Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[mgk920]

Over the past year, several lights in San Diego and Orange counties have gotten yellow reflectors on their backplates (examples here, here, and here). Before 2020, these reflectors were few and far between (this one was installed in 2016), but they've grown exponentially in the past year. I don't know if Caltrans or other agencies are responsible, but it's certainly nice to see them spreading.

They're all over the IE, too.

Santa Clara has been busy yellow-outlining their signal backplates for the last year; San Jose is just beginning to do so as well.  They're showing up on Caltrans-owned streets (particularly El Camino Real in Santa Clara and Sunnyvale) as well as local ones, so apparently everyone's on the same page regarding the effectiveness of the reflectors.

They are optional in the current MUTCD, I'd love to see them made mandatory, including with the full black back plates and faces (yes, including in places like NYC - get with the program, willyas!).  IIRC, they are adapted from European practice, where they use white outlines.

Mike

[bing101]

CA 259 is once again posted in the field, albeit likely briefly and probably just a contractor's oversight since the TO 210 signs are up everywhere else. A 259 shield is up on the separation from northbound I-215 to CA 259, on the right just past the gore point. Roadgeek while ye can.

Ooh, this actually leads to an interesting thought:

How many California state routes that were unsigned prior to 2000 have since been signed in the field, even briefly?

When I was living in northern CA in the late 1990's, there was a construction project on Sacramento's 29th-30th freeway around the bridge over the American River.  While the road was signed as BIZ-80, there were construction signs ("your tax dollars at work") that had CA-51 shields on them.  This may have been the only on-road acknowledgement of the road's status as CA-51 that was easily visible to motorists.

Cool

https://www.redlandscommunitynews.com/project-to-add-two-more-lanes-to-sr-210-finally-ready-to-start/article_d941e5dc-5400-11ea-855a-d34b6df40e1b.html

This is probably due to an ongoing project and 2023 is the estimated completion date.

[sparker]

CA 259 is once again posted in the field, albeit likely briefly and probably just a contractor's oversight since the TO 210 signs are up everywhere else. A 259 shield is up on the separation from northbound I-215 to CA 259, on the right just past the gore point. Roadgeek while ye can.

Ooh, this actually leads to an interesting thought:

How many California state routes that were unsigned prior to 2000 have since been signed in the field, even briefly?

When I was living in northern CA in the late 1990's, there was a construction project on Sacramento's 29th-30th freeway around the bridge over the American River.  While the road was signed as BIZ-80, there were construction signs ("your tax dollars at work") that had CA-51 shields on them.  This may have been the only on-road acknowledgement of the road's status as CA-51 that was easily visible to motorists.

Cool

https://www.redlandscommunitynews.com/project-to-add-two-more-lanes-to-sr-210-finally-ready-to-start/article_d941e5dc-5400-11ea-855a-d34b6df40e1b.html

This is probably due to an ongoing project and 2023 is the estimated completion date.

Well, so much for the original plans to simply widen the shoulders and bridges on 210 in San Bernardino to Interstate standards -- this is above & beyond that!  It was needed back in 2012 when I moved north; nine years later it's probably a necessity!   Maybe Caltrans will see fit to finally seek Interstate status when this is done two years hence! 

[jrouse]

From the 2021 INFRA Grants thread:

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=29600.msg2632097#msg2632097

•           The Yolo County Transportation District will be awarded $85.9 million in grant funding to improve traffic flow in the I-80 corridor on the west side of the Sacramento-Yolo metro area.

Possible widening of the Yolo Causeway?  I know that that was a bottleneck at times (particularly Fridays) during the time I lived in Sacramento.

Yes, plus an HOV direct connector at the I-80/US-50 interchange.

[mrsman]

Just noticed that the upper CA 39 closure (between Crystal Lake and CA 2) status has been updated.  For quite a while it showed a date in 2020, then it was updated to 2025.  Now it shows "Expected to end at 5:01 am Nov 30, 2050".

(Not that I'm expecting it to open then or ever, much as I'd like to see it open again.)

Believe me, 30 years is a hell of a long time for that section of the highway to reopen.

I didn't think Caltrans would be that together regarding an opening date. According to their website:

SR 39
[IN THE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA AREA]
IS CLOSED FROM 4.4 MI SOUTH OF THE JCT OF SR 2 TO THE JCT OF SR 2 (LOS
ANGELES CO) 24 HRS A DAY 7 DAYS A WEEK - DUE TO CONSTRUCTION -
MOTORISTS ARE ADVISED TO USE AN ALTERNATE ROUTE

There is no other information regarding opening, or even what the construction is for that matter.

To that end I don’t believe there has been any official action in the CTC minutes (recalling what I’ve seen on Daniel’s site) in years.  The 2050 is probably a place holder or someone trying to be funny.

Yeah -- no one in CA would even think of getting up for a ribbon-cutting ceremony at 5:01 a.m.!

I know right?

Unless I was dead I would be there, count me in on November 30th, 2050 at 5:01 AM.

It reminds me a lot of the Y2K stuff.  Back in the 1950s and 60s saying the year 2000 seemed so far away.  In fact, there was a big concern that a lot of computer programming that involved dates would crash on Jan 1 2000, because the programming in the 60s only used two digits for the year, and so it was feared that the programming would treat the new date as 0.  But the fears were overblown - the world did not end on Jan 1 2000.

Nov 30 2050 remains to be seen.

[kkt]

Just noticed that the upper CA 39 closure (between Crystal Lake and CA 2) status has been updated.  For quite a while it showed a date in 2020, then it was updated to 2025.  Now it shows "Expected to end at 5:01 am Nov 30, 2050".

(Not that I'm expecting it to open then or ever, much as I'd like to see it open again.)

Believe me, 30 years is a hell of a long time for that section of the highway to reopen.

I didn't think Caltrans would be that together regarding an opening date. According to their website:

SR 39
[IN THE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA AREA]
IS CLOSED FROM 4.4 MI SOUTH OF THE JCT OF SR 2 TO THE JCT OF SR 2 (LOS
ANGELES CO) 24 HRS A DAY 7 DAYS A WEEK - DUE TO CONSTRUCTION -
MOTORISTS ARE ADVISED TO USE AN ALTERNATE ROUTE

There is no other information regarding opening, or even what the construction is for that matter.

To that end I don’t believe there has been any official action in the CTC minutes (recalling what I’ve seen on Daniel’s site) in years.  The 2050 is probably a place holder or someone trying to be funny.

Yeah -- no one in CA would even think of getting up for a ribbon-cutting ceremony at 5:01 a.m.!

I know right?

Unless I was dead I would be there, count me in on November 30th, 2050 at 5:01 AM.

It reminds me a lot of the Y2K stuff.  Back in the 1950s and 60s saying the year 2000 seemed so far away.  In fact, there was a big concern that a lot of computer programming that involved dates would crash on Jan 1 2000, because the programming in the 60s only used two digits for the year, and so it was feared that the programming would treat the new date as 0.  But the fears were overblown - the world did not end on Jan 1 2000.

Nov 30 2050 remains to be seen.

There was no disaster on January 1 2000 because lots and lots of programmers worked very hard in the late 1990s to work around the problem.  Going to a 4-digit year was elegant and preferred, but required converting the data in a data structure that may have no room to expand.  A lot of times some individual program was set up still with a 2-digit year but a window of interpretation:  dates from, say, 80 to 99 were interpreted as in 1980 to 1999, while 00 to, say, 30 are interpreted as 2000 to 2030.  This strategy means individual applications may start failing at different times in the future with little or no warning.

[Rothman]

Just noticed that the upper CA 39 closure (between Crystal Lake and CA 2) status has been updated.  For quite a while it showed a date in 2020, then it was updated to 2025.  Now it shows "Expected to end at 5:01 am Nov 30, 2050".

(Not that I'm expecting it to open then or ever, much as I'd like to see it open again.)

Believe me, 30 years is a hell of a long time for that section of the highway to reopen.

I didn't think Caltrans would be that together regarding an opening date. According to their website:

SR 39
[IN THE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA AREA]
IS CLOSED FROM 4.4 MI SOUTH OF THE JCT OF SR 2 TO THE JCT OF SR 2 (LOS
ANGELES CO) 24 HRS A DAY 7 DAYS A WEEK - DUE TO CONSTRUCTION -
MOTORISTS ARE ADVISED TO USE AN ALTERNATE ROUTE

There is no other information regarding opening, or even what the construction is for that matter.

To that end I don’t believe there has been any official action in the CTC minutes (recalling what I’ve seen on Daniel’s site) in years.  The 2050 is probably a place holder or someone trying to be funny.

Yeah -- no one in CA would even think of getting up for a ribbon-cutting ceremony at 5:01 a.m.!

I know right?

Unless I was dead I would be there, count me in on November 30th, 2050 at 5:01 AM.

It reminds me a lot of the Y2K stuff.  Back in the 1950s and 60s saying the year 2000 seemed so far away.  In fact, there was a big concern that a lot of computer programming that involved dates would crash on Jan 1 2000, because the programming in the 60s only used two digits for the year, and so it was feared that the programming would treat the new date as 0.  But the fears were overblown - the world did not end on Jan 1 2000.

Nov 30 2050 remains to be seen.

There was no disaster on January 1 2000 because lots and lots of programmers worked very hard in the late 1990s to work around the problem.  Going to a 4-digit year was elegant and preferred, but required converting the data in a data structure that may have no room to expand.  A lot of times some individual program was set up still with a 2-digit year but a window of interpretation:  dates from, say, 80 to 99 were interpreted as in 1980 to 1999, while 00 to, say, 30 are interpreted as 2000 to 2030.  This strategy means individual applications may start failing at different times in the future with little or no warning.

^This.

It is horrific that so many people now see Y2K as a non-issue or even a hoax.  It is a total discredit to those that stayed up around the clock to address the issue precisely to ensure a disaster did not happen (including my mother who kept one of the major network backbones in New England running).  It should be celebrated as a huge success that a disaster did not happen due to a whole lot of programmers' efforts.  To treat it as an exaggerated event that did not warrant attention is ignorant disrespect and ingratitude.

[bing101]

Here is a clinched tour of I-605, I/CA-210 and I-15 on this AsphaltPlanet video.

[TheStranger]

Live police chase on 110 north (Arroyo Seco Parkway/old US 66)!!!

https://www.facebook.com/watch/live/?v=168127058600352&ref=watch_permalink

[TheStranger]

Finally got some photos of the upgraded signage along US 101/Bayshore Freeway in San Mateo County.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/albums/72157719602979781

DSC_3230c by Chris Sampang, on Flickr

DSC_3238c by Chris Sampang, on Flickr

DSC_3244c by Chris Sampang, on Flickr

DSC_3246e by Chris Sampang, on Flickr

DSC_3248e by Chris Sampang, on Flickr

[Max Rockatansky]

That reminds me, I really need to get back out there and take better photos of El Camino Real in addition to the Bayshore.

[Plutonic Panda]

I went drove the new Mulholland HWY bridge over Malibu Creek(???) by Old Place:









And the old temporary bridge which was there when I took the other photos in early July:

[Plutonic Panda]

Mulholland HWY is still closed at the snake:



Anyone know when it’ll reopen, if ever?

[pderocco]

The new Mulholland bridge is an eyesore. What do they need all that steel painted red for?

[Plutonic Panda]

Not sure but I actually really like the bridge.

[Max Rockatansky]

I like how I can “proceed at my own risk” on foot or on a bike.  That totally would be up my alley to do.

[sparker]

The new Mulholland bridge is an eyesore. What do they need all that steel painted red for?

That's a standard commercial Rust-Oleum shade, intended to not only ward off major oxidation but to actually blend with any residual rust that would occur over time.  To me, it's preferable to the "Cor-Ten" bridge structural treatment, found mainly on RR bridge structures over water, that actually derives its color from the rust it deliberately forms from day one (it's more of a dark red-brown).  Example of the latter -- the BNSF bridge over the Willamette River about a mile north of Union Station in Portland.  I definitely prefer the pre-painted approach; to me it's more appropriate to SoCal mountain settings -- all 3 Pacific Coast DOT's tend to use a medium green if they elect to paint the metal superstructure of their bridges; works in far northern CA and the NW states, but a little strange out in the desert; wouldn't mind the "red brick" paint out there. 

[Max Rockatansky]

Regarding that temporary Bailey Bridge.  Was that obtained from the Caltrans emergency surplus?  That seems suspiciously identical to what is in use at the Ferguson Slide on CA 140.

I kind of dig the rust color red on that new truss span.  Almost all the truss spans I encounter in the state carry that green shade Sparker describes.  If anything it’s kind of abstract and make the bridges feel way older than it really is.

[kkt]

I like the rusty red color.  It's a nice earth color that goes well in the country.  (Of course I prefer the looks of the Golden Gate Bridge to the S.F.-Oakland Bay Bridge, too.)

[pderocco]

Well, I like the look of the old bridge: entirely underneath the road, so you don't even notice you're on a bridge. It's not like it's a really long span with a nice view or something.

[ClassicHasClass]

Sad, since this section of highway is TV/movie famous. It was a standin for generic backcountry roads in a million shows (Mission: Impossible used it a lot, incongruously, for generic Eastern European and tinpot South American dictatorships alike).

[TJS23]

Seen finishing my road trip that I think is new, on the 80 portion from capital city freeway to 5, under the 80 reassurance shield it seems like they put a new TO 5 trailblazer under there. Another thing a CA DOT district is trying?

[stevashe]

The new Mulholland bridge is an eyesore. What do they need all that steel painted red for?

That's a standard commercial Rust-Oleum shade, intended to not only ward off major oxidation but to actually blend with any residual rust that would occur over time.  To me, it's preferable to the "Cor-Ten" bridge structural treatment, found mainly on RR bridge structures over water, that actually derives its color from the rust it deliberately forms from day one (it's more of a dark red-brown).  Example of the latter -- the BNSF bridge over the Willamette River about a mile north of Union Station in Portland.  I definitely prefer the pre-painted approach; to me it's more appropriate to SoCal mountain settings -- all 3 Pacific Coast DOT's tend to use a medium green if they elect to paint the metal superstructure of their bridges; works in far northern CA and the NW states, but a little strange out in the desert; wouldn't mind the "red brick" paint out there.

Actually, in the eastern parts of the state, WSDOT uses a more tan/brown color that fits in better with the desert landscape over there than their standard green would: https://goo.gl/maps/cfBkNubJ6sczddjd6. I like do like the red though, and I think it fits Mulholland better than the tan would.

[TheStranger]

Seen finishing my road trip that I think is new, on the 80 portion from capital city freeway to 5, under the 80 reassurance shield it seems like they put a new TO 5 trailblazer under there. Another thing a CA DOT district is trying?

TO 5 had existed there even in the old button copy signage, from what I remember when I lived in Sacramento from 2007-2014.

SM-G973U1

[andy3175]

Article on projects that may be delayed in the San Diego-area TransNet program as priorities shift toward transit mobility.

https://www.voiceofsandiego.org/topics/government/here-are-the-transnet-projects-that-probably-arent-happening/

Regional planners outlining the future of transportation in San Diego are ready to acknowledge which highway and transit projects from the region’s last vision aren’t happening.

Twenty-one projects included in TransNet, the 2004 voter-approved sales tax for regional infrastructure funding, are unlikely to be built as part of a broad reimagining of San Diego’s transportation system, executives from the San Diego Association of Governments told an oversight board last month and confirmed to Voice of San Diego in a follow-up interview.

The board of directors – composed of elected officials from across the county – still has final say on any decision, but the agency’s staff, led by director Hasan Ikhrata, has said in no uncertain terms that there is no money for the unbuilt TransNet projects, and that they wouldn’t have any place in his new vision for regional transportation even if there was.

The list of likely-to-be-canceled projects includes 19 highway improvements, one rapid bus line from San Ysidro to Sorrento Mesa and a tunnel in Coronado. They’re the same projects that have been on the chopping block since Ikhrata came to SANDAG in 2018, and began promising a new system built around hundreds of miles of fast, frequent trains.

List of impacted projects (which could be funded by other sources in the future, delayed indefinitely, or fully deleted) is in the weblink.



SM-G975U