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

[Quillz]

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?

[Max Rockatansky]

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.

[oscar]

^^^ 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.

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.

[Lukeisroads]

Now what is bakersfield gonna do about naming rosedale hwy something else

[Max Rockatansky]

Why would it need to be?  Rosedale Highway seems pretty adequate given the name has been around for decades. 

[Quillz]

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.

[pderocco]

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.

[pderocco]

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.

[Max Rockatansky]

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.

[The Ghostbuster]

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.

[Occidental Tourist]

Here's a study 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.

[pderocco]

Here's a study 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.

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.

[Occidental Tourist]

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.

[Max Rockatansky]

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.

[mrsman]

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? 

[Occidental Tourist]

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.

[cahwyguy]

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)

[Quillz]

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.

[FredAkbar]

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

From the sign that's there now, 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).

[Max Rockatansky]

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.

[Concrete Bob]

I would put this on the overhead sign:

58 WEST To 5

[DTComposer]

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)

[thsftw]

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.

[Occidental Tourist]

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?



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.

[Max Rockatansky]

The older and now razed alignment of Stockdale Highway.