News:

Thanks to everyone for the feedback on what errors you encountered from the forum database changes made in Fall 2023. Let us know if you discover anymore.

Main Menu

California

Started by andy3175, July 20, 2016, 12:17:21 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

andy3175

Interesting LA Times article about LA and its freeways...

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/arts/la-ca-cm-building-type-high-desert-corridor-20180225-story.html

Quote

If no one in 2018 would argue, as a young writer named David Brodsly did in 1981, that the "L.A. freeway is the cathedral of its time and place," or that it's the spot where Angelenos "spend the two calmest and most rewarding hours of their daily lives," as British architectural historian Reyner Banham put it with almost laughable enthusiasm a decade earlier, there's no doubt that both the practical and metaphorical meanings of the freeway continue to preoccupy Southern Californians.

Any sense that we've put freeway-building behind us, in fact, could be squashed by spending even a few minutes looking at recent headlines, which in the last few weeks have included items on plans to widen the 710 through Long Beach and an Orange County stretch of the 405.

Then came a report from my colleague Louis Sahagun on plans by Caltrans, the state's once-imperious road-making agency, to build a freeway linking Palmdale and Victorville. Carrying a price tag of $8 billion and part of a larger project called the High Desert Corridor, it would stretch through the Mojave Desert from the northeastern corner of L.A. County into San Bernardino County. It would be the first freeway completed in L.A. County since the controversial, much-delayed and highly litigated Century Freeway opened in 1993.

The plan suggests that Caltrans hasn't quite given up the hope of someday completing the perfect, all-encompassing freeway network, a fantasyland Banham dubbed "Autopia" in 1971. It also suggests that when we talk about growth, especially along the desert fringe of the L.A. metropolitan behemoth, we almost always talk in the next breath about freeways.

Regards,
Andy

www.aaroads.com


mrpablue

Would a California-specific game similar to the nationwide ones in Traffic Control be welcome here?

oscar

Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 24, 2018, 10:24:29 PM
Its been quite awhile since anyone posted anything regarding Hawaii.

Because not much happens in Hawaii, at least for new construction, given a shift away from that to maintaining the existing system. But there's a new highway segment scheduled to open this month in west Maui, which I'll discuss in its own thread once the segment opens or at least there is a firm opening date.
my Hot Springs and Highways pages, with links to my roads sites:
http://www.alaskaroads.com/home.html

Techknow

Today I had the opportunity to drive through US 101 for work. It was raining a lot and there were some brief heavy showers but as usual it's not too bad as long as you don't speed.

For those not familiar, for years after Pinnacles National Monument became upgraded to a National Park, the signs that directed one to what was the national monument was still there. This sign may be found while going southbound right before the CA-25 intersection past Gilroy. Well guess what, the sign has been replaced! It is now a brown sign that says Pinnacles Nat'l Park! I couldn't take a photo but I believe there is another brown sign at the end of CA-25. I might be able to take a photo of it later today

Max Rockatansky

Quote from: Techknow on March 02, 2018, 01:21:46 PM
Today I had the opportunity to drive through US 101 for work. It was raining a lot and there were some brief heavy showers but as usual it's not too bad as long as you don't speed.

For those not familiar, for years after Pinnacles National Monument became upgraded to a National Park, the signs that directed one to what was the national monument was still there. This sign may be found while going southbound right before the CA-25 intersection past Gilroy. Well guess what, the sign has been replaced! It is now a brown sign that says Pinnacles Nat'l Park! I couldn't take a photo but I believe there is another brown sign at the end of CA-25. I might be able to take a photo of it later today

Only took from early 2013 to change it.  Shame I never got a photo of the old sign.

Techknow

#455
Driving back to SF (and through a rough storm), I noticed two more signs of Pinnacles National Park, one on US 101 North right before the interchange of CA-25, and on the nearby frontage road. Here's the latter sign:



What the sign doesn't tell you (and I don't know if there's distance signage for Pinnacles as there is for Yosemite on CA-59 and CA-140), is that the park entrance is at least 40 miles away!

sparker

Quote from: Techknow on March 02, 2018, 11:07:03 PM
Driving back to SF (and through a rough storm), I noticed two more signs of Pinnacles National Park, one on US 101 North right before the interchange of CA-25, and on the nearby frontage road. Here's the latter sign:



What the sign doesn't tell you (and I don't know if there's distance signage for Pinnacles as there is for Yosemite on CA-59 and CA-140), is that the park entrance is at least 40 miles away!

That wasn't up 3 weeks ago when we went down to Hollister.  Unfortunately, park visitors must endure the purgatory that is the commuter-heavy CA 25 between US 101 and Hollister itself.  Take a deep breath -- and watch out for tailgaters! :angry:

BTW, that's a nice-looking sign!

Max Rockatansky

^^^

Probably just better to go to West Pinnacles anyways since the road is more scenic and its closer to the cooler trails like the Balconies Cave.  The new sign is pretty solid looking though.

Plutonic Panda

Caltrans has a new director: https://www.enr.com/blogs/12-california-views/post/44099-qa-with-new-caltrans-director-laurie-berman

Laurie Berman a former San Diego District Director. I sure hope she is more pro-car then the last one who has been quoted saying he wants to make traffic miserable to "encourage"  people to find alternative forms of transportation.

andy3175

#459
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on March 05, 2018, 02:40:04 PM
Caltrans has a new director: https://www.enr.com/blogs/12-california-views/post/44099-qa-with-new-caltrans-director-laurie-berman

Laurie Berman a former San Diego District Director. I sure hope she is more pro-car then the last one who has been quoted saying he wants to make traffic miserable to "encourage"  people to find alternative forms of transportation.

One time, about four years ago, at an event for the seismic retrofit of the Cabrillo Bridge over CA-163, I asked Ms. Berman whether changing the signs on CA 15 to I-15 and CA-905 to I-905. She basically responded by asking me why would that be necessary. I mumbled something about numbering and benefits of Interstate shields and so forth, but the discussion really went nowhere.  Ms. Berman was clearly more interested in the improved roadways and freeways brought about by construction projects on both roads, and the numbering and shield shape were of less importance. I then realized I was dwelling in a detail-oriented corner of our hobby, acknowledged how much better both routes have been with improvements, and left it at that. So at that time, it finally gave me clarity that we probably won't see Interstate sign upgrades for a long time if ever on those two roadways, regardless if the freeway is built to Interstate standards (which 905 is and 15 mostly is except for the area around the CA-94 interchange). And that was basically when I more or less stopped caring if it happens or not. With that said, I think Ms. Berman will do a fine job leading Caltrans. She has done quite a few good things here in San Diego. Now if I can just get Caltrans District 11 to quit posting those neutered Interstate 5 and 15 shields that have popped up over the past seven or eight years ... ha ha, there I go again in another detail-oriented corner of our hobby!
Regards,
Andy

www.aaroads.com

myosh_tino

Found another planned implementation of Arrow-per-Lane signage in California.  This time, the sign is to be installed as part of a project to rehab/replace the concrete pavement of CA-58 east of the 58-99 interchange in Bakersfield.  What's different time around was the plans gave height and width dimensions of the thru, option and exit arrows.  As a result, I was able to duplicate them and add them to my sign-making library.  Here's the sign according to the plans...



The through and option lane arrows are 42 inches tall while the exit arrow is 36 inches tall.  The arrowhead used follows the FHWA spec (Standard Arrow Details) with an 8-inch shaft.  Also of note is the fact that this is the first example of Caltrans using an APL where there are two closely spaced exits (West 58/North 99 and South 99).  IMO, the circumstances made using an APL easier because the option lane becomes a dropped lane for 99 South.  The two left lanes are the only "through" lanes.
Quote from: golden eagle
If I owned a dam and decided to donate it to charity, would I be giving a dam? I'm sure that might be a first because no one really gives a dam.

compdude787

Don't you think that Caltrans should wait on replacing this sign until after the Centennial Corridor is open?

myosh_tino

Quote from: compdude787 on March 10, 2018, 12:41:29 PM
Don't you think that Caltrans should wait on replacing this sign until after the Centennial Corridor is open?

Looking at the project plans, the existing signs could not be reused because the lane configuration is going to change upon completion of the paving project necessitating the need to install new signs.
Quote from: golden eagle
If I owned a dam and decided to donate it to charity, would I be giving a dam? I'm sure that might be a first because no one really gives a dam.

mrsman

Quote from: myosh_tino on March 10, 2018, 02:59:30 PM
Quote from: compdude787 on March 10, 2018, 12:41:29 PM
Don't you think that Caltrans should wait on replacing this sign until after the Centennial Corridor is open?

Looking at the project plans, the existing signs could not be reused because the lane configuration is going to change upon completion of the paving project necessitating the need to install new signs.

It's also disappointing that the sign doesn't include a control city bor 58 west like Buttonwillow or McKittrick.

sparker

Quote from: mrsman on March 11, 2018, 11:23:56 AM
Quote from: myosh_tino on March 10, 2018, 02:59:30 PM
Quote from: compdude787 on March 10, 2018, 12:41:29 PM
Don't you think that Caltrans should wait on replacing this sign until after the Centennial Corridor is open?

Looking at the project plans, the existing signs could not be reused because the lane configuration is going to change upon completion of the paving project necessitating the need to install new signs.

It's also disappointing that the sign doesn't include a control city bor 58 west like Buttonwillow or McKittrick.

I wouldn't at all be surprised to see "TO I-5" as a control on the pull-through signs on WB 58 and the ramp signage on NB CA 99.  Buttonwillow wouldn't likely be mentioned because it's not served by Stockdale Blvd., which ostensibly will replace current CA 58 to west I-5 once the Westside freeway connects to the 58/99 interchange -- or at least until that freeway is eventually extended to I-5. 

myosh_tino

Quote from: sparker on March 11, 2018, 02:29:42 PM
I wouldn't at all be surprised to see "TO I-5" as a control on the pull-through signs on WB 58 and the ramp signage on NB CA 99.  Buttonwillow wouldn't likely be mentioned because it's not served by Stockdale Blvd., which ostensibly will replace current CA 58 to west I-5 once the Westside freeway connects to the 58/99 interchange -- or at least until that freeway is eventually extended to I-5.

I'd take it a step further by using Sacramento as the control city for CA-58 but only on the pull-through portion of the APL sign.  I suspect Caltrans would prefer all traffic bound for Sacramento use I-5 rather than CA-99.  Once the Westside Pkwy is complete all the way to I-5, CA-58 west would carry all that thru traffic.  Here is the modified APL signage...



The panel size is the same but everything is shifted to the right to accommodate the additional legend on the pull-through portion of the sign.

As for using "TO I-5" as the control point for CA-58 west on northbound 99 signs, I would argue that it wouldn't be terribly helpful.  Keep in mind that the 99/58 interchange is only 24 miles from the I-5/99 split near the Grapevine so the percentage of vehicles on north 99 wanting to get to I-5 should be pretty low.  With that said, here's my idea for what that sign should look like (although I suspect Caltrans will want to try to use an APL here as well)...

Quote from: golden eagle
If I owned a dam and decided to donate it to charity, would I be giving a dam? I'm sure that might be a first because no one really gives a dam.

Max Rockatansky

Spent the day out in Big Sur and got a clean shot of the CA 1 BGS closure sign at the Carmel River:

1CAa by Max Rockatansky, on Flickr

Found a leftover CA 156 Business shield while driving through Hollister on the way home:

156CABLa by Max Rockatansky, on Flickr

mrsman

Quote from: myosh_tino on March 11, 2018, 09:40:52 PM
Quote from: sparker on March 11, 2018, 02:29:42 PM
I wouldn't at all be surprised to see "TO I-5" as a control on the pull-through signs on WB 58 and the ramp signage on NB CA 99.  Buttonwillow wouldn't likely be mentioned because it's not served by Stockdale Blvd., which ostensibly will replace current CA 58 to west I-5 once the Westside freeway connects to the 58/99 interchange -- or at least until that freeway is eventually extended to I-5.

I'd take it a step further by using Sacramento as the control city for CA-58 but only on the pull-through portion of the APL sign.  I suspect Caltrans would prefer all traffic bound for Sacramento use I-5 rather than CA-99.  Once the Westside Pkwy is complete all the way to I-5, CA-58 west would carry all that thru traffic.  Here is the modified APL signage...



The panel size is the same but everything is shifted to the right to accommodate the additional legend on the pull-through portion of the sign.

As for using "TO I-5" as the control point for CA-58 west on northbound 99 signs, I would argue that it wouldn't be terribly helpful.  Keep in mind that the 99/58 interchange is only 24 miles from the I-5/99 split near the Grapevine so the percentage of vehicles on north 99 wanting to get to I-5 should be pretty low.  With that said, here's my idea for what that sign should look like (although I suspect Caltrans will want to try to use an APL here as well)...



In the interests of saving taxpayer money, my hope is that the sign above is actually signed when they replace the signage, but that they use greenout and temporary shields to make the sign look like Reply 460 until such time as the Westside Pkwy is completed to the  99 interchange.

I do also hope that there would be some signage that would indicate travel to the central coast should take 58 west (Stockdale) and then continue on I-5 north to 58 west (Rosedale) or to 46 west.  A Buttonwillow control city would be a start, but maybe signage leading to Paso Robles might be even better.

myosh_tino

Quote from: mrsman on March 12, 2018, 07:41:53 PM
I do also hope that there would be some signage that would indicate travel to the central coast should take 58 west (Stockdale) and then continue on I-5 north to 58 west (Rosedale) or to 46 west.  A Buttonwillow control city would be a start, but maybe signage leading to Paso Robles might be even better.

CA-46 should be signed for Paso Robles, not CA-58.
Quote from: golden eagle
If I owned a dam and decided to donate it to charity, would I be giving a dam? I'm sure that might be a first because no one really gives a dam.

sparker

Quote from: myosh_tino on March 13, 2018, 01:50:56 AM
Quote from: mrsman on March 12, 2018, 07:41:53 PM
I do also hope that there would be some signage that would indicate travel to the central coast should take 58 west (Stockdale) and then continue on I-5 north to 58 west (Rosedale) or to 46 west.  A Buttonwillow control city would be a start, but maybe signage leading to Paso Robles might be even better.

CA-46 should be signed for Paso Robles, not CA-58.

Possibly secondary signage on CA 58 west at or near CA 99 might state "Paso Robles/use CA 58 west to I-5 north"; once on I-5 the signage for the CA 46 exit at Lost Hills should suffice.

Max Rockatansky

#470
Quote from: sparker on March 13, 2018, 02:31:35 AM
Quote from: myosh_tino on March 13, 2018, 01:50:56 AM
Quote from: mrsman on March 12, 2018, 07:41:53 PM
I do also hope that there would be some signage that would indicate travel to the central coast should take 58 west (Stockdale) and then continue on I-5 north to 58 west (Rosedale) or to 46 west.  A Buttonwillow control city would be a start, but maybe signage leading to Paso Robles might be even better.

CA-46 should be signed for Paso Robles, not CA-58.

Possibly secondary signage on CA 58 west at or near CA 99 might state "Paso Robles/use CA 58 west to I-5 north"; once on I-5 the signage for the CA 46 exit at Lost Hills should suffice.

You'd need something clearly directing traffic away from 58 if you want Paso Robles as a control city.  Taking 58 west to US 101 would add at least a solid 40 minutes to the trip given the indirect path it takes west of I-5.  Santa Maria would be a much better control city for 58 west IMO.  Buttonwillow is just a glorified collection of gas stations off of I-5 for the most part nowadays, might as well convey the lengthy distance to US 101 to deter anyone who isn't serious about taking 58.

silverback1065

Quote from: TheStranger on February 27, 2018, 03:03:33 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on February 26, 2018, 07:59:59 PM
they should just remove 280 east of us 101, and connect the us 101 freeway directly to van ness ave.
101 has always connected directly with Van Ness Avenue, at Exit 434A (the Duboce/Mission/South Van Ness junction where 101 now splits off from the Central Freeway) and previously, the pre-1989 terminus of the Central Freeway at Golden Gate Avenue and Franklin Street.

The late mayor Ed Lee did propose a downgrading of 280 north of 16th Street a few years ago.  (Commute traffic still uses that portion on a regular basis during the workweek, and it is the primary route to reach the Embarcadero corridor and Mission Bay/Dogpatch districts from all points south)

what i meant was for it to be a continuous movement, no getting off, so instead of the stub tying directly into octavia blvd, it does with van ness instead.

TheStranger

Quote from: silverback1065 on March 13, 2018, 07:49:16 AM
Quote from: TheStranger on February 27, 2018, 03:03:33 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on February 26, 2018, 07:59:59 PM
they should just remove 280 east of us 101, and connect the us 101 freeway directly to van ness ave.
101 has always connected directly with Van Ness Avenue, at Exit 434A (the Duboce/Mission/South Van Ness junction where 101 now splits off from the Central Freeway) and previously, the pre-1989 terminus of the Central Freeway at Golden Gate Avenue and Franklin Street.

The late mayor Ed Lee did propose a downgrading of 280 north of 16th Street a few years ago.  (Commute traffic still uses that portion on a regular basis during the workweek, and it is the primary route to reach the Embarcadero corridor and Mission Bay/Dogpatch districts from all points south)

what i meant was for it to be a continuous movement, no getting off, so instead of the stub tying directly into octavia blvd, it does with van ness instead.
The configuration at the Duboce exit  (where 101 splits off to reach Van Ness) really precludes that from happening - too many buildings in that area would need to be removed and the intersection with Mission would also have to be reworked entirely.

The Octavia route also serves two purposes: maintaining the access to Fell Street that had existed prior to 2005, and increasing the accessibility of the Hayes Valley boutiques and restaurants  (Smitten Ice Cream and a beer garden each take up space in the old Central Freeway right of way along Octavia)

SAMSUNG-SM-G930A

Chris Sampang

sparker

Quote from: Max Rockatansky on March 13, 2018, 07:46:09 AM
Quote from: sparker on March 13, 2018, 02:31:35 AM
Quote from: myosh_tino on March 13, 2018, 01:50:56 AM
Quote from: mrsman on March 12, 2018, 07:41:53 PM
I do also hope that there would be some signage that would indicate travel to the central coast should take 58 west (Stockdale) and then continue on I-5 north to 58 west (Rosedale) or to 46 west.  A Buttonwillow control city would be a start, but maybe signage leading to Paso Robles might be even better.

CA-46 should be signed for Paso Robles, not CA-58.

Possibly secondary signage on CA 58 west at or near CA 99 might state "Paso Robles/use CA 58 west to I-5 north"; once on I-5 the signage for the CA 46 exit at Lost Hills should suffice.

You'd need something clearly directing traffic away from 58 if you want Paso Robles as a control city.  Taking 58 west to US 101 would add at least a solid 40 minutes to the trip given the indirect path it takes west of I-5.  Santa Maria would be a much better control city for 58 west IMO.  Buttonwillow is just a glorified collection of gas stations off of I-5 for the most part nowadays, might as well convey the lengthy distance to US 101 to deter anyone who isn't serious about taking 58.

I think signage will depend upon the configuration of the eventual 5/58 freeway interchange.  If it's a straight directional merge with I-5 NB, then what would be appropriate there would be a mileage sign after the merge with Paso Robles as one of the destinations (possibly citing "Via CA 46" between the city name and the mileage).  If, however, it's a trumpet or directional interchange, it would be germane to put "To CA 46/Paso Robles" on the BGS's directing traffic to NB I-5.  And if one wanted to nail the point down, a sign (even a secondary type) could be placed prior to the CA 58 West Buttonwillow exit stating "Paso Robles/CA 46....Use I-5 North".   For the record,  I'd omit Santa Maria from anything not directing traffic to CA 119 or CA 166; CA 58 west of I-5 certainly isn't a viable route to that destination;  the only major central coast city even remotely appropriate for that road (possibly not the wisest choice of thoroughfares) would be SLO. 

myosh_tino

Quote from: sparker on March 13, 2018, 12:25:47 PM
I think signage will depend upon the configuration of the eventual 5/58 freeway interchange.  If it's a straight directional merge with I-5 NB, then what would be appropriate there would be a mileage sign after the merge with Paso Robles as one of the destinations (possibly citing "Via CA 46" between the city name and the mileage).  If, however, it's a trumpet or directional interchange, it would be germane to put "To CA 46/Paso Robles" on the BGS's directing traffic to NB I-5.  And if one wanted to nail the point down, a sign (even a secondary type) could be placed prior to the CA 58 West Buttonwillow exit stating "Paso Robles/CA 46....Use I-5 North".   For the record,  I'd omit Santa Maria from anything not directing traffic to CA 119 or CA 166; CA 58 west of I-5 certainly isn't a viable route to that destination;  the only major central coast city even remotely appropriate for that road (possibly not the wisest choice of thoroughfares) would be SLO.

This is why I do not support listing Paso Robles on any CA-58 related signage on CA-99.  Trying to kludge together mileage signs on I-5 to justify putting Paso Robles on exit signs for CA-58 just seems silly to me.  I would go so far as to retract my original thoughts and support using Buttonwillow on CA-58 related signs on 99.  Looking at Google Maps, Buttonwillow is not just the collection of gas stations on I-5 but there appears to be a sizable community about 4 miles west of the 5/58 interchange.
Quote from: golden eagle
If I owned a dam and decided to donate it to charity, would I be giving a dam? I'm sure that might be a first because no one really gives a dam.



Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.