10:51:37 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on December 06, 2023, 08:32:43 PM
It looks like CA 58 signage along Hageman Rd and Rosedale Hwy. was almost non-existent before CA 58 was moved to Stockdale Hwy. and the Westside Parkway. Except for one lone reassurance shield just east of CA 43 on Rosedale, and one just west of 43 on Hageman, the only indications that the roadways were part of CA 58 were Route 58 signs attached to traffic signal poles. Is this the norm for non-freeway highways on California?

Rosedale Highway was adequately signed on Rosedale Highway before the Westside Parkway got going.  By "traffic poles" are you referring to Postmile paddles?
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: pderocco on December 07, 2023, 01:24:17 AM
Quote from: Henry on December 06, 2023, 10:02:52 PM
I find the West Beltway interesting, since I feel that a loop highway (with two or three more sides added to it) would be nice for Bakersfield in the off chance that I-40 gets extended west from Barstow. I, for one, find it hard to believe that no such highways exist in CA. The closest to one would be the I-280/I-680/I-880 around the Bay, and even that's just a 3/4 loop at best.

If you look at the geography, circumferential beltways couldn't work around any of the cities in California that are big enough to need one. Los Angeles has various ridges that defy the construction of a good loop, San Jose is too close to the Diablo range, and San Diego, San Francisco, Long Beach, and Oakland are next to water. The only significant cities I see that could fit a beltway in the future are Fresno, Sacramento, and eventually Bakersfield, but that's a long way off.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on December 07, 2023, 08:14:19 AM
Fresno won't need one, the general plan has the city growing eastward between Jensen Avenue and CA 180 towards McCall Avenue.  Both the Jensen and CA 180 corridors are high quality expressway already.  The city has basically no real long term plans to grow to the south or west.  Considering much of the lane west of 99 is owned by factory farms the easier growth pattern is eastward towards Sanger.  There is some growth in Madera County north of the San Joaquin River but it is largely contained to CA 41 and probably will require expansion to four lanes maybe to CA 145 one day.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Voyager on December 07, 2023, 11:53:52 AM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on December 07, 2023, 08:14:19 AM
Fresno won't need one, the general plan has the city growing eastward between Jensen Avenue and CA 180 towards McCall Avenue.  Both the Jensen and CA 180 corridors are high quality expressway already.  The city has basically no real long term plans to grow to the south or west.  Considering much of the lane west of 99 is owned by factory farms the easier growth pattern is eastward towards Sanger.  There is some growth in Madera County north of the San Joaquin River but it is largely contained to CA 41 and probably will require expansion to four lanes maybe to CA 145 one day.

Too bad 65 was never built on the east side though, that would have created an almost beltway around the city.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on December 07, 2023, 12:35:32 PM
Quote from: Voyager on December 07, 2023, 11:53:52 AM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on December 07, 2023, 08:14:19 AM
Fresno won't need one, the general plan has the city growing eastward between Jensen Avenue and CA 180 towards McCall Avenue.  Both the Jensen and CA 180 corridors are high quality expressway already.  The city has basically no real long term plans to grow to the south or west.  Considering much of the lane west of 99 is owned by factory farms the easier growth pattern is eastward towards Sanger.  There is some growth in Madera County north of the San Joaquin River but it is largely contained to CA 41 and probably will require expansion to four lanes maybe to CA 145 one day.

Too bad 65 was never built on the east side though, that would have created an almost beltway around the city.

Not really.  That would have more or less served Reedley and Sanger but largely bypassed the Fresno area.  The closest the projected corridor of 65 ever got the direct line northwest of Sanger towards Friant.  Certainly it would have been useful heading north as an alternate to 99.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: mrsman on December 17, 2023, 09:52:44 PM
Quote from: kkt on December 06, 2023, 10:23:23 PM
Quote from: mrsman on September 21, 2023, 12:14:48 PM
Quote from: cahwyguy on September 12, 2023, 11:26:33 PM
Quote from: Concrete Bob on September 12, 2023, 09:19:42 PM
The right of way heading directly north and south of Stockdale Highway is for an extension of Rudd Road.  Rudd Road is planned to run from 7th Standard Road in the North to SR 119 in the south.  The road will be constructed to either expressway or freeway standards.  Ultimately, the expressway/freeway is slated to run from SR 99 in the north to I-5 on the south end. I believe it will be known as the West Beltway. 

Doing a quick search, I found this: https://www.kerncog.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/W_Beltway_Corridor_Study.pdf

There's also this from 2016: https://www.bakersfield.com/news/where-do-bakersfields-freeway-projects-stand/article_6655d31d-60d1-57d7-a62e-07e97352ee63.html

* West Beltway (7th Standard Road to Highway 119): Route adoption complete.

Construction dependent on future development and funding.

There's also this listing: https://www.loopnet.com/Listing/150000-Rosedale-Hwy-Bakersfield-CA/29394454/

The potential of the West Beltway highway alignment with an interchange on the corner at Rosedale Hwy located in the blooming Rosedale CA is immense. This project will open up a new corridor of development opportunities for businesses, residents, and visitors alike. The new highway will provide a direct connection to the nearby cities of Bakersfield and Fresno, as well as other major cities in the Central Valley. Additionally, the interchange will provide easy access to the local businesses and attractions in Rosedale.

Such a highway would be nice.  Basically a straight line connection btwn 5 and 99 to connect LA to Fresno without going through cenral Bakersfield.

When built, Fresno should not be signed at 5/99 so that traffic to Fresno from 5 could take the West Beltway instead.

Not CA 43?  or CA 41?  or 269 to 145 to 180?

From L.A., the fastest way to Fresno is I-5 to 99 right through Bakersfield.  Even under normal traffic conditions, it is quicker to go through Bakersfield on an expressway than to do I-5/CA-41 as a bypass.

But if a bypass that is straight north-south was built to expressway standards that runs from 5 to 99 north of Bakersfield, that would be the new preferred way from LA to Fresno.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Concrete Bob on December 18, 2023, 01:25:55 PM
I check online news sources like crazy. When the hell is the Centennial Corridor going to open?  Bakersfield and the rest of the state needs a Taxpayer-Funded Christmas Gift for mobility, commerce and the satisfaction of looking at an open freeway on a map!! Dammit. : )
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Voyager on December 27, 2023, 02:18:20 PM
Doesn't look like it'll be open this year.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: rschen7754 on December 28, 2023, 02:19:35 AM
I did drive by on CA 99 just a few days ago. The signs for CA 58 west and the new freeway were all there, and the flyover from 99 N to 58 W looked ready to go... but it was all blocked off.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on December 28, 2023, 07:45:23 AM
I posted pictures of those signs on northbound 99 back on the 13th.  The signage wasn't present on southbound 99 the day prior:

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=pfbid035XP6UMznseLwiT9C9BPzGb6YiKxUJMQigEskaWyrJpn4Mna4hV64dipUisGok5qEl&id=100063655972258&mibextid=cr9u03
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: boilerup25 on December 28, 2023, 05:34:33 PM
Quote from: rschen7754 on December 28, 2023, 02:19:35 AM
I did drive by on CA 99 just a few days ago. The signs for CA 58 west and the new freeway were all there, and the flyover from 99 N to 58 W looked ready to go... but it was all blocked off.

I also passed by there fairly recently, and was surprised to see that CalTrans did not tarp off or put an orange "EXIT CLOSED" banner over the CA 58 WB sign from CA 99 NB even if the ramp is blocked.
(https://i.imgur.com/LwHmMeN.jpg)
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Voyager on December 28, 2023, 07:51:05 PM
Quote from: boilerup25 on December 28, 2023, 05:34:33 PM
Quote from: rschen7754 on December 28, 2023, 02:19:35 AM
I did drive by on CA 99 just a few days ago. The signs for CA 58 west and the new freeway were all there, and the flyover from 99 N to 58 W looked ready to go... but it was all blocked off.

I also passed by there fairly recently, and was surprised to see that CalTrans did not tarp off or put an orange "EXIT CLOSED" banner over the CA 58 WB sign from CA 99 NB even if the ramp is blocked.
(https://i.imgur.com/LwHmMeN.jpg)

Also this is a bizarre not very California-like design being used here for this gantry...I am not a fan. Too weird seeing lines that don't go all the way down each section.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on December 28, 2023, 08:10:11 PM
I'm honestly surprised nobody here or on my page flipped about the internal exit tabs.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: kurumi on December 28, 2023, 10:25:16 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on December 28, 2023, 08:10:11 PM
I'm honestly surprised nobody here or on my page flipped about the internal exit tabs.

We're at the 5th stage: acceptance.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: pderocco on December 29, 2023, 04:37:15 AM
I don't understand why Caltrans posts absolutely nothing on its site about when this will be open. They've got a page about the future addition of the remaining ramps between 58 and 99, but nothing about the current status. And neither does any other government site that I can find. I like the idea that maybe they'll just surprise us, and we'll wake up one morning to find the ramps open, but I can't imagine they'll pass up a stupid ribbon-cutting opportunity.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: cahwyguy on December 29, 2023, 08:40:56 AM
Quote from: pderocco on December 29, 2023, 04:37:15 AM
I don't understand why Caltrans posts absolutely nothing on its site about when this will be open. They've got a page about the future addition of the remaining ramps between 58 and 99, but nothing about the current status. And neither does any other government site that I can find. I like the idea that maybe they'll just surprise us, and we'll wake up one morning to find the ramps open, but I can't imagine they'll pass up a stupid ribbon-cutting opportunity.

Some public information officers are better than others, but all of them respond better to the press than they do to us peons. Still, you can try contacting the public information officer, the contact point listed in the project website, or contact the Bakersfield Caliifornian (the local paper) to see if they can find out, as a service to the citizens of Bakersfield. You might also try contacting the state assembly or senate critters, because they might also be able to find out.

All of those are better channels than posting about it here, because it is unlikely more than one or two Caltrans folks read these forums... and the ones that do, if they knew, would have posted the answer. But remember that just because something looks like it could open, doesn't mean they've completed the project yet. There could still be signage or safety equipment or striping left to perform; concrete could still be curing; they could still need to cut grooves; there could be street signage pending; there could still be landscaping or drainage issues to address.

I do know -- simply from my working on the highway pages over the last few days -- that the December CTC meeting had some stuff on this:

In the approval for future consideration of funding:
06-06-Ker-58, PM T31.7/R55.6; 06-Ker-99, PM 21.2/26.2. Centennial Corridor Project. Construct a new alignment for Route 58 to provide a continuous route along Route 58 from Cottonwood Road on existing Route 58, east of Route 99 to I-5. Improvements to Route 99 from Wilson Road to Gilmore Avenue would also be required for the connection with Route 58, in Kern County. (FEIR Addendum) (PPNO 8030) (TCEP)

See https://catc.ca.gov/-/media/ctc-media/documents/ctc-meetings/2023/2023-12/35-2-2c2-a11y.pdf

[06]-06-Ker-58, PM T31.7/R55.6
06-Ker-99, PM 21.2/26.2
Resolution E-23-161A

The attached resolution proposes to approve for consideration of funding the following project
for which a FEIR and an Addendum have been completed:

• SR 58 and SR 99 in Kern County. Construct a new alignment for SR 58, to provide a
continuous route from Cottonwood Road on existing SR 58, east of SR 99 to I-5.
Improvements to SR 99, from Wilson Road to Gilmore Avenue, would also be required
for the connection with SR 58, in Kern County. (PPNO 8030)

The project is located on SR 58 from PM T31.7 to PM R55.6, and on SR 99 from PM 21.2 to
PM 26.2, in Kern County. The Department proposes to construct a new alignment for SR 58, to
provide a continuous route from Cottonwood Road on existing SR 58, east of SR 99 to I-5.
Improvements to SR 99, from Wilson Road to Gilmore Avenue, would also be required for the
connection with SR 58. The project is currently programmed in the Trade Corridor
Enhancement Program (TCEP). The total programmed amount, which includes Right of Way
(Capital), and Construction (Capital) is $13,400,000. Construction began in 2023-2024. The
scope, as described for the preferred alternative, is consistent with the project scope as
programmed by the Commission in the TCEP.

A copy of the FEIR has been provided to Commission staff. The Commission approved the
project for future consideration of funding on March 21, 2018, under Resolution E-18-30 and
August 17, 2023, under Resolution E-23-122A. Since the approval of the FEIR and Addendum,
there have been changes to the project and a new Addendum was prepared pursuant to
CEQA. These changes include the construction of a southbound SR 99 to westbound SR 58
connector ramp. The ramp would be constructed at the current location of the southbound
SR 99 to Stockdale off-ramp. The existing Stockdale off-ramp would be permanently closed.
The connector ramp would be a fly-over structure, which would cross over Stockdale Highway,
the existing westbound SR 58 to southbound SR 99 loop connector, and Real Road before
merging to the westbound SR 58. West of Real Road, an existing retaining wall would be
reconstructed to accommodate the new connector ramp. An additional 470-foot auxiliary lane
would be constructed on westbound SR 58 to accommodate merging. There are no substantial
changes proposed in the new connector ramp that would require major revisions of the FEIR
due to involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the
severity of previously identified significant effects. The project changes do not meet the criteria
outlined in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 and Section 15163 to prepare a Subsequent or
Supplemental FEIR. The Department subsequently completed an Addendum to the FEIR
pursuant to CEQA.

The Department has approved this project for construction. This approval and the Addendum
will satisfy the environmental requirements for this stage of the planning process.

Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on December 29, 2023, 09:42:52 AM
One of my friends is a District 6 engineer.  He didn't even know when I asked him regarding when the Centennial Corridor would open.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Bobby5280 on December 29, 2023, 10:17:52 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/LwHmMeN.jpg)

There are things I don't like about that big green sign. But at least it's a Caltrans sign that doesn't make me feel like throwing up in my mouth a little.

We could give it about 10 or so years when they start doing patch job nonsense to it. Then it will fit in with all the other hammered looking crap out there.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: vdeane on December 30, 2023, 10:15:39 AM
I think at this point we're all used to the internal tabs (no matter how ugly they can often be) and it feels like beating a dead horse.  I actually momentarily didn't think about how CalTrans finally figured out how to mount external tabs (after 48 or 49 other states already have), but this project might be old enough to have been designed before that spec came out.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on December 30, 2023, 10:24:01 AM
Amusingly even the recently completed Veterans Boulevard has internal exit tabs on 99.  The project concept definitely predates the external tab adoption though by several decades, hard to say when the current specs were drafted.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: rschen7754 on December 30, 2023, 10:25:14 PM
Drove through today going southbound and the signage was the same as before. (!)
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: CtrlAltDel on December 30, 2023, 10:37:16 PM
It took me a bit too long to realize that Voyager isn't me.

(https://i.imgur.com/ydTW475.png)
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: pderocco on January 02, 2024, 03:15:04 AM
Quote from: cahwyguy on December 29, 2023, 08:40:56 AM
Quote from: pderocco on December 29, 2023, 04:37:15 AM
I don't understand why Caltrans posts absolutely nothing on its site about when this will be open. They've got a page about the future addition of the remaining ramps between 58 and 99, but nothing about the current status. And neither does any other government site that I can find. I like the idea that maybe they'll just surprise us, and we'll wake up one morning to find the ramps open, but I can't imagine they'll pass up a stupid ribbon-cutting opportunity.

Some public information officers are better than others, but all of them respond better to the press than they do to us peons. Still, you can try contacting the public information officer, the contact point listed in the project website, or contact the Bakersfield Caliifornian (the local paper) to see if they can find out, as a service to the citizens of Bakersfield. You might also try contacting the state assembly or senate critters, because they might also be able to find out.

I still think that maintaining an up-to-date web site to keep the public informed is a pretty trivial task compared to, say, building a freeway.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: The Ghostbuster on January 02, 2024, 02:53:51 PM
I think the best anyone can say is that the Westside Parkway will be completed to the CA 58/CA 99 interchange sometime this year.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Voyager on January 02, 2024, 03:49:58 PM
Quote from: CtrlAltDel on December 30, 2023, 10:37:16 PM
It took me a bit too long to realize that Voyager isn't me.

(https://i.imgur.com/ydTW475.png)

Sorry but I was first (I made the forum 15 years ago!)

Also I didn't realize back on this topic that the 58 extension to I-5 is kinda...not really planned. Hopefully someday, since Bakersfield is growing that direction anyways.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: cl94 on January 02, 2024, 04:06:19 PM
58 may get 4-laned further west. Full freeway...eh, I doubt that's necessary. Especially given how constrained ROW is. I don't see them doing anything that would eat up a lot of ag land.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: kkt on January 02, 2024, 04:16:05 PM
Quote from: Voyager on January 02, 2024, 03:49:58 PM
Quote from: CtrlAltDel on December 30, 2023, 10:37:16 PM
It took me a bit too long to realize that Voyager isn't me.

(https://i.imgur.com/ydTW475.png)

Sorry but I was first (I made the forum 15 years ago!)

Also I didn't realize back on this topic that the 58 extension to I-5 is kinda...not really planned. Hopefully someday, since Bakersfield is growing that direction anyways.

I hope this time around they at least reserve the right of way so they can build it in the future without having to do condemnations.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on January 02, 2024, 04:18:19 PM
It would probably take Bakersfield several decades to even get close growing out towards I-5 on the newly relocated part of 58 west of 43.  Right now and really for the foreseeable future an upgrade isn't necessary.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: pderocco on January 02, 2024, 05:48:33 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 02, 2024, 04:18:19 PM
It would probably take Bakersfield several decades to even get close growing out towards I-5 on the newly relocated part of 58 west of 43.  Right now and really for the foreseeable future an upgrade isn't necessary.
I don't think the primary purpose of a 58 full freeway extension to I-5 would be to serve the local residents and the properties around there, it would be to serve truckers going between I-5 and I-15 or I-40 in Barstow. If they built it, I think there would be a ton of truck traffic on it.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on January 02, 2024, 06:07:13 PM
Quote from: pderocco on January 02, 2024, 05:48:33 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 02, 2024, 04:18:19 PM
It would probably take Bakersfield several decades to even get close growing out towards I-5 on the newly relocated part of 58 west of 43.  Right now and really for the foreseeable future an upgrade isn't necessary.
I don't think the primary purpose of a 58 full freeway extension to I-5 would be to serve the local residents and the properties around there, it would be to serve truckers going between I-5 and I-15 or I-40 in Barstow. If they built it, I think there would be a ton of truck traffic on it.

Perhaps, but it isn't as though most freight doesn't already cut over on 46 and 152.  I'll be curious to see how much gets drawn onto 58 once the Centennial Corridor opens.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: CtrlAltDel on January 05, 2024, 09:15:27 PM
Quote from: Voyager on January 02, 2024, 03:49:58 PM
Quote from: CtrlAltDel on December 30, 2023, 10:37:16 PM
It took me a bit too long to realize that Voyager isn't me.

(https://i.imgur.com/ydTW475.png)

Sorry but I was first (I made the forum 15 years ago!)

Pulling rank, I see!  :-D 
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sprjus4 on January 05, 2024, 10:29:35 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 02, 2024, 06:07:13 PM
Quote from: pderocco on January 02, 2024, 05:48:33 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 02, 2024, 04:18:19 PM
It would probably take Bakersfield several decades to even get close growing out towards I-5 on the newly relocated part of 58 west of 43.  Right now and really for the foreseeable future an upgrade isn't necessary.
I don't think the primary purpose of a 58 full freeway extension to I-5 would be to serve the local residents and the properties around there, it would be to serve truckers going between I-5 and I-15 or I-40 in Barstow. If they built it, I think there would be a ton of truck traffic on it.

Perhaps, but it isn't as though most freight doesn't already cut over on 46 and 152.  I'll be curious to see how much gets drawn onto 58 once the Centennial Corridor opens.
Given the new Centennial Corridor will be a direct continuation of the CA-58 freeway and will beeline directly for I-5 a few miles west, I would imagine most freight would stick to it. It will be necessary to extend the freeway out to I-5 in the future, or at minimum four lane divided highway.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: mrsman on January 06, 2024, 09:19:15 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on January 05, 2024, 10:29:35 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 02, 2024, 06:07:13 PM
Quote from: pderocco on January 02, 2024, 05:48:33 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 02, 2024, 04:18:19 PM
It would probably take Bakersfield several decades to even get close growing out towards I-5 on the newly relocated part of 58 west of 43.  Right now and really for the foreseeable future an upgrade isn't necessary.
I don't think the primary purpose of a 58 full freeway extension to I-5 would be to serve the local residents and the properties around there, it would be to serve truckers going between I-5 and I-15 or I-40 in Barstow. If they built it, I think there would be a ton of truck traffic on it.

Perhaps, but it isn't as though most freight doesn't already cut over on 46 and 152.  I'll be curious to see how much gets drawn onto 58 once the Centennial Corridor opens.
Given the new Centennial Corridor will be a direct continuation of the CA-58 freeway and will beeline directly for I-5 a few miles west, I would imagine most freight would stick to it. It will be necessary to extend the freeway out to I-5 in the future, or at minimum four lane divided highway.

I agree.  It's easier and desirable for traffic from Barstow to not clog up 99 if headed to I-5.  With the new freeway completion, it will be a thru route, without the need to interchange to 99. 
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Concrete Bob on January 16, 2024, 03:02:57 PM
Centennial Corridor is expected to open in early February.  The ribbon cutting is scheduled for February 2, 2024:

https://www.bakersfield.com/news/construction-disruption-coming-to-an-end-centennial-corridor-set-for-february-completion/article_7066a726-b272-11ee-8906-f36c06fb51d1.html
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on January 16, 2024, 03:30:41 PM
What a coincidence, I just so happen to be off that day.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Concrete Bob on January 16, 2024, 05:25:58 PM
Enjoy the maximum spiritual goodness of driving on a freshly-opened freeway!! We don't get to do that in California too much anymore. 
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: The Ghostbuster on January 17, 2024, 12:10:08 PM
I'm glad they are finally completing and opening the CA 58 Westside Parkway extension from Truxtun Ave. to the CA 99 freeway. I doubt any further upgrades to Stockdale Hwy. will occur anytime soon.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Voyager on January 17, 2024, 04:44:05 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on January 17, 2024, 12:10:08 PM
I'm glad they are finally completing and opening the CA 58 Westside Parkway extension from Truxtun Ave. to the CA 99 freeway. I doubt any further upgrades to Stockdale Hwy. will occur anytime soon.

I think that'll be dependent on how many trucks/thru traffic start using the new corridor from I-5 (could be a lot more than you'd think), and that roundabout at highway 43 can't handle a ton of volume despite being built not that long ago.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on January 17, 2024, 06:00:05 PM
It definitely won't get the truck volume the turbo roundabout at 25/156 does. 
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Techknow on January 18, 2024, 12:11:54 AM
Awesome. I remember seeing the Westside Parkway for the first time on Google Maps almost 10 years ago, since it opened in 2014. Now 10 years later it's part of a state route and connects to another freeway!
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: roadfro on January 18, 2024, 10:47:49 AM
Quote from: Concrete Bob on January 16, 2024, 03:02:57 PM
Centennial Corridor is expected to open in early February.  The ribbon cutting is scheduled for February 2, 2024:

https://www.bakersfield.com/news/construction-disruption-coming-to-an-end-centennial-corridor-set-for-february-completion/article_7066a726-b272-11ee-8906-f36c06fb51d1.html

There's a ribbon cutting, but is there any talk of hosting a community event? Does Caltrans ever do something like that?

Just thinking about comparable NDOT projects (various phases of the Carson City Freeway, I-580 extension between Reno & Carson), where they have celebrated substantial completion of a brand new freeway segment by opening it up for the community about a week or two before the facility opens to traffic. These typically allow people to check out the freeway on foot/bike/scooter/etc. for a few hours on a weekend morning, and they put up display boards about elements of the project (history of the project, any interesting road features, explanation of aesthetics, etc.).

Seems like if Caltrans has spent over $1 billion on this project, they ought to celebrate that a bit. And since it's a project that dove right through a neighborhood, Caltrans ought to be a good neighbor and have an open house before they invite all their loud friends (drivers) over.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: mrsman on January 18, 2024, 11:54:34 AM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 17, 2024, 06:00:05 PM
It definitely won't get the truck volume the turbo roundabout at 25/156 does.

Probably true, but it will still likely get enough truck traffic to overwhelm the existing roundabout.  High volume rural intersections should be converted to grade separations when possible.

While most of 58 between 5 and 99 is currently low volume, the completion of the Westside Parkway will certainly induce more traffic.  I don't believe that a freeway is necessary all the way to 5, but I can certainly appreciate a dual carriage roadway without traffic signals and the occasional grade separation to keep traffic moving.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Voyager on January 18, 2024, 01:44:56 PM
Quote from: mrsman on January 18, 2024, 11:54:34 AM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 17, 2024, 06:00:05 PM
It definitely won't get the truck volume the turbo roundabout at 25/156 does.

Probably true, but it will still likely get enough truck traffic to overwhelm the existing roundabout.  High volume rural intersections should be converted to grade separations when possible.

While most of 58 between 5 and 99 is currently low volume, the completion of the Westside Parkway will certainly induce more traffic.  I don't believe that a freeway is necessary all the way to 5, but I can certainly appreciate a dual carriage roadway without traffic signals and the occasional grade separation to keep traffic moving.

If they intended to extend Interstate 40 to Interstate 5, then I think they'd see it differently, but CalTrans seems to disagree with our desires on that one (as seen by the CA 223 intersection).
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: The Ghostbuster on January 18, 2024, 02:07:16 PM
I doubt Interstate 40 will ever be extended. They should convert the CA 223 intersection into an interchange.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sprjus4 on January 18, 2024, 02:11:08 PM
Quote from: Voyager on January 18, 2024, 01:44:56 PM
Quote from: mrsman on January 18, 2024, 11:54:34 AM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 17, 2024, 06:00:05 PM
It definitely won't get the truck volume the turbo roundabout at 25/156 does.

Probably true, but it will still likely get enough truck traffic to overwhelm the existing roundabout.  High volume rural intersections should be converted to grade separations when possible.

While most of 58 between 5 and 99 is currently low volume, the completion of the Westside Parkway will certainly induce more traffic.  I don't believe that a freeway is necessary all the way to 5, but I can certainly appreciate a dual carriage roadway without traffic signals and the occasional grade separation to keep traffic moving.

If they intended to extend Interstate 40 to Interstate 5, then I think they'd see it differently, but CalTrans seems to disagree with our desires on that one (as seen by the CA 223 intersection).
Interstate 40 being extended is a fictional proposal. In reality though, I do feel they should upgrade or construct a freeway segment between the Westside Parkway and I-5.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: pderocco on January 18, 2024, 10:03:07 PM
It's obvious that they've already purchased some of the ROW to extend the freeway a half mile south of Stockdale Hwy.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/9RuBHr1C5mLh2PDj7 (https://maps.app.goo.gl/9RuBHr1C5mLh2PDj7)

Although that's not likely to be built real soon, if that's their eventual intention, I doubt they'll build a grade separation on Stockdale. A traffic light would be more likely, if the roundabout creates a problem.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on January 18, 2024, 10:05:50 PM
I mean wouldn't it just be common sense this will eventually extend to I-5 one day?
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: cahwyguy on January 18, 2024, 11:43:06 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on January 18, 2024, 10:05:50 PM
I mean wouldn't it just be common sense this will eventually extend to I-5 one day?

It will. I posted the following earlier, but I'll post it again. It just may not be freeway all of the way, and it certainly won't be I-40.

In December 2023, the CTC approved for future consideration of funding the following project for which a FEIR and an Addendum have been completed: Centennial Corridor Project. Route 58 and Route 99 in Kern County. Construct a new alignment for Route 58, to provide a continuous route from Cottonwood Road on existing Route 58, east of Route 99 to I-5. Improvements to Route 99, from Wilson Road to Gilmore Avenue, would also be required for the connection with Route 58, in Kern County. (06-Ker-58, PM T31.7/R55.6; 06-Ker-99, PM 21.2/26.2; PPNO 06-8030) The project is located on Route 58 from PM T31.7 to PM R55.6, and on Route 99 from PM 21.2 to PM 26.2, in Kern County. The Department proposes to construct a new alignment for Route 58, to provide a continuous route from Cottonwood Road on existing Route 58, east of Route 99 to I-5. Improvements to Route 99, from Wilson Road to Gilmore Avenue, would also be required for the connection with Route 58. The project is currently programmed in the Trade Corridor Enhancement Program (TCEP). The total programmed amount, which includes Right of Way (Capital), and Construction (Capital) is $13,400,000. Construction began in 2023-2024. The scope, as described for the preferred alternative, is consistent with the project scope as programmed by the Commission in the TCEP. A copy of the FEIR has been provided to Commission staff. The Commission approved the project for future consideration of funding on March 21, 2018, under Resolution E-18-30 and August 17, 2023, under Resolution E-23-122A. Since the approval of the FEIR and Addendum, there have been changes to the project and a new Addendum was prepared pursuant to CEQA. These changes include the construction of a southbound Route 99 to westbound Route 58 connector ramp. The ramp would be constructed at the current location of the southbound Route 99 to Stockdale off-ramp. The existing Stockdale off-ramp would be permanently closed. The connector ramp would be a fly-over structure, which would cross over Stockdale Highway, the existing westbound Route 58 to southbound Route 99 loop connector, and Real Road before merging to the westbound Route 58. West of Real Road, an existing retaining wall would be reconstructed to accommodate the new connector ramp. An additional 470-foot auxiliary lane would be constructed on westbound Route 58 to accommodate merging. There are no substantial changes proposed in the new connector ramp that would require major revisions of the FEIR due to involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. The project changes do not meet the criteria outlined in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 and Section 15163 to prepare a Subsequent or Supplemental FEIR. The Department subsequently completed an Addendum to the FEIR pursuant to CEQA. The Department has approved this project for construction. This approval and the Addendum will satisfy the environmental requirements for this stage of the planning process.
(Source: December 2023 CTC Agenda, Agenda Item 2.2c.(2))
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: mgk920 on January 18, 2024, 11:46:07 PM
I agree that it would make sense, but it is for the future and I'm not laying awake at night in the eager anticipation of it being done. Traffic needs and funding availability will dictate its fate and timing.

Mike
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: rschen7754 on January 19, 2024, 02:34:29 AM
Quote from: roadfro on January 18, 2024, 10:47:49 AM
Quote from: Concrete Bob on January 16, 2024, 03:02:57 PM
Centennial Corridor is expected to open in early February.  The ribbon cutting is scheduled for February 2, 2024:

https://www.bakersfield.com/news/construction-disruption-coming-to-an-end-centennial-corridor-set-for-february-completion/article_7066a726-b272-11ee-8906-f36c06fb51d1.html

There's a ribbon cutting, but is there any talk of hosting a community event? Does Caltrans ever do something like that?

Just thinking about comparable NDOT projects (various phases of the Carson City Freeway, I-580 extension between Reno & Carson), where they have celebrated substantial completion of a brand new freeway segment by opening it up for the community about a week or two before the facility opens to traffic. These typically allow people to check out the freeway on foot/bike/scooter/etc. for a few hours on a weekend morning, and they put up display boards about elements of the project (history of the project, any interesting road features, explanation of aesthetics, etc.).

Seems like if Caltrans has spent over $1 billion on this project, they ought to celebrate that a bit. And since it's a project that dove right through a neighborhood, Caltrans ought to be a good neighbor and have an open house before they invite all their loud friends (drivers) over.

I was at the opening of CA 52 through Santee several years back. It was a great event.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on January 19, 2024, 02:44:36 AM
If there is an event I'll likely be in attendance. 
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: kkt on January 19, 2024, 03:52:57 AM
I hope they at least reserve ROW for it.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Voyager on January 19, 2024, 03:14:18 PM
Quote from: pderocco on January 18, 2024, 10:03:07 PM
It's obvious that they've already purchased some of the ROW to extend the freeway a half mile south of Stockdale Hwy.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/9RuBHr1C5mLh2PDj7 (https://maps.app.goo.gl/9RuBHr1C5mLh2PDj7)

Although that's not likely to be built real soon, if that's their eventual intention, I doubt they'll build a grade separation on Stockdale. A traffic light would be more likely, if the roundabout creates a problem.

I wonder what that southern ROW is between those subdivisions? I see that they purchased enough space for a diamond interchange at Stockdale at least.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Lukeisroads on January 20, 2024, 12:48:41 AM
Quote from: roadfro on January 18, 2024, 10:47:49 AM
Quote from: Concrete Bob on January 16, 2024, 03:02:57 PM
Centennial Corridor is expected to open in early February.  The ribbon cutting is scheduled for February 2, 2024:

https://www.bakersfield.com/news/construction-disruption-coming-to-an-end-centennial-corridor-set-for-february-completion/article_7066a726-b272-11ee-8906-f36c06fb51d1.html

There's a ribbon cutting, but is there any talk of hosting a community event? Does Caltrans ever do something like that?

Just thinking about comparable NDOT projects (various phases of the Carson City Freeway, I-580 extension between Reno & Carson), where they have celebrated substantial completion of a brand new freeway segment by opening it up for the community about a week or two before the facility opens to traffic. These typically allow people to check out the freeway on foot/bike/scooter/etc. for a few hours on a weekend morning, and they put up display boards about elements of the project (history of the project, any interesting road features, explanation of aesthetics, etc.).

Seems like if Caltrans has spent over $1 billion on this project, they ought to celebrate that a bit. And since it's a project that dove right through a neighborhood, Caltrans ought to be a good neighbor and have an open house before they invite all their loud friends (drivers) over.
They did do one for the OG opening They had people driving on it during the ribbon cutting but only on the right lane and slowly and half of them were media so probably only for media but thats according to old videos i watched from 2013 2014
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: oscar on January 20, 2024, 04:35:05 AM
Quote from: rschen7754 on January 19, 2024, 02:34:29 AM
Quote from: roadfro on January 18, 2024, 10:47:49 AM
There's a ribbon cutting, but is there any talk of hosting a community event? Does Caltrans ever do something like that?

Just thinking about comparable NDOT projects (various phases of the Carson City Freeway, I-580 extension between Reno & Carson), where they have celebrated substantial completion of a brand new freeway segment by opening it up for the community about a week or two before the facility opens to traffic. These typically allow people to check out the freeway on foot/bike/scooter/etc. for a few hours on a weekend morning, and they put up display boards about elements of the project (history of the project, any interesting road features, explanation of aesthetics, etc.).

Seems like if Caltrans has spent over $1 billion on this project, they ought to celebrate that a bit. And since it's a project that dove right through a neighborhood, Caltrans ought to be a good neighbor and have an open house before they invite all their loud friends (drivers) over.

I was at the opening of CA 52 through Santee several years back. It was a great event.

I was there too. It was in 2011. I still have the "Sea to Santee" gimme event T-shirt (the organizers generously offered a choice of sizes, not just the usual XL), and it still fits me.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: brad2971 on January 20, 2024, 04:09:29 PM
Quote from: rschen7754 on January 19, 2024, 02:34:29 AM
Quote from: roadfro on January 18, 2024, 10:47:49 AM
Quote from: Concrete Bob on January 16, 2024, 03:02:57 PM
Centennial Corridor is expected to open in early February.  The ribbon cutting is scheduled for February 2, 2024:

https://www.bakersfield.com/news/construction-disruption-coming-to-an-end-centennial-corridor-set-for-february-completion/article_7066a726-b272-11ee-8906-f36c06fb51d1.html

There's a ribbon cutting, but is there any talk of hosting a community event? Does Caltrans ever do something like that?

Just thinking about comparable NDOT projects (various phases of the Carson City Freeway, I-580 extension between Reno & Carson), where they have celebrated substantial completion of a brand new freeway segment by opening it up for the community about a week or two before the facility opens to traffic. These typically allow people to check out the freeway on foot/bike/scooter/etc. for a few hours on a weekend morning, and they put up display boards about elements of the project (history of the project, any interesting road features, explanation of aesthetics, etc.).

Seems like if Caltrans has spent over $1 billion on this project, they ought to celebrate that a bit. And since it's a project that dove right through a neighborhood, Caltrans ought to be a good neighbor and have an open house before they invite all their loud friends (drivers) over.

I was at the opening of CA 52 through Santee several years back. It was a great event.

I was at that same event, and it certainly was a fun time. BTW, Santee (CA) is a fairly unique suburb in that it received it's modern light rail (San Diego Trolley) connection before it received its direct freeway connection. One would have to search long and hard for a similar set of circumstances.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: rschen7754 on January 20, 2024, 09:43:22 PM
Quote from: oscar on January 20, 2024, 04:35:05 AM
Quote from: rschen7754 on January 19, 2024, 02:34:29 AM
Quote from: roadfro on January 18, 2024, 10:47:49 AM
There's a ribbon cutting, but is there any talk of hosting a community event? Does Caltrans ever do something like that?

Just thinking about comparable NDOT projects (various phases of the Carson City Freeway, I-580 extension between Reno & Carson), where they have celebrated substantial completion of a brand new freeway segment by opening it up for the community about a week or two before the facility opens to traffic. These typically allow people to check out the freeway on foot/bike/scooter/etc. for a few hours on a weekend morning, and they put up display boards about elements of the project (history of the project, any interesting road features, explanation of aesthetics, etc.).

Seems like if Caltrans has spent over $1 billion on this project, they ought to celebrate that a bit. And since it's a project that dove right through a neighborhood, Caltrans ought to be a good neighbor and have an open house before they invite all their loud friends (drivers) over.

I was at the opening of CA 52 through Santee several years back. It was a great event.

I was there too. It was in 2011. I still have the "Sea to Santee" gimme event T-shirt (the organizers generously offered a choice of sizes, not just the usual XL), and it still fits me.

Unfortunately I don't anymore. It got pretty worn out and I had to throw it out.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on January 20, 2024, 09:59:46 PM
A couple new photos of CA 58 westbound approaching the Centennial Corridor Interchange.  All the signs are present but currently covered:

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53476839376_a42d2b9c1e_4k.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2ptyMf1)IMG_0829 (https://flic.kr/p/2ptyMf1) by Max Rockatansky (https://www.flickr.com/photos/151828809@N08/), on Flickr

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53475935377_29616c8baf_4k.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2ptu9vP)IMG_0833 (https://flic.kr/p/2ptu9vP) by Max Rockatansky (https://www.flickr.com/photos/151828809@N08/), on Flickr

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53475935382_82fcd60c4a_4k.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2ptu9vU)IMG_0835 (https://flic.kr/p/2ptu9vU) by Max Rockatansky (https://www.flickr.com/photos/151828809@N08/), on Flickr

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53477156214_96f69e81ad_4k.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2ptApqJ)IMG_0837 (https://flic.kr/p/2ptApqJ) by Max Rockatansky (https://www.flickr.com/photos/151828809@N08/), on Flickr
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: RZF on January 21, 2024, 04:30:19 PM
Those BGSs are beautiful. I'm assuming the through lane control sign will say "58 West - Westside Pkwy" or "58 West - San Luis Obispo" if they're daring enough.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on January 21, 2024, 04:41:49 PM
I'm assuming they'll just be "west" given there isn't much else that black cloth could be covering.  That ought to give the road fandom a new control city it will absolutely hate. 
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: roadfro on January 21, 2024, 08:33:09 PM
Quote from: RZF on January 21, 2024, 04:30:19 PM
Those BGSs are beautiful.

I think we must have different definitions of 'beautiful'... Those APL BGSs have some awfully cramped layouts. (Although I guess under Caltrans' "120-inch maximum panel height and no external exit tab" sign design methodologies, they're probably about the best you can do while making them APLs...)
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Bobby5280 on January 21, 2024, 11:04:50 PM
I certainly don't call those signs "beautiful." The text layouts are cramped, all due to Caltrans trying to use sign panels as short as possible. In another 10 years the panels will be pockmarked with all sorts of patch job work. Then they'll fit in with all the other horrible looking highway signs in California.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on January 21, 2024, 11:14:38 PM
It is almost as though vinyl was designed to have a 10 year field life...  But digress, the older button copy design at the same interchange was far more snazzy.

https://flic.kr/p/2kN62Dk
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Bobby5280 on January 22, 2024, 11:14:28 AM
It depends on the vinyl. The "engineer's grade" computer cut white reflective vinyl commonly used for the sign legends lasts only around 7 years in optimal conditions. Here in Oklahoma I'll see the lettering start cracking and flaking off in as little as 3 or 4 years. The high intensity reflective vinyl used on the backgrounds does last longer (8-10 years) and is quite a bit more expensive.

I think some DOT sign departments are starting to use digital printing methods directly on the high intensity reflective vinyl or printing on clear and applying that over the reflective vinyl. The prints have to be UV laminated. Still, the prints aren't going to get more than about 7 years of life before fading noticeably.

Some of Caltrans' old button copy signs did look good, when the signs were new. Over the years and with various patch jobs to try to extend the sign panel's life the look of them went to hell.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on January 22, 2024, 11:18:58 AM
The patch jobs tend to be on 1960s and 1970s era gantries.  The 1990s stuff (including the photo) is still holding very well over time. 

Pertaining to vinyl, the stuff Caltrans installs is fairly durable.  The graffiti sheeting peeling is what makes a lot of the modern signs look bad.  All the same, I look to NDOT for examples of poor vinyl applications.  The entire Las Vegas Metro area is awash in badly fading and contracting vinyl signs.  Numeral overlays in particular are subject to shrinking/contracting a hot weather environments. 
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Bobby5280 on January 22, 2024, 04:49:52 PM
The expansion and contraction cycle (going from very hot to very cold weather) is a big part of what makes the computer cut reflective lettering fail on BGSes in Oklahoma. The sign panels consist of 12" tall extruded metal bars. The seams in between those bars add a great deal of extra stress to the overlaid vinyl. The background vinyl can take the stress pretty well, but the cheap engineer's grade vinyl cannot. Cracks often start happening horizontally at those seam points.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: The Ghostbuster on January 22, 2024, 07:55:36 PM
How long after the missing link of the CA 58 Westside Parkway opens might the existing exits along the Stockdale Hwy.-to-Truxtun Ave. get exit numbers? Hopefully, it won't be too long.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: seicer on January 22, 2024, 08:00:47 PM
Ah - that explains all of the issues I've seen seeing on signs across the nation. Many have become downright unreadable at night.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: oscar on January 22, 2024, 08:42:07 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on January 22, 2024, 07:55:36 PM
How long after the missing link of the CA 58 Westside Parkway opens might the existing exits along the Stockdale Hwy.-to-Truxtun Ave. get exit numbers? Hopefully, it won't be too long.

Most of the existing Westside Parkway exits (Coffee Rd. and points west) have been adopted into the state highway system for some time. If Caltrans were in a hurry to post exit numbers, it could have done so already, without waiting for the missing link to be finished.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on January 26, 2024, 08:13:34 AM
The new ribbon cutting event will be on 2/9 at 11 AM.  The public will be able to attend:

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=pfbid02i8LLpBVknKhGASP9imtuZpXJtrBMt7zqaxf525ogSYMepUAeH4TfaGMQPwGe9w11l&id=100064643924143&mibextid=cr9u03
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: rschen7754 on January 26, 2024, 03:07:09 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 26, 2024, 08:13:34 AM
The new ribbon cutting event will be on 2/9 at 11 AM.  The public will be able to attend:

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=pfbid02i8LLpBVknKhGASP9imtuZpXJtrBMt7zqaxf525ogSYMepUAeH4TfaGMQPwGe9w11l&id=100064643924143&mibextid=cr9u03

Anything else besides the ribbon cutting? As much as I love one of those, I am not sure I want to drive 5 hours for a 15 minute ceremony.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: mgk920 on January 26, 2024, 04:18:48 PM
Quote from: rschen7754 on January 26, 2024, 03:07:09 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 26, 2024, 08:13:34 AM
The new ribbon cutting event will be on 2/9 at 11 AM.  The public will be able to attend:

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=pfbid02i8LLpBVknKhGASP9imtuZpXJtrBMt7zqaxf525ogSYMepUAeH4TfaGMQPwGe9w11l&id=100064643924143&mibextid=cr9u03

Anything else besides the ribbon cutting? As much as I love one of those, I am not sure I want to drive 5 hours for a 15 minute ceremony.

I would think the same way for something like that here in Wisconsin.  NOW, if they were giving out kewl little freebies such as miniature Caltrans-spec route shield fridgie magnets . . .

Mike
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on January 26, 2024, 05:23:34 PM
I'm unclear if there is any trinkets being given out.  I'm kind of surprised Caltrans District 6 hasn't put out something regarding the opening yet.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Henry on January 26, 2024, 10:09:01 PM
Coming from another thread:

Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 24, 2024, 12:19:28 AM
This has article has a comedy of errors starting with falsely assuming I-40 will be extended:

https://www.kget.com/news/local-news/1-5-billion-centennial-corridor-freeway-project-mere-days-from-completion/?utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=socialflow&utm_source=facebook.com&fbclid=IwAR3ZbrsMc1WmMi8cPJSFxxyqe4-QMnUbaH_XK9IcI6qwXADd1GplugwvRP4_aem_AY3-2lSLurHS6goj4LMZUDZvU_Rm_7lfvw0eFegGHi7C2ZYof5xCrAG-YrTe05JWkHU

The article above says that I-40 once ended in Barstow, and now it ends in Bakersfield. Obviously, the reporter has been checking the Fictional Highways thread for various proposals that, AFAIK, are nonexistent. But at least they got it right about the Centennial Corridor being extended to I-5 eventually, and I-40 being 2,500 miles long and connecting to the Atlantic coast in NC. (BTW, Bakersfield to Barstow is 130 miles, and when you add the 2,554 miles to Wilmington, that makes a grand total of 2,684 miles.)
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: kkt on January 27, 2024, 12:35:56 AM
Quote from: Henry on January 26, 2024, 10:09:01 PM
Coming from another thread:

Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 24, 2024, 12:19:28 AM
This has article has a comedy of errors starting with falsely assuming I-40 will be extended:

https://www.kget.com/news/local-news/1-5-billion-centennial-corridor-freeway-project-mere-days-from-completion/?utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=socialflow&utm_source=facebook.com&fbclid=IwAR3ZbrsMc1WmMi8cPJSFxxyqe4-QMnUbaH_XK9IcI6qwXADd1GplugwvRP4_aem_AY3-2lSLurHS6goj4LMZUDZvU_Rm_7lfvw0eFegGHi7C2ZYof5xCrAG-YrTe05JWkHU

The article above says that I-40 once ended in Barstow, and now it ends in Bakersfield. Obviously, the reporter has been checking the Fictional Highways thread for various proposals that, AFAIK, are nonexistent. But at least they got it right about the Centennial Corridor being extended to I-5 eventually, and I-40 being 2,500 miles long and connecting to the Atlantic coast in NC. (BTW, Bakersfield to Barstow is 130 miles, and when you add the 2,554 miles to Wilmington, that makes a grand total of 2,684 miles.)

The "reporter" is actually a deep agent for the Fictional Highways board, getting the idea to the public.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on January 27, 2024, 12:39:02 AM
Quote from: kkt on January 27, 2024, 12:35:56 AM
Quote from: Henry on January 26, 2024, 10:09:01 PM
Coming from another thread:

Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 24, 2024, 12:19:28 AM
This has article has a comedy of errors starting with falsely assuming I-40 will be extended:

https://www.kget.com/news/local-news/1-5-billion-centennial-corridor-freeway-project-mere-days-from-completion/?utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=socialflow&utm_source=facebook.com&fbclid=IwAR3ZbrsMc1WmMi8cPJSFxxyqe4-QMnUbaH_XK9IcI6qwXADd1GplugwvRP4_aem_AY3-2lSLurHS6goj4LMZUDZvU_Rm_7lfvw0eFegGHi7C2ZYof5xCrAG-YrTe05JWkHU

The article above says that I-40 once ended in Barstow, and now it ends in Bakersfield. Obviously, the reporter has been checking the Fictional Highways thread for various proposals that, AFAIK, are nonexistent. But at least they got it right about the Centennial Corridor being extended to I-5 eventually, and I-40 being 2,500 miles long and connecting to the Atlantic coast in NC. (BTW, Bakersfield to Barstow is 130 miles, and when you add the 2,554 miles to Wilmington, that makes a grand total of 2,684 miles.)

The "reporter" is actually a deep agent for the Fictional Highways board, getting the idea to the public.

Fritz changed his tactics regarding taking over the world through mass media to implement "his plans."  I expect the Interstate to North Korea to be announced any day now. 
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on January 31, 2024, 12:00:10 AM
Apparently there will be a cycling day on the Centennial Corridor:

https://www.yourcentralvalley.com/news/california/you-can-cycle-the-centennial-corridor-before-it-opens-to-the-public/?fbclid=IwAR1VxU7Se8QG6n1JBZGeEV3vCNV2SZfWN_OXFERA3mzrDdo6r17YdtBJfRo_aem_AVxrAfRIGdupFYTqX9QWJbq4LJUxPR68N2wd-nScH4ZBfZX7H-Uf06-jXimHemzWP5I
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: ROGUE on January 31, 2024, 08:09:51 PM
When this was originally proposed, the Westside Parkway was supposed to continue all the way to I5, rather than dump off onto Stockdale Hwy. Is this still the plan... please say Kern County has not yet again stopped 58  at the foot of a shopping center. They still have a ROW passage between properties... I am really hoping they don't just stop once the 58/99 interchange is opened. Anyone with any knowledge on this?
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: cahwyguy on February 01, 2024, 12:19:48 PM
Quote from: ROGUE on January 31, 2024, 08:09:51 PM
When this was originally proposed, the Westside Parkway was supposed to continue all the way to I5, rather than dump off onto Stockdale Hwy. Is this still the plan... please say Kern County has not yet again stopped 58  at the foot of a shopping center. They still have a ROW passage between properties... I am really hoping they don't just stop once the 58/99 interchange is opened. Anyone with any knowledge on this?

For the third time in this thread, I'll post the following. Please note that it shows the plans are to extend the corridor, in some form, to I-5.

In December 2023, the CTC approved for future consideration of funding the following project for which a FEIR and an Addendum have been completed: Centennial Corridor Project. Route 58 and Route 99 in Kern County. Construct a new alignment for Route 58, to provide a continuous route from Cottonwood Road on existing Route 58, east of Route 99 to I-5. Improvements to Route 99, from Wilson Road to Gilmore Avenue, would also be required for the connection with Route 58, in Kern County. (06-Ker-58, PM T31.7/R55.6; 06-Ker-99, PM 21.2/26.2; PPNO 06-8030) The project is located on Route 58 from PM T31.7 to PM R55.6, and on Route 99 from PM 21.2 to PM 26.2, in Kern County. The Department proposes to construct a new alignment for Route 58, to provide a continuous route from Cottonwood Road on existing Route 58, east of Route 99 to I-5. Improvements to Route 99, from Wilson Road to Gilmore Avenue, would also be required for the connection with Route 58. The project is currently programmed in the Trade Corridor Enhancement Program (TCEP). The total programmed amount, which includes Right of Way (Capital), and Construction (Capital) is $13,400,000. Construction began in 2023-2024. The scope, as described for the preferred alternative, is consistent with the project scope as programmed by the Commission in the TCEP. A copy of the FEIR has been provided to Commission staff. The Commission approved the project for future consideration of funding on March 21, 2018, under Resolution E-18-30 and August 17, 2023, under Resolution E-23-122A. Since the approval of the FEIR and Addendum, there have been changes to the project and a new Addendum was prepared pursuant to CEQA. These changes include the construction of a southbound Route 99 to westbound Route 58 connector ramp. The ramp would be constructed at the current location of the southbound Route 99 to Stockdale off-ramp. The existing Stockdale off-ramp would be permanently closed. The connector ramp would be a fly-over structure, which would cross over Stockdale Highway, the existing westbound Route 58 to southbound Route 99 loop connector, and Real Road before merging to the westbound Route 58. West of Real Road, an existing retaining wall would be reconstructed to accommodate the new connector ramp. An additional 470-foot auxiliary lane would be constructed on westbound Route 58 to accommodate merging. There are no substantial changes proposed in the new connector ramp that would require major revisions of the FEIR due to involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. The project changes do not meet the criteria outlined in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 and Section 15163 to prepare a Subsequent or Supplemental FEIR. The Department subsequently completed an Addendum to the FEIR pursuant to CEQA. The Department has approved this project for construction. This approval and the Addendum will satisfy the environmental requirements for this stage of the planning process.
(Source: December 2023 CTC Agenda, Agenda Item 2.2c.(2))
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: mgk920 on February 01, 2024, 02:26:07 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 31, 2024, 12:00:10 AM
Apparently there will be a cycling day on the Centennial Corridor:

https://www.yourcentralvalley.com/news/california/you-can-cycle-the-centennial-corridor-before-it-opens-to-the-public/?fbclid=IwAR1VxU7Se8QG6n1JBZGeEV3vCNV2SZfWN_OXFERA3mzrDdo6r17YdtBJfRo_aem_AVxrAfRIGdupFYTqX9QWJbq4LJUxPR68N2wd-nScH4ZBfZX7H-Uf06-jXimHemzWP5I

(Memories of the Calumet and Outagamie County section of WI 441 freeway here in the Appleton WI area before it opened back in 1993!  :cool: )

Mike
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: The Ghostbuster on February 01, 2024, 05:21:42 PM
I couldn't imagine cycling on a freeway, even if it was closed to all other traffic.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Bobby5280 on February 01, 2024, 07:14:23 PM
That reminds me of an event celebrating the 25th anniversary of the opening of the Verrazano Narrows Bridge in 1989. They closed down the upper deck to vehicles so people could walk across. It was pretty interesting.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: WahooBill on February 03, 2024, 08:11:52 AM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on February 01, 2024, 05:21:42 PM
I couldn't imagine cycling on a freeway, even if it was closed to all other traffic.

I still remember cycling on I-805 before it opened to traffic in San Diego in the 70s.  It was a cool experience.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: roadfro on February 03, 2024, 12:21:48 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 31, 2024, 12:00:10 AM
Apparently there will be a cycling day on the Centennial Corridor:

https://www.yourcentralvalley.com/news/california/you-can-cycle-the-centennial-corridor-before-it-opens-to-the-public/?fbclid=IwAR1VxU7Se8QG6n1JBZGeEV3vCNV2SZfWN_OXFERA3mzrDdo6r17YdtBJfRo_aem_AVxrAfRIGdupFYTqX9QWJbq4LJUxPR68N2wd-nScH4ZBfZX7H-Uf06-jXimHemzWP5I

Glad they're doing some kind of public event!

Quote from: The Ghostbuster on February 01, 2024, 05:21:42 PM
I couldn't imagine cycling on a freeway, even if it was closed to all other traffic.

Most people can't. That alone is a great reason to do these kinds of opening events—they really don't cost all that much to put on, and fulfill a unique experience that can only really happen once for a community.

Same goes for walking on a freeway. For Nevada DOT's last few freeway opening events up north, they opened up the freeways to all types of non-motorized travel. Not having non-motorized modes of transport at the time of these events, I ended up walking along I-580 in Carson City from US 50 east interchange to the southern terminus at US 395/50 west (two separate events) and most of I-580 from SR 431 south over the Galena Creek Bridge and almost all the way to Washoe Valley.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: oscar on February 03, 2024, 12:35:32 PM
Quote from: WahooBill on February 03, 2024, 08:11:52 AM
I still remember cycling on I-805 before it opened to traffic in San Diego in the 70s.  It was a cool experience.

I heard of that unopened freeway used for illicit drag racing, around that time when I lived in the area. That made the local cops very unhappy, especially with the risks of high-speed encounters with construction debris.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: mgk920 on February 03, 2024, 01:21:00 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on February 01, 2024, 05:21:42 PM
I couldn't imagine cycling on a freeway, even if it was closed to all other traffic.

I won't give you all of the 'nitty gritty' in here, but the WI 441 experience became the catalyst for the ongoing development of a comprehensive off-road pathway system here throughout the general Appleton area.

Mike
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on February 03, 2024, 01:39:56 PM
Going for a bike ride on the shoulder of I-17 north of Black Canyon City was suffice to say an exhilarating experience.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: ARMOURERERIC on February 03, 2024, 03:49:39 PM
Bike road I79 from Wexford to Mt nebo before it opened.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: pderocco on February 03, 2024, 11:14:15 PM
Quote from: roadfro on February 03, 2024, 12:21:48 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on February 01, 2024, 05:21:42 PM
I couldn't imagine cycling on a freeway, even if it was closed to all other traffic.

Most people can't. That alone is a great reason to do these kinds of opening events—they really don't cost all that much to put on, and fulfill a unique experience that can only really happen once for a community.

It's funny, I've seen lots of car ads shot on the westernmost section of I-105 south of LAX, and you know they had to close the road for that, probably on a Sunday morning. If they really wanted to, they could make that a regular thing, since there's a reasonable alternate route in Imperial Highway. On the other hand, biking on freeways isn't really that scenic or pleasant, compared, say, to bike paths along the beach or along a river. It's the sort of thing that people only really want to do once, so they can say, "I rode my bike on ____ once".
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: jdbx on February 05, 2024, 02:38:00 PM
The last time I can remember an event around here that allowed walking on a new stretch of highway was when the new Westbound span of the Carquinez Bridge opened.  There was a big chain-cutting ceremony with Governor Gray Davis who would leave office just a few days later after being recalled. After the dedication ceremony, the crowd then proceeded to walk across the bridge from the Vallejo side, then down the ramp to the Crockett side. I went with my wife, who was less than enthused about being dragged out to this sort of event, but we had a nice lunch afterward at The Dead Fish, so all was not lost. I can't think of any other similar event around here recently.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on February 05, 2024, 03:01:50 PM
Barring something unforeseen I'll be attending the dedication Friday.  I've been trying to get to Caliente Creek Road anyways and figure why not see a dedication if it gets me down to Bakersfield?
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on February 09, 2024, 09:22:34 AM
The Centennial Corridor is now on Google Maps as of this morning.  The Postmile Tool hasn't been updated yet.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: The Ghostbuster on February 09, 2024, 12:43:06 PM
I see it: https://www.google.com/maps/@35.3603549,-119.0360038,4835m/data=!3m1!1e3?entry=ttu. Hopefully, Street View is updated soon as well.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on February 09, 2024, 01:35:01 PM
I'm at the ribbon cutting ceremony presently:

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=pfbid031DyDwseHL6cpzdeQxxc3GmpCaCGawvBAUAD52kGYwpxmrszZZV54F7gtkR5RsXpCl&id=100063655972258&mibextid=cr9u03
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Voyager on February 09, 2024, 03:35:46 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 09, 2024, 01:35:01 PM
I'm at the ribbon cutting ceremony presently:

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=pfbid031DyDwseHL6cpzdeQxxc3GmpCaCGawvBAUAD52kGYwpxmrszZZV54F7gtkR5RsXpCl&id=100063655972258&mibextid=cr9u03

Interesting photo from your set regarding the extension to I-5 routing:

(https://scontent-lax3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/427472687_886885513443306_3450368914515509661_n.jpg?stp=cp6_dst-jpg&_nc_cat=102&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=dd5e9f&_nc_ohc=PFd_ZcZ0Q6gAX99_WDd&_nc_ht=scontent-lax3-1.xx&oh=00_AfDpy2vTG7efGdq7TiuVm92hJ8BmHr-ACBHLghppaQZ4_Q&oe=65CA8E10)
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on February 09, 2024, 05:50:01 PM
Yes, I started taking photos of everything after I saw that. 
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on February 09, 2024, 07:38:43 PM
Just finished my Centennial Corridor photo album:

https://flic.kr/s/aHBqjBdzDd
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on February 09, 2024, 07:55:15 PM
I always thought allowing people to walk and bike first was kinda of common for these types of projects.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on February 09, 2024, 08:10:30 PM
Right, but how many new urban freeways open up nowadays?
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: pderocco on February 10, 2024, 01:40:20 AM
I'm going to drive it this weekend. I'm curious about the traffic levels, especially truck traffic.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Lukeisroads on February 10, 2024, 09:11:39 PM
Quote from: pderocco on February 10, 2024, 01:40:20 AM
I'm going to drive it this weekend. I'm curious about the traffic levels, especially truck traffic.
i looked at one of the cameras off of Chester facing west on 58 and the sign for 58 west is till taped so idk if its open or not
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on February 10, 2024, 09:19:56 PM
I was under the impression that the process of getting the road open would take place after the cycling event today.  How long that actually takes?...got me.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Lukeisroads on February 10, 2024, 09:22:05 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 10, 2024, 09:19:56 PM
I was under the impression that the process of getting the road open would take place after the cycling event today.  How long that actually takes?...got me.
well ill find out tomorrow if its open
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: pderocco on February 10, 2024, 09:47:07 PM
Quote from: Lukeisroads on February 10, 2024, 09:22:05 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 10, 2024, 09:19:56 PM
I was under the impression that the process of getting the road open would take place after the cycling event today.  How long that actually takes?...got me.
well ill find out tomorrow if its open
I don't see any green (or yellow, orange, or red) lines on the connector yet in Google Maps, so I doubt it's got any cars on it. If I don't see that tomorrow morning, I'll put off my trip from San Diego up to Bakersfield to next weekend.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on February 10, 2024, 09:56:26 PM
The thought did occur to me today that I'm likely the only person on the forum who currently has an up to date clinch of CA 58.  Not that I have a Travel Maps account or really keep a good account of Sign Route clinches. 
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: 74/171FAN on February 10, 2024, 10:02:36 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 10, 2024, 09:56:26 PM
The thought did occur to me today that I'm likely the only person on the forum who currently has an up to date clinch of CA 58.  Not that I have a Travel Maps account or really keep a good account Sign Route clinches. 

Well, until mapcat and oscar clinch the new alignment next week.   ;-) :nod:
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on February 10, 2024, 10:27:09 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on February 10, 2024, 10:02:36 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 10, 2024, 09:56:26 PM
The thought did occur to me today that I'm likely the only person on the forum who currently has an up to date clinch of CA 58.  Not that I have a Travel Maps account or really keep a good account Sign Route clinches. 

Well, until mapcat and oscar clinch the new alignment next week.   ;-) :nod:

The irony was that I wasn't even supposed to be off Friday.  I went in on my original day off to survey storm damage on several buildings I oversee safety for.  I had a choice of Friday or Saturday, the cycling event looked way more cumbersome given my wife was going to likely object to me using her bike rack.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on February 10, 2024, 11:19:20 PM
Seems this has morphed into "several more days" for the opening:

https://news.yahoo.com/centennial-corridor-finally-cuts-ribbon-020027478.html

Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: pderocco on February 11, 2024, 01:08:10 AM
So do you think they'll have another ribbon cutting ceremony when they open the road?
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: TheStranger on February 11, 2024, 06:31:44 AM
Curious:

How well-signed is 58 along Stockdale west of the current Westside Parkway terminus?
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on February 11, 2024, 09:55:05 AM
I doubt that there will be another ceremony.  And yes, 58 is well signed on Stockdale now:

https://www.flickr.com/gp/151828809@N08/n5QF65945f
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on February 11, 2024, 05:49:29 PM
Bumped this up in my writing schedule:

https://www.gribblenation.org/2024/02/the-centennial-corridor-and-west-side.html?m=1
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on February 11, 2024, 07:29:15 PM
So besides this and CA-71 are there any other new freeway segments in urban California areas that are going to be built?
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on February 11, 2024, 07:33:30 PM
To my knowledge there isn't anything upcoming.  Even CA 71 basically is an upgrade to an existing expressway alignment.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on February 11, 2024, 07:42:56 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 11, 2024, 07:33:30 PM
To my knowledge there isn't anything upcoming.  Even CA 71 basically is an upgrade to an existing expressway alignment.
Yep. Not even a new alignment freeway. Really a rare opportunity to witness. I'll be driving it next week.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: jdbx on February 12, 2024, 01:49:57 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 11, 2024, 05:49:29 PM
Bumped this up in my writing schedule:

https://www.gribblenation.org/2024/02/the-centennial-corridor-and-west-side.html?m=1

I'm a little confused by the oddity of seeing Exit 23 immediately followed by Exit 110. I'm assuming 110 is based on the total mileage of SR-58 from it's terminus at US-101, and the 23 is measured from where eastern CA-58 branches off of I-5? That just seems strange to me.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on February 12, 2024, 01:54:07 PM
Quote from: jdbx on February 12, 2024, 01:49:57 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 11, 2024, 05:49:29 PM
Bumped this up in my writing schedule:

https://www.gribblenation.org/2024/02/the-centennial-corridor-and-west-side.html?m=1

I'm a little confused by the oddity of seeing Exit 23 immediately followed by Exit 110. I'm assuming 110 is based on the total mileage of SR-58 from it's terminus at US-101, and the 23 is measured from where eastern CA-58 branches off of I-5? That just seems strange to me.

Exit 23 for Ming Avenue is referring to mileage from 99.  It doesn't make any sense for it be signed the way it presently is.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: TheStranger on February 12, 2024, 08:17:49 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 12, 2024, 01:54:07 PM
Quote from: jdbx on February 12, 2024, 01:49:57 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 11, 2024, 05:49:29 PM
Bumped this up in my writing schedule:

https://www.gribblenation.org/2024/02/the-centennial-corridor-and-west-side.html?m=1

I'm a little confused by the oddity of seeing Exit 23 immediately followed by Exit 110. I'm assuming 110 is based on the total mileage of SR-58 from it's terminus at US-101, and the 23 is measured from where eastern CA-58 branches off of I-5? That just seems strange to me.

Exit 23 for Ming Avenue is referring to mileage from 99.  It doesn't make any sense for it be signed the way it presently is.

This reminds me how at the junction of 99/Business 80/50 in Sacramento, the T Street exit that can only be accessed from 99 north is signed using a Business 80 exit number, at least last time I checked.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: jdbx on February 13, 2024, 12:05:37 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 12, 2024, 01:54:07 PM
Quote from: jdbx on February 12, 2024, 01:49:57 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 11, 2024, 05:49:29 PM
Bumped this up in my writing schedule:

https://www.gribblenation.org/2024/02/the-centennial-corridor-and-west-side.html?m=1

I'm a little confused by the oddity of seeing Exit 23 immediately followed by Exit 110. I'm assuming 110 is based on the total mileage of SR-58 from it's terminus at US-101, and the 23 is measured from where eastern CA-58 branches off of I-5? That just seems strange to me.

Exit 23 for Ming Avenue is referring to mileage from 99.  It doesn't make any sense for it be signed the way it presently is.

This is the kind of thing that kind of blows my mind re: CalTrans....  not a single person with any authority looked up at those signs and said "Huh, that's not right..."  Or is it that we are such pedants about this sort of thing while your typical CalTrans official doesn't even notice that those are a couple of wildly out-of-sequence exit numbers.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on February 13, 2024, 12:20:56 PM
Quote from: jdbx on February 13, 2024, 12:05:37 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 12, 2024, 01:54:07 PM
Quote from: jdbx on February 12, 2024, 01:49:57 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 11, 2024, 05:49:29 PM
Bumped this up in my writing schedule:

https://www.gribblenation.org/2024/02/the-centennial-corridor-and-west-side.html?m=1

I'm a little confused by the oddity of seeing Exit 23 immediately followed by Exit 110. I'm assuming 110 is based on the total mileage of SR-58 from it's terminus at US-101, and the 23 is measured from where eastern CA-58 branches off of I-5? That just seems strange to me.

Exit 23 for Ming Avenue is referring to mileage from 99.  It doesn't make any sense for it be signed the way it presently is.

This is the kind of thing that kind of blows my mind re: CalTrans....  not a single person with any authority looked up at those signs and said "Huh, that's not right..."  Or is it that we are such pedants about this sort of thing while your typical CalTrans official doesn't even notice that those are a couple of wildly out-of-sequence exit numbers.

Probably more the latter than the former.  It is weird and I'm sure it will be talked about for years to come.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: GaryA on February 13, 2024, 12:36:16 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 12, 2024, 01:54:07 PM
Exit 23 for Ming Avenue is referring to mileage from 99.  It doesn't make any sense for it be signed the way it presently is.

The Ming Avenue exit on 99 is exit 23 (measured from I-5), so if the exit from 58 connects to the existing exit from 99, someone may have thought it logical to give it the same exit number.  (I don't think that's proper, but I can see how someone might have thought so.)
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on February 13, 2024, 12:38:19 PM
Quote from: GaryA on February 13, 2024, 12:36:16 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 12, 2024, 01:54:07 PM
Exit 23 for Ming Avenue is referring to mileage from 99.  It doesn't make any sense for it be signed the way it presently is.

The Ming Avenue exit on 99 is exit 23 (measured from I-5), so if the exit from 58 connects to the existing exit from 99, someone may have thought it logical to give it the same exit number.  (I don't think that's proper, but I can see how someone might have thought so.)

That's what I assumed also.  Consider the poor access to Ming otherwise from WB 58.  I suspect that played a factor as to why the EB signage was posted as such.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: vdeane on February 13, 2024, 01:00:56 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 13, 2024, 12:20:56 PM
Quote from: jdbx on February 13, 2024, 12:05:37 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 12, 2024, 01:54:07 PM
Quote from: jdbx on February 12, 2024, 01:49:57 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 11, 2024, 05:49:29 PM
Bumped this up in my writing schedule:

https://www.gribblenation.org/2024/02/the-centennial-corridor-and-west-side.html?m=1

I'm a little confused by the oddity of seeing Exit 23 immediately followed by Exit 110. I'm assuming 110 is based on the total mileage of SR-58 from it's terminus at US-101, and the 23 is measured from where eastern CA-58 branches off of I-5? That just seems strange to me.

Exit 23 for Ming Avenue is referring to mileage from 99.  It doesn't make any sense for it be signed the way it presently is.

This is the kind of thing that kind of blows my mind re: CalTrans....  not a single person with any authority looked up at those signs and said "Huh, that's not right..."  Or is it that we are such pedants about this sort of thing while your typical CalTrans official doesn't even notice that those are a couple of wildly out-of-sequence exit numbers.

Probably more the latter than the former.  It is weird and I'm sure it will be talked about for years to come.
Yeah, this.  It's important to remember that the vast majority of DOT employees aren't roadgeeks, and of those that are, most of those are not policy makers.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: cl94 on February 13, 2024, 03:07:58 PM
Quote from: vdeane on February 13, 2024, 01:00:56 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 13, 2024, 12:20:56 PM
Quote from: jdbx on February 13, 2024, 12:05:37 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 12, 2024, 01:54:07 PM
Quote from: jdbx on February 12, 2024, 01:49:57 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 11, 2024, 05:49:29 PM
Bumped this up in my writing schedule:

https://www.gribblenation.org/2024/02/the-centennial-corridor-and-west-side.html?m=1

I'm a little confused by the oddity of seeing Exit 23 immediately followed by Exit 110. I'm assuming 110 is based on the total mileage of SR-58 from it's terminus at US-101, and the 23 is measured from where eastern CA-58 branches off of I-5? That just seems strange to me.

Exit 23 for Ming Avenue is referring to mileage from 99.  It doesn't make any sense for it be signed the way it presently is.

This is the kind of thing that kind of blows my mind re: CalTrans....  not a single person with any authority looked up at those signs and said "Huh, that's not right..."  Or is it that we are such pedants about this sort of thing while your typical CalTrans official doesn't even notice that those are a couple of wildly out-of-sequence exit numbers.

Probably more the latter than the former.  It is weird and I'm sure it will be talked about for years to come.
Yeah, this.  It's important to remember that the vast majority of DOT employees aren't roadgeeks, and of those that are, most of those are not policy makers.

There are a few of us with the ability to influence policy, but yes, we are nowhere near the majority. We may make some impact in niche areas or on a local scale. But there are also times when doing our jobs pits us against the hobby as a whole.

(personal opinion emphasized)
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: pderocco on February 13, 2024, 09:09:08 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on February 11, 2024, 07:29:15 PM
So besides this and CA-71 are there any other new freeway segments in urban California areas that are going to be built?
There's a mile of 11 down in Otay Mesa that sits there unopened, and will be extended by another 0.5 miles when they get around to building the border crossing. Whooptee doo.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on February 13, 2024, 11:25:42 PM
Quote from: pderocco on February 13, 2024, 09:09:08 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on February 11, 2024, 07:29:15 PM
So besides this and CA-71 are there any other new freeway segments in urban California areas that are going to be built?
There's a mile of 11 down in Otay Mesa that sits there unopened, and will be extended by another 0.5 miles when they get around to building the border crossing. Whooptee doo.
I had just assumed that that project was pretty much completed and the border crossing was underway. Have they not even started on the border crossing yet?
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Concrete Bob on February 18, 2024, 07:17:22 PM
Looks like the Centennial Corridor opened for business yesterday (2/17/24):

https://www.kget.com/news/local-news/centennial-corridor-opens-connecting-highway-58-to-westside-parkway/
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on February 18, 2024, 07:34:39 PM
Google still isn't directing traffic on the Centennial Corridor though in route calculations.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: luv2drive on February 19, 2024, 07:14:24 PM
I drove from San Jose to Las Vegas on Friday, The entire freeway was not opened, had to follow signs to take Mohawk to Rosedale to 99 South to 58. Today (Monday Feb 19) returning home, the waze directions showed 58 completed, turns into Stockdale Hwy after several miles. Very nice drive.

I used to take 46 or 7th Standard Road to go from 5 to 99 and vice versa returning home. No longer the case.

Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Concrete Bob on February 19, 2024, 07:50:55 PM
Freeways. new and old, are our commuting and transporting friends!  Really!  If you are on this website, you aren't here by accident. 

Public money well-spent. Bakersfield will be a super-hub for transport, shipping and logistics in the coming decades thanks to the Centennial Corridor.  I hope that funding and construction comes soon to extend the freeway corridor to Interstate 5. 
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on February 19, 2024, 09:26:56 PM
It definitely needs to be needs to be extended to I-5. If Caltrans doesn't have any interests in extending the I-40 designation to I-5 why hasn't any representatives from the Bakersfield area thought about it?
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: FredAkbar on February 19, 2024, 10:39:40 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 10, 2024, 09:56:26 PM
The thought did occur to me today that I'm likely the only person on the forum who currently has an up to date clinch of CA 58.  Not that I have a Travel Maps account or really keep a good account of Sign Route clinches.

This led me to wonder, do people line up to try to be the first person to drive a new section of road like this when it opens? Similar to people waiting in line to get the first copy of a new book/album/whatever. Or is the population of roadgeeks slim enough that there isn't really demand for such a thing? (One imagines Max/Tom patiently sitting there by himself waiting for the big moment.)
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on February 19, 2024, 10:45:10 PM
I tried to get to the ceremony right as it was opening.  I showed up about ten minutes early and had to loop back around.  Once the ceremony ground was open I was maybe the twentieth car in line.  A Corvette club showed up early and I was followed in by a Mustang club.  A lot of the remaining crowd consisted of infrastructure fans and people who wanted to see Bill Thomas speak.   There was probably about two hundred plus people by my rough count.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: cahwyguy on February 19, 2024, 10:49:29 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on February 19, 2024, 09:26:56 PM
It definitely needs to be needs to be extended to I-5. If Caltrans doesn't have any interests in extending the I-40 designation to I-5 why hasn't any representatives from the Bakersfield area thought about it?

Define "it":

Are you saying Route 58 should go to I-5? It does.

Are you saying it needs to be fully controlled access freeway from the end of the Westside Parkway to I-5? I wonder if the traffic and safety justify the need? If there aren't a lot of crossings, truck traffic is served just as well with an expressway or a well maintained road.

Are you saying it needs to be signed as I-40 to I-5? I'm not sure I see the reason why, other than to satisfy the folks that love numbering. It makes no difference in terms of navigation ease. This is true even if you are just talking about the segment between Barstow and Bakersfield. Further, the way and location where Route 58 connects to I-15 is quite a few miles S of where I-40 ends, so there's this big discontinuity. About the only equivalent concurrency is I-580 N of the Oakland Bay Bridge, and that's confusing for folks.

So, precisely, what needs to be extended to I-5?
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on February 19, 2024, 11:06:20 PM
Me personally I would be happy with just getting an expressway from the end of the West Side Parkway to I-5.  It would be great if it was a CA 198 Hanford-Visalia expressway with no traffic lights. 
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: kkt on February 19, 2024, 11:51:10 PM
Quote from: cahwyguy on February 19, 2024, 10:49:29 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on February 19, 2024, 09:26:56 PM
It definitely needs to be needs to be extended to I-5. If Caltrans doesn't have any interests in extending the I-40 designation to I-5 why hasn't any representatives from the Bakersfield area thought about it?

Define "it":

Are you saying Route 58 should go to I-5? It does.

Are you saying it needs to be fully controlled access freeway from the end of the Westside Parkway to I-5? I wonder if the traffic and safety justify the need? If there aren't a lot of crossings, truck traffic is served just as well with an expressway or a well maintained road.

Are you saying it needs to be signed as I-40 to I-5? I'm not sure I see the reason why, other than to satisfy the folks that love numbering. It makes no difference in terms of navigation ease. This is true even if you are just talking about the segment between Barstow and Bakersfield. Further, the way and location where Route 58 connects to I-15 is quite a few miles S of where I-40 ends, so there's this big discontinuity. About the only equivalent concurrency is I-580 N of the Oakland Bay Bridge, and that's confusing for folks.

So, precisely, what needs to be extended to I-5?

I'm not Plutonic Panda, but I do think there's enough long-haul traffic there that a freeway would be justified.  And it is strange to a lot of people that you follow I-40 west from Amarillo but if you want to continue west from I-15 you follow a different number.  Should I-80 change numbers in Sacramento for the last 85 miles to San Francisco?  I-40 could duplex with I-15 to where it reaches CA 58.  It's only about 5 miles - at least it would not be a wrong-way duplex like I-80 and I-580 north of Oakland.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on February 20, 2024, 12:29:03 AM
^^^^ yes the road should be freeway/interstate quality to I-5.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: sprjus4 on February 20, 2024, 01:06:31 AM
https://www.bakersfieldcity.us/617/Projects-Map

As mentioned in the past couple of pages, their long range plan appears to call for a new alignment connector to be built to I-5. I couldn't imagine it would be anything less than a fully controlled access freeway.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on February 20, 2024, 01:13:12 AM
Thanks for posting that! How likely is the west beltway going to be built?
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: pderocco on February 20, 2024, 03:34:14 AM
83%
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on February 20, 2024, 09:26:06 AM
Given the right of way seems to be mostly already reserved and Caltrans District 6 has cities that want new corridors the chances are very good.  The city of Bakersfield might have to annex parcels of land and contribute a ton of money to the expansion like they already had with the West Side Parkway.  Let's not forget, the West Side Parkway was originally the under maintenance of the city rather than Caltrans.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: ClassicHasClass on February 20, 2024, 11:43:58 AM
Quote from: pderocco on February 20, 2024, 03:34:14 AM
83%

Psh. I say at least 84.781%.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on February 20, 2024, 12:34:35 PM
It's over 9,000%!
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: vdeane on February 20, 2024, 12:54:23 PM
Quote from: cahwyguy on February 19, 2024, 10:49:29 PM
Further, the way and location where Route 58 connects to I-15 is quite a few miles S of where I-40 ends, so there's this big discontinuity. About the only equivalent concurrency is I-580 N of the Oakland Bay Bridge, and that's confusing for folks.
California must be really allergic to overlaps.  4-5 miles is nothing.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: triplemultiplex on February 20, 2024, 12:56:06 PM
Road Guy Rob was at the ribbon cutting:
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=27275.msg2908238#msg2908238 (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=27275.msg2908238#msg2908238)
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: kkt on February 20, 2024, 01:06:00 PM
Quote from: vdeane on February 20, 2024, 12:54:23 PM
Quote from: cahwyguy on February 19, 2024, 10:49:29 PM
Further, the way and location where Route 58 connects to I-15 is quite a few miles S of where I-40 ends, so there's this big discontinuity. About the only equivalent concurrency is I-580 N of the Oakland Bay Bridge, and that's confusing for folks.
California must be really allergic to overlaps.  4-5 miles is nothing.

California did try to eliminate as many overlaps as possible at the 1964 renumbering.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: GaryA on February 20, 2024, 01:18:38 PM
Quote from: luv2drive on February 19, 2024, 07:14:24 PM
I drove from San Jose to Las Vegas on Friday, The entire freeway was not opened, had to follow signs to take Mohawk to Rosedale to 99 South to 58. Today (Monday Feb 19) returning home, the waze directions showed 58 completed, turns into Stockdale Hwy after several miles. Very nice drive.

I drove through there, also on Monday (2/19).  The freeway was open (both directions), but there were still signs in place telling eastbound drivers to take the detour you describe.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on February 20, 2024, 01:20:24 PM
Quote from: kkt on February 20, 2024, 01:06:00 PM
Quote from: vdeane on February 20, 2024, 12:54:23 PM
Quote from: cahwyguy on February 19, 2024, 10:49:29 PM
Further, the way and location where Route 58 connects to I-15 is quite a few miles S of where I-40 ends, so there's this big discontinuity. About the only equivalent concurrency is I-580 N of the Oakland Bay Bridge, and that's confusing for folks.
California must be really allergic to overlaps.  4-5 miles is nothing.

California did try to eliminate as many overlaps as possible at the 1964 renumbering.

And for some reason created an unnecessarily long (albeit mostly silent) extension overlapping US 101 along Santa Barbara Channel south of Gaviota Pass. 

More in line with Interstate multiplexes, I-5 and CA 33 have a fairly substantial multiplex of north of CA 33 to Derrick Avenue.  That wasn't born as part of the 1964 Renumbering but rather a desire by the Division of Highways to shed maintenance along Coalinga-Mendota Road.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: DTComposer on February 21, 2024, 08:29:17 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 20, 2024, 01:20:24 PM
Quote from: kkt on February 20, 2024, 01:06:00 PM
Quote from: vdeane on February 20, 2024, 12:54:23 PM
Quote from: cahwyguy on February 19, 2024, 10:49:29 PM
Further, the way and location where Route 58 connects to I-15 is quite a few miles S of where I-40 ends, so there's this big discontinuity. About the only equivalent concurrency is I-580 N of the Oakland Bay Bridge, and that's confusing for folks.
California must be really allergic to overlaps.  4-5 miles is nothing.

California did try to eliminate as many overlaps as possible at the 1964 renumbering.
And for some reason created an unnecessarily long (albeit mostly silent) extension overlapping US 101 along Santa Barbara Channel south of Gaviota Pass. 

More in line with Interstate multiplexes, I-5 and CA 33 have a fairly substantial multiplex of north of CA 33 to Derrick Avenue.  That wasn't born as part of the 1964 Renumbering but rather a desire by the Division of Highways to shed maintenance along Coalinga-Mendota Road.

As well as the completely unnecessary - and well-marked - 12-mile duplex of CA-99 and CA-70 from I-5 heading north. It even persisted on official Caltrans maps through 1990, and amusingly enough, shows up on Apple Maps.

Although I don't see a compelling need to renumber CA-58, I don't think a I-15/I-40 duplex in Barstow would be that confusing. I see it akin to the (admittedly shorter) CA-57/CA-60 overlap in Diamond Bar.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on February 21, 2024, 08:32:45 PM
Quote from: DTComposer on February 21, 2024, 08:29:17 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 20, 2024, 01:20:24 PM
Quote from: kkt on February 20, 2024, 01:06:00 PM
Quote from: vdeane on February 20, 2024, 12:54:23 PM
Quote from: cahwyguy on February 19, 2024, 10:49:29 PM
Further, the way and location where Route 58 connects to I-15 is quite a few miles S of where I-40 ends, so there's this big discontinuity. About the only equivalent concurrency is I-580 N of the Oakland Bay Bridge, and that's confusing for folks.
California must be really allergic to overlaps.  4-5 miles is nothing.

California did try to eliminate as many overlaps as possible at the 1964 renumbering.
And for some reason created an unnecessarily long (albeit mostly silent) extension overlapping US 101 along Santa Barbara Channel south of Gaviota Pass. 

More in line with Interstate multiplexes, I-5 and CA 33 have a fairly substantial multiplex of north of CA 33 to Derrick Avenue.  That wasn't born as part of the 1964 Renumbering but rather a desire by the Division of Highways to shed maintenance along Coalinga-Mendota Road.

As well as the completely unnecessary - and well-marked - 12-mile duplex of CA-99 and CA-70 from I-5 heading north. It even persisted on official Caltrans maps through 1990, and amusingly enough, shows up on Apple Maps.

Although I don't see a compelling need to renumber CA-58, I don't think a I-15/I-40 duplex in Barstow would be that confusing. I see it akin to the (admittedly shorter) CA-57/CA-60 overlap in Diamond Bar.

Hell, for quite a long time CA 70 multiplexed CA 99 all the way to Capitol Mall in downtown Sacramento.  One of the signs is still lingering around. 

https://flic.kr/p/RiyhiS
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: TheStranger on February 21, 2024, 08:53:25 PM
Quote from: DTComposer on February 21, 2024, 08:29:17 PM

As well as the completely unnecessary - and well-marked - 12-mile duplex of CA-99 and CA-70 from I-5 heading north. It even persisted on official Caltrans maps through 1990, and amusingly enough, shows up on Apple Maps.


The 70 concurrency with 99 (which primarily existed in the 1960s, as noted by the artifact sign in downtown Sacramento) is probably a weird artifact of two things:

- US 40A starting out as a concurrency (albeit with US 99W along what is now Route 113)

- The 1959-1964 portion of Route 24 that ran between Marysville and the Land Park district in Sacramento, which 70 directly replaced (along with 40A, which itself used to be part of 24 until 1953 or so)

Interestingly, part of the 1960s 70/99 alignment (1959-1964 Route 24) in Natomas was demolished and removed in the 1990s, the connector from Jibboom Street to Garden Highway north of Sacramento's Discovery Park.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: fungus on February 22, 2024, 01:57:09 AM
If the west beltway has not yet been environmentally cleared yet it is not going to be built without VMT mitigation thanks to the new state law (SB 743). As far as I can tell (https://www.bakersfieldcity.us/736/Project-Documents) it has not. The VMT mitigation is going to be pretty expensive, on the order of massively expanding bus service or charging tolls to fund bike lanes in the central part of the city. There are environmental interest groups which are raising red flags any time lanes are being added, anywhere statewide, so even in Kern County it will be tough, although projects which are environmentally cleared to add lanes are going to keep moving, and there are a good deal of them out there.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on February 22, 2024, 09:35:40 AM
I seem to recall there was a wavier process for SB 743?  Wasn't cl94 the one who mentioned something about that?
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Lukeisroads on February 22, 2024, 10:49:03 AM
So are we now gonna decide if 99 is gonna be turned into a interstate?
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on February 22, 2024, 10:53:29 AM
Hasn't been seriously considered since the 1980s.  Even with all the recent improvements to the corridor there is still a bunch that is far from Interstate standard.  As an example the rail underpass used by the northbound lanes near Chowchilla dates to the 1930s.  Tulare County had a crap ton of early 1950s freeway along with all the non-standard oddities that come with it.

Interestingly I think people don't realize sometimes that 99 between Wheeler Ridge and Sacramento only became a full freeway in 2016.  The expressway segment between Chowchilla and Merced was the last segment to be fully closed off.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: cl94 on February 22, 2024, 05:46:31 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 22, 2024, 09:35:40 AM
I seem to recall there was a wavier process for SB 743?  Wasn't cl94 the one who mentioned something about that?

The thing with SB 743 is that it has some weird workarounds that encourage suburban development in counties with a decent amount of rural population. SB 743 is intended to reduce VMT per capita. Kern County has a lot of rural population, so anything suburban Bakersfield will reduce VMT per capita because their trip lengths will be shorter than someone who lives out in the boonies.

If the project ends up promoting infill development, SB 743 will likely be statisfied. But there are other things at play and CTC would need to approve it.

Long story short, nearly anything that encourages infill development (on a countywide scale) will satisfy SB 743, but other things could come into play.

(Personal opinions emphasized)
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: ClassicHasClass on February 24, 2024, 09:28:29 PM
QuoteThe expressway segment between Chowchilla and Merced was the last segment to be fully closed off.

Man, I remember when that finally got done. What an improvement, which is now ruined by the construction through Merced.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on February 24, 2024, 09:51:52 PM
Quote from: ClassicHasClass on February 24, 2024, 09:28:29 PM
QuoteThe expressway segment between Chowchilla and Merced was the last segment to be fully closed off.

Man, I remember when that finally got done. What an improvement, which is now ruined by the construction through Merced.

I've been using 16th Street and sometimes Santa Fe Drive (County Route J7) quite often to get around backups.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: ClassicHasClass on February 25, 2024, 10:54:52 PM
Went up through Bakersfield this morning on CA 99 N and the CA 58 WB flyover is nicely striped but the whole thing is still behind K-rail.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: pderocco on February 27, 2024, 03:00:55 AM
I also drove it Sunday, both directions. Where it passes over Stockdale Hwy, it's so wide that the area of the overpass is almost the size of a football field. It's almost more impressive to drive under than on it.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: cahwyguy on March 02, 2024, 09:59:57 PM
I was working on the highway pages today, incorporating Tom's post on Route 58. There's an interesting problem.

▸In 2013, Chapter 525 (SB 788, 10/9/2013) split this into two segments:

    (3) From Route 43 to just west of Van Buren Place near Bakersfield.

    (4) Mohawk Street near Bakersfield to Route 99.

This legislative change hasn't been undone, to my knowledge. I just checked online (https://casetext.com/statute/california-codes/california-streets-and-highways-code/division-1-state-highways/chapter-2-the-state-highway-system/article-3-the-state-highway-routes/section-358-route-58-relinquishment), and the definition is still:
Quote
(a) Route 58 is from:
(1) Route 101 near Santa Margarita to Route 33.
(2) Route 33 to Route 43.
(3) Route 43 to just west of Van Buren Place near Bakersfield.
(4) Mohawk Street near Bakersfield to Route 99.
(5) Route 99 to Route 15 near Barstow via Bakersfield and Mojave.
(b) Upon a determination by the commission that it is in the best interests of the state to do so, the commission may, upon terms and conditions approved by it, relinquish to the City of Bakersfield or the County of Kern the portion of Route 58 that is located within the jurisdiction of that city or county if the city or county agrees to accept it. The following conditions shall apply upon relinquishment:
(1) The relinquishment shall become effective on the date following the county recorder's recordation of the relinquishment resolution containing the commission's approval of the terms and conditions of the relinquishment.
(2) On and after the effective date of the relinquishment, the relinquished portion of Route 58 shall cease to be a state highway.
(3) The portion of Route 58 relinquished under this subdivision shall be ineligible for future adoption under Section 81.
(4) For the portion of Route 58 that is relinquished under this subdivision, the City of Bakersfield or the County of Kern shall install and maintain within the jurisdiction of the city or county signs directing motorists to the continuation of Route 58.
(c) The relinquished former portions of Route 58 within the unincorporated area of the County of Kern and within the City of Bakersfield are not state highways and are not eligible for adoption under Section 81. For the relinquished former portions of Route 58, the County of Kern and the City of Bakersfield shall maintain within their respective jurisdictions signs directing motorists to the continuation of Route 58.
Ca. Sts. and High. Code § 358

Amended by Stats 2013 ch 523 (SB 788),s 9, eff. 1/1/2014.
Amended by Stats 2010 ch 491 (SB 1318),s 18, eff. 1/1/2011.
Amended by Stats 2006 ch 315 (AB 1858),s 1, eff. 1/1/2007.

Cal. Sts. & Hy. Code § 358

So, although the new segments might be signed as Route 58, it is unclear if they are really part of Route 58 until there's a legislative change -- and based on my review of all the assembly and senate bills currently introduced for the 2023-2024 session, there are no plans to change the state code.

OK, who wants to tell Caltrans?

Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: pderocco on March 02, 2024, 10:06:17 PM
Quote from: cahwyguy on March 02, 2024, 09:59:57 PM
I was working on the highway pages today, incorporating Tom's post on Route 58. There's an interesting problem.

▸In 2013, Chapter 525 (SB 788, 10/9/2013) split this into two segments:

    (3) From Route 43 to just west of Van Buren Place near Bakersfield.

    (4) Mohawk Street near Bakersfield to Route 99.

This legislative change hasn't been undone, to my knowledge. I just checked online (https://casetext.com/statute/california-codes/california-streets-and-highways-code/division-1-state-highways/chapter-2-the-state-highway-system/article-3-the-state-highway-routes/section-358-route-58-relinquishment), and the definition is still:
Quote
(a) Route 58 is from:
(1) Route 101 near Santa Margarita to Route 33.
(2) Route 33 to Route 43.
(3) Route 43 to just west of Van Buren Place near Bakersfield.
(4) Mohawk Street near Bakersfield to Route 99.
(5) Route 99 to Route 15 near Barstow via Bakersfield and Mojave.
(b) Upon a determination by the commission that it is in the best interests of the state to do so, the commission may, upon terms and conditions approved by it, relinquish to the City of Bakersfield or the County of Kern the portion of Route 58 that is located within the jurisdiction of that city or county if the city or county agrees to accept it. The following conditions shall apply upon relinquishment:
(1) The relinquishment shall become effective on the date following the county recorder's recordation of the relinquishment resolution containing the commission's approval of the terms and conditions of the relinquishment.
(2) On and after the effective date of the relinquishment, the relinquished portion of Route 58 shall cease to be a state highway.
(3) The portion of Route 58 relinquished under this subdivision shall be ineligible for future adoption under Section 81.
(4) For the portion of Route 58 that is relinquished under this subdivision, the City of Bakersfield or the County of Kern shall install and maintain within the jurisdiction of the city or county signs directing motorists to the continuation of Route 58.
(c) The relinquished former portions of Route 58 within the unincorporated area of the County of Kern and within the City of Bakersfield are not state highways and are not eligible for adoption under Section 81. For the relinquished former portions of Route 58, the County of Kern and the City of Bakersfield shall maintain within their respective jurisdictions signs directing motorists to the continuation of Route 58.
Ca. Sts. and High. Code § 358

Amended by Stats 2013 ch 523 (SB 788),s 9, eff. 1/1/2014.
Amended by Stats 2010 ch 491 (SB 1318),s 18, eff. 1/1/2011.
Amended by Stats 2006 ch 315 (AB 1858),s 1, eff. 1/1/2007.

Cal. Sts. & Hy. Code § 358

So, although the new segments might be signed as Route 58, it is unclear if they are really part of Route 58 until there's a legislative change -- and based on my review of all the assembly and senate bills currently introduced for the 2023-2024 session, there are no plans to change the state code.

OK, who wants to tell Caltrans?

Who wants to tell the legislature? Hadn't they heard about this bit of freeway which has been under construction for several years?
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: cahwyguy on March 02, 2024, 10:17:01 PM
Quote from: pderocco on March 02, 2024, 10:06:17 PM
Quote from: cahwyguy on March 02, 2024, 09:59:57 PM
I was working on the highway pages today, incorporating Tom's post on Route 58. There's an interesting problem.

▸In 2013, Chapter 525 (SB 788, 10/9/2013) split this into two segments:

    (3) From Route 43 to just west of Van Buren Place near Bakersfield.

    (4) Mohawk Street near Bakersfield to Route 99.

This legislative change hasn't been undone, to my knowledge. I just checked online (https://casetext.com/statute/california-codes/california-streets-and-highways-code/division-1-state-highways/chapter-2-the-state-highway-system/article-3-the-state-highway-routes/section-358-route-58-relinquishment), and the definition is still:
Quote
(a) Route 58 is from:
(1) Route 101 near Santa Margarita to Route 33.
(2) Route 33 to Route 43.
(3) Route 43 to just west of Van Buren Place near Bakersfield.
(4) Mohawk Street near Bakersfield to Route 99.
(5) Route 99 to Route 15 near Barstow via Bakersfield and Mojave.
(b) Upon a determination by the commission that it is in the best interests of the state to do so, the commission may, upon terms and conditions approved by it, relinquish to the City of Bakersfield or the County of Kern the portion of Route 58 that is located within the jurisdiction of that city or county if the city or county agrees to accept it. The following conditions shall apply upon relinquishment:
(1) The relinquishment shall become effective on the date following the county recorder's recordation of the relinquishment resolution containing the commission's approval of the terms and conditions of the relinquishment.
(2) On and after the effective date of the relinquishment, the relinquished portion of Route 58 shall cease to be a state highway.
(3) The portion of Route 58 relinquished under this subdivision shall be ineligible for future adoption under Section 81.
(4) For the portion of Route 58 that is relinquished under this subdivision, the City of Bakersfield or the County of Kern shall install and maintain within the jurisdiction of the city or county signs directing motorists to the continuation of Route 58.
(c) The relinquished former portions of Route 58 within the unincorporated area of the County of Kern and within the City of Bakersfield are not state highways and are not eligible for adoption under Section 81. For the relinquished former portions of Route 58, the County of Kern and the City of Bakersfield shall maintain within their respective jurisdictions signs directing motorists to the continuation of Route 58.
Ca. Sts. and High. Code § 358

Amended by Stats 2013 ch 523 (SB 788),s 9, eff. 1/1/2014.
Amended by Stats 2010 ch 491 (SB 1318),s 18, eff. 1/1/2011.
Amended by Stats 2006 ch 315 (AB 1858),s 1, eff. 1/1/2007.

Cal. Sts. & Hy. Code § 358

So, although the new segments might be signed as Route 58, it is unclear if they are really part of Route 58 until there's a legislative change -- and based on my review of all the assembly and senate bills currently introduced for the 2023-2024 session, there are no plans to change the state code.

OK, who wants to tell Caltrans?

Who wants to tell the legislature? Hadn't they heard about this bit of freeway which has been under construction for several years?

Often the legislature doesn't know or care about this stuff. They may just never have realized they relinquished it (after all, it happened over 10 years ago). Caltrans would care, as they likely could get audited and chided by the state for spending maintenance money on non-state facilities (although I guess they do fund stuff off the state highway system). Still, they shouldn't be putting it in as postmiles, or not signing it without a "TO" placard.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on March 02, 2024, 10:28:26 PM
Considering zombie/necro routes like 225 and 187 never got deleted I suspect there is lots of stuff Caltrans needs to send up legislature to clean up.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: cahwyguy on March 02, 2024, 10:46:14 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on March 02, 2024, 10:28:26 PM
Considering zombie/necro routes like 225 and 187 never got deleted I suspect there is lots of stuff Caltrans needs to send up legislature to clean up.

Certainly, as we know, they need to update the definition of Route 1 to reflect relinquishments (and finally give Torrance its due).
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: ClassicHasClass on March 10, 2024, 11:15:53 PM
Not sure when the K-rail was removed but the CA 58 W flyover was in full operation when we went through on CA 99 N. Getting some usage already.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: FredAkbar on March 12, 2024, 10:41:35 PM
We drove through this past weekend on 58 (eastbound on Thursday morning, westbound on Sunday morning). It all looked complete and was a nice change from having to take city streets to get back to 58E.

The only weird thing (which I assume they will remove?) is, on 58E around the Mohawk exit, there is still the sign (https://www.google.com/maps/@35.3683199,-119.0742938,3a,75y,78.92h,89.54t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sPuqqq1JbUEnjYiuDtwPWaA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu) telling you to use the next exit for 58. Which makes no sense since 58 passes straight through.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Max Rockatansky on March 13, 2024, 12:07:22 AM
Quote from: FredAkbar on March 12, 2024, 10:41:35 PM
We drove through this past weekend on 58 (eastbound on Thursday morning, westbound on Sunday morning). It all looked complete and was a nice change from having to take city streets to get back to 58E.

The only weird thing (which I assume they will remove?) is, on 58E around the Mohawk exit, there is still the sign (https://www.google.com/maps/@35.3683199,-119.0742938,3a,75y,78.92h,89.54t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sPuqqq1JbUEnjYiuDtwPWaA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu) telling you to use the next exit for 58. Which makes no sense since 58 passes straight through.

Yes, Mohawk was part of the interim routing.  It would direct traffic up to Rosedale Highway.  I made sure to get all those signs in my photo albums I linked from Flickr.
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: Lukeisroads on March 18, 2024, 12:27:27 AM
i found this hint https://www.google.com/maps/@35.3617922,-119.1220027,3a,44.5y,110.24h,101.17t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sGk4JTN2uT9FvK22HsSwxcA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu maybe their turning allen into 102 calloway into 104 coffee into 105 mohawk into 106 and truxtun into 107 this is a great hint thank you sign for decaying
Title: Re: Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)
Post by: The Ghostbuster on March 18, 2024, 06:21:32 PM
As you all are probably aware, Google Maps Street View was updated last month to include the new segment of CA 58/Westside Parkway.