California

[kkt]

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

[oscar]

I've never figured out how to post pictures here, but it's a green spade.

You can upload the picture to your website, Flickr, etc. Then copy the image address to a new post here, between image tags. See https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=29125.msg2601935#msg2601935 for examples.

[jander]

https://www.reddit.com/r/bayarea/comments/nlf7va/in_1976_san_jose_city_councilman_joe_colla_lifted/






The construction of the Joe Colla Interchange was delayed for almost five years.[1] In 1976, three uncompleted flyover ramps hung over US 101 and unfinished I-280/I-680. At this time, both I-280 and I-680 were completed to their current southern terminus. I-280 ended at State Route 17 (SR 17), now I-880, and I-680 ended in Milpitas, California.[2]

Joe Colla stunt[edit]
Near midnight, protesters of the unfinished interchange Tom Carter, Joe Colla, and Doug Beatty placed a 1960 Chevrolet Impala on a crane and placed it on top of an unfinished ramp. They weren't seen by police, although one officer recalled seeing a crane on the unfinished ramp, but assumed that it was late night work.[1]

Later that morning, Joe Colla rode a helicopter to the top of the same unfinished ramp and took a picture with the Impala. The next day, that picture ran in dozens of newspapers and according to the San Jose Mercury News, pressured former governor of California Jerry Brown. Eventually, because of the stunt, the interchange was completed five years later, in 1981.

[TheStranger]

Noticed that the US 101 section of Lombard Street in SF now has freshly smoothed out asphalt...Van Ness Avenue with the ongoing bus lane construction still needs a bit of work though.

Also seeing a proliferation of exit number gore point signs along 280 even though none of the overhead signs between Daly City and the ballpark have any exit numbering on them yet (over 20 years after CalNEXUS project began statewide).

80 has full exit numbering (being as short as it is) within the city.

101 has most but not all overhead signs with numbering, though there are several examples without it (i.e. the exits to 280).  All the northbound exit signs for the Central Freeway are numbered, but not the southbound ramp to I-80.  A gore point number sign was added to the 9th Street exit off the Central Freeway a month or two ago.

The Presidio Parkway exits along US 101 have had numbers from the start, and IIRC there is one small sign southbound on the Golden Gate Bridge noting the exit number for 25th Avenue (in actuality, Lincoln Boulevard but that eventually leads to 25th).

[kkt]

I thought Caltrans made a deliberate decision to sign exit numbers for long routes first, rather than short routes even when they've got lots of traffic.

[TheStranger]

I thought Caltrans made a deliberate decision to sign exit numbers for long routes first, rather than short routes even when they've got lots of traffic.

Most of 280 all the way from Daly City to San Jose has been given exit numbers with the internal-tab overhead signage, and IIRC at this point just about every other Bay Area freeway has overhead exit number signage at least once. 

280 in SF stands out by having none of it on any of the overheads between Route 1 and King Street.

[andy3175]

I thought Caltrans made a deliberate decision to sign exit numbers for long routes first, rather than short routes even when they've got lots of traffic.

The strategy to implement exit numbering on freeways across California seems to vary district by district. For example, I would say about 90% of all freeway exits in San Diego and Imperial Counties (Caltrans District 11) are now at least minimally compliant with federal standards (at least one advance sign with exit number and an exit number on the gore sign). This includes all freeways, long and short.

The exit numbering changes were in large part due to a major sign replacement program in 2019 and 2020 where many button copy signs were replaced with reflective signs. It is much more difficult to find a button copy sign in San Diego today than it was 10 years ago. (Sooner or later, I will get out to take pictures of the replacement signs since our site mostly shows the older signs that have been largely replaced.)

Other Caltrans Districts have varying rates of sign replacements, and I am not aware of a strategy to implement sign replacements on longer-haul freeways versus short-haul freeways.

[andy3175]

Most signs posted on this type of sign bridge in Caltrans District 11 (San Diego and Imperial Counties) have not been exchanged with new signs, which leads me to believe these sign bridges will be replaced and signs modernized to include exit numbers at the same time.

SM-G975U

[TheStranger]

Upcoming construction project next week on Route 99 in Sacramento:

https://dot.ca.gov/caltrans-near-me/district-3/d3-projects/d3-sr-99-21st-avenue-undercrossing

Work Schedule/ Full Highway Closure Information
Caltrans is scheduled to close northbound and southbound State Route 99 from 47th Avenue to the U.S. Highway 50 Connector in Sacramento.

The four-day full highway closure is scheduled to begin 8:00 p.m., Friday, June 11, 2021 until 4:00 a.m., Wednesday, June 16, 2021.

Crews are also closing the mainline westbound Business 80/Capital City Freeway to southbound SR-99, and the westbound and eastbound US-50 connector ramps to southbound SR-99.

In addition, the following ramps are scheduled to be closed:

The on-ramp from 16th Street to eastbound US-50
The on-ramp from 29th Street/H Street to westbound Business 80/Capital City Freeway
The on-ramp from 29th Street/N Street to westbound Business 80/Capital City Freeway
The on-ramp from 29th Street/T Street to southbound SR-99
The on-ramp from Broadway to southbound SR-99
The off-ramp from southbound SR-99 to 12th Street
The off-ramp from northbound SR-99 to 12th Street
The on-ramp from 14th Avenue/30th Street to southbound SR-99
The on-ramp (slip) from Fruitridge Road to northbound SR-99
The on-ramp (loop) from Fruitridge Road to northbound SR-99
The on-ramp (slip) from East 47th Avenue to northbound SR-99
The on-ramp (loop) from West 47th Avenue to northbound SR-99

[nexus73]

Glad I am not driving in Sacto!  That is an ambitious schedule.  Hope it works!

Rick

[sparker]

Glad I am not driving in Sacto!  That is an ambitious schedule.  Hope it works!

Rick

Seeing as how that stretch of freeway opened 60 years ago this year -- and the pavement is pretty well trashed (particularly the ramps!), the decision to do it with one shot is a tradeoff between six days of inconvenience to local users or a protracted schedule of reconstruction with partial lane closures and numerous short detours.  Of course, the safety of the construction crews and those who would be driving on the freeway during "normal" spot-type construction would have been taken into consideration.  I would imagine that part of the decision process to do a complete shutdown was the presence of parallel I-5; longer-distance commercial movements that don't specify the east part of Elk Grove or Galt would simply shunt over to the Interstate via either CA 120 or CA 4 farther south and US 50 on the north.  Commuters to those same areas will be the most inconvenienced, but hopefully they received plenty of advance notice.  I think we're going to see more construction/reconstruction projects undertaken this way due to both time constraints and liability issues.   

[jdbx]

Glad I am not driving in Sacto!  That is an ambitious schedule.  Hope it works!

Rick

Seeing as how that stretch of freeway opened 60 years ago this year -- and the pavement is pretty well trashed (particularly the ramps!), the decision to do it with one shot is a tradeoff between six days of inconvenience to local users or a protracted schedule of reconstruction with partial lane closures and numerous short detours.  Of course, the safety of the construction crews and those who would be driving on the freeway during "normal" spot-type construction would have been taken into consideration.  I would imagine that part of the decision process to do a complete shutdown was the presence of parallel I-5; longer-distance commercial movements that don't specify the east part of Elk Grove or Galt would simply shunt over to the Interstate via either CA 120 or CA 4 farther south and US 50 on the north.  Commuters to those same areas will be the most inconvenienced, but hopefully they received plenty of advance notice.  I think we're going to see more construction/reconstruction projects undertaken this way due to both time constraints and liability issues.   

I am inclined to agree.  Weighing the options of the typical weeks/months-long projects while keeping a route open vs taking a few days or a week of inconvenience and detours, I think that most people would gladly take the tradeoff and simply close the freeway for a few days.  With enough publicity, the traffic nightmares that many predict don't actually end up happening.  People find a way to adapt.

[jrouse]

Glad I am not driving in Sacto!  That is an ambitious schedule.  Hope it works!

Rick

Seeing as how that stretch of freeway opened 60 years ago this year -- and the pavement is pretty well trashed (particularly the ramps!), the decision to do it with one shot is a tradeoff between six days of inconvenience to local users or a protracted schedule of reconstruction with partial lane closures and numerous short detours.  Of course, the safety of the construction crews and those who would be driving on the freeway during "normal" spot-type construction would have been taken into consideration.  I would imagine that part of the decision process to do a complete shutdown was the presence of parallel I-5; longer-distance commercial movements that don't specify the east part of Elk Grove or Galt would simply shunt over to the Interstate via either CA 120 or CA 4 farther south and US 50 on the north.  Commuters to those same areas will be the most inconvenienced, but hopefully they received plenty of advance notice.  I think we're going to see more construction/reconstruction projects undertaken this way due to both time constraints and liability issues.   

I am inclined to agree.  Weighing the options of the typical weeks/months-long projects while keeping a route open vs taking a few days or a week of inconvenience and detours, I think that most people would gladly take the tradeoff and simply close the freeway for a few days.  With enough publicity, the traffic nightmares that many predict don't actually end up happening.  People find a way to adapt.

In my 22 years at Caltrans I have seen several of these major closures.  They have gone off pretty much without a hitch.  The massive amount of public outreach does make a difference.  Like the previous poster said, people listen and adjust.   If the W-X Fix50 bridge deck rebuild a few years ago was any indication, Caltrans will most likely halt the widening/reconstruction work that's underway on I-5 while 99 is closed.  They shut down the widening/rehab work that was happening on I-80 "across the top"  while that Fix50 project took place.

[mrsman]

Glad I am not driving in Sacto!  That is an ambitious schedule.  Hope it works!

Rick

Seeing as how that stretch of freeway opened 60 years ago this year -- and the pavement is pretty well trashed (particularly the ramps!), the decision to do it with one shot is a tradeoff between six days of inconvenience to local users or a protracted schedule of reconstruction with partial lane closures and numerous short detours.  Of course, the safety of the construction crews and those who would be driving on the freeway during "normal" spot-type construction would have been taken into consideration.  I would imagine that part of the decision process to do a complete shutdown was the presence of parallel I-5; longer-distance commercial movements that don't specify the east part of Elk Grove or Galt would simply shunt over to the Interstate via either CA 120 or CA 4 farther south and US 50 on the north.  Commuters to those same areas will be the most inconvenienced, but hopefully they received plenty of advance notice.  I think we're going to see more construction/reconstruction projects undertaken this way due to both time constraints and liability issues.   

I am inclined to agree.  Weighing the options of the typical weeks/months-long projects while keeping a route open vs taking a few days or a week of inconvenience and detours, I think that most people would gladly take the tradeoff and simply close the freeway for a few days.  With enough publicity, the traffic nightmares that many predict don't actually end up happening.  People find a way to adapt.

In my 22 years at Caltrans I have seen several of these major closures.  They have gone off pretty much without a hitch.  The massive amount of public outreach does make a difference.  Like the previous poster said, people listen and adjust.   If the W-X Fix50 bridge deck rebuild a few years ago was any indication, Caltrans will most likely halt the widening/reconstruction work that's underway on I-5 while 99 is closed.  They shut down the widening/rehab work that was happening on I-80 "across the top"  while that Fix50 project took place.

I think this is a bit of a trend in many areas to go with full closure, versus partial closures that would take months to accomplish a similar amount of work.  THe partial closures are also inefficient as they have to use some of their labor time to keep opening and closing the highway.  it is done for both highways and transit.  Yes, you can plan a closure for the right time to minimize disruption.  A true silver lining of COVID is that the lower traffic really enabled a boon to such construction projects, given traffic reduction.  But more generally, summer in most areas has enough of a lower traffic impact, since schools and colleges are closed, that you can generally do a closure like this without severe impact as well.  People can and often do schedule their vacation or WFH to coincide with such closures.

I now live in the DC area and pre-COVID, I would take the Metro to work.  A few years ago, there were several closures of my line to do some repair work.  One project was about seven weeks, so could not take vacation for the entire period, but enough people did for parts that it was indeed less crowded.  Shuttle buses were a pain, but for a short period, very manageable.  far better than single tracking which would mean that we'd still have delays (albeit less severe) for a much longer period of time.

[Plutonic Panda]

Sorry for the incoming rant, but can anyone explain what the hell is going on around Mulholland and Kanan road area? Mulholland HWY has been closed at "The Snake"  here for years: Dropped pin
https://goo.gl/maps/V5mDuSUcZfTsfZpe8

They've taken almost 3 years to replace a simple two lane bridge in a rural area and it still isn't slated to be complete until late July.

Then there's a pedestrian/hiking bridge that went out on a trail connecting the old M.A.S.H. set to Malibu Creek State main entrance. Haven't heard from Caltrans or the county about why these things are taking forever to rebuild after the heavy rain intense fire seasons in 2018/2019 caused them to be fail.

[splashflash]

Upcoming construction project next week on Route 99 in Sacramento:

https://dot.ca.gov/caltrans-near-me/district-3/d3-projects/d3-sr-99-21st-avenue-undercrossing

Work Schedule/ Full Highway Closure Information
Caltrans is scheduled to close northbound and southbound State Route 99 from 47th Avenue to the U.S. Highway 50 Connector in Sacramento.

The four-day full highway closure is scheduled to begin 8:00 p.m., Friday, June 11, 2021 until 4:00 a.m., Wednesday, June 16, 2021.

Crews are also closing the mainline westbound Business 80/Capital City Freeway to southbound SR-99, and the westbound and eastbound US-50 connector ramps to southbound SR-99.

In addition, the following ramps are scheduled to be closed:

The on-ramp from 16th Street to eastbound US-50
The on-ramp from 29th Street/H Street to westbound Business 80/Capital City Freeway
The on-ramp from 29th Street/N Street to westbound Business 80/Capital City Freeway
The on-ramp from 29th Street/T Street to southbound SR-99
The on-ramp from Broadway to southbound SR-99
The off-ramp from southbound SR-99 to 12th Street
The off-ramp from northbound SR-99 to 12th Street
The on-ramp from 14th Avenue/30th Street to southbound SR-99
The on-ramp (slip) from Fruitridge Road to northbound SR-99
The on-ramp (loop) from Fruitridge Road to northbound SR-99
The on-ramp (slip) from East 47th Avenue to northbound SR-99
The on-ramp (loop) from West 47th Avenue to northbound SR-99

https://www.enr.com/articles/51917-caltrans-shaves-months-off-sr-99-repair-time-with-precast-prefab-girders

"We can fabricate the product offsite within a factory environment to strict specifications and the product will then be able to arrive on the jobsite in such a manner that it is able to take traffic loading immediately as opposed to having to cure onsite,"  says Michael Hein, president of Con-Fab California.

The sections are trucked to the jobsite and installed with two crane crews. Once they are in place, the joints between them will be sealed off and ultra-high-performance concrete will be installed within the keyways to lock the pieces together, says Hein. Once that is done, a polyester concrete will be put on top to smooth out any edges.

Hein says his company worked on an $800,000 contract to fabricate the pieces in about a month. Once the sections were complete, his team put them together at the Con-Fab plant to fit before taking them to the actual project site, says Hein.

The FixSac99 bridge deck replacement is part of the SAC 99 21st Avenue Project, which includes replacing sound walls, the concrete median barrier, and installing brighter lighting for the 21st Street undercrossing.

Built in 1959, the 21st Avenue undercrossing was band widened in 1974. It currently has corrosion on the surface deck, concrete spalling, cracks, joint seals that need to be replaced, and the bridge deck has begun to deteriorate due to wear and tear from high traffic, weather and age. Caltrans says it is replacing the bridge deck before emergency operations are necessary.

Caltrans used a similar accelerated bridge construction method on the $14.1-million project that replaced the deteriorating Echo Summit Bridge on U.S. Highway 50 in El Dorado County.

[Bickendan]

I noted on my drive down US 101 through Del Norte, Humboldt, and Mendocino Counties that a number of BGS had external exit tabs, very refreshing to see in California. And, of course, the windy Super-4 sections, notably along CA 271 and 254.

[TheStranger]

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.

[Max Rockatansky]

I noted on my drive down US 101 through Del Norte, Humboldt, and Mendocino Counties that a number of BGS had external exit tabs, very refreshing to see in California. And, of course, the windy Super-4 sections, notably along CA 271 and 254.

Is 271 actually signed from an exit guide sign?  254, 283 and 211 aren't signed from any exit signage.

[sparker]

I noted on my drive down US 101 through Del Norte, Humboldt, and Mendocino Counties that a number of BGS had external exit tabs, very refreshing to see in California. And, of course, the windy Super-4 sections, notably along CA 271 and 254.

Is 271 actually signed from an exit guide sign?  254, 283 and 211 aren't signed from any exit signage.

The last time I came through there, the northern section of CA 271 was signed on a BGS from both directions of US 101; the southern section southeast of Leggett only utilized a stand-alone 271 trailblazer assembly adjacent to the exit -- and only at its southern end; the northern end of that section actually "terminates" at CA 1 a block west of that route's own northern terminus.  I don't recall ever seeing a 271 trailblazer along CA 1, though.  Apparently the 2-lane segment of US 101 north of Leggett would have been redesignated as the connecting portion of 271 had the 101 bypass freeway been built; the original intention when plans called for US 101 to be upgraded to a continuous freeway were for 271 to function south of Garberville much as 254 did north of there -- but environmental concerns and funding issues put those freeway plans on what looks like a permanent hold, so CA 271 remains a split facility.   

[STLmapboy]

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.

[Joshua Whitman]

 

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?

[Max Rockatansky]

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.

[ClassicHasClass]

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.

[sparker]

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.