Westside Parkway & Centennial Corridor (CA 58 realignment, Bakersfield)

[ClassicHasClass]

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!

[Max Rockatansky]

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. 

[roadfro]

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.

[Bickendan]

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)

[skluth]

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).

[Max Rockatansky]

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.

[pderocco]

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.

[FredAkbar]

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?

[mgk920]

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

[ClassicHasClass]

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?

[kurumi]

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

[Bobby5280]

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.

[dbz77]

I notice the 58 state shield was excluded from the freeway entrance sign.

[Concrete Bob]

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

[Concrete Bob]

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.

[pderocco]

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.

[roadfro]

Seems odd that they wouldn't have included the SB 99 to WB 58 connector from the jump. Anybody know why that was excluded?

[pderocco]

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.

[Lukeisroads]

Welcome in a new sign in the family https://cwwp2.dot.ca.gov/vm/loc/d6/ker99somingave.htm

[Max Rockatansky]

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

[kkt]

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.

[pderocco]

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.

[Occidental Tourist]

Those APL's are thicc.

[Quillz]

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.

[Max Rockatansky]

It won't, 178 begins at 204.