AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: California  (Read 275228 times)

stevashe

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 344
  • Age: 26
  • Location: Seattle, WA
  • Last Login: Today at 04:41:37 PM
Re: California
« Reply #1350 on: September 20, 2021, 01:58:37 PM »

That's cool!

I checked it out on Street View, and it does remind me a bit of some of the assemblies in Washington, apart from the cardinal direction plaque which seems to be quite rare around here (with down-facing arrows being more common, although not in every region).

I'm not sure I realized that stretch of freeway was yet to be numbered.

Yeah it's very cool!! When I first spotted Westside Parkway on Google Maps, I immediately went to streetview to see what they did for the freeway entrance signs given there wasn't a highway they could include on them. The assemblies still don't really look Washington-like to me though, both because of the cardinal directions that are never used here like you said, but also because the downward arrows are usually integrated into a single sign instead of on a plaque below (https://goo.gl/maps/dfMKLeEtozo3viho9), and even when it is a plaque it's a larger size compared to the freeway entrance sign (https://goo.gl/maps/jJtsit5x9iDpKz1W8).

Yeah, but is that actually state highway? I don't think it's Caltrans-maintained, at least not yet.

No, it was not a state highway or Caltrans-maintained when those streetview images were taken. But Jake was not asking about state highways specifically, just freeways, at least as I read it. It does appear that some CA 58 shields are being added now that it has been transferred as TheStranger noted, so those assemblies may not remain shield-less for long.
Logged

TheStranger

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 4498
  • Last Login: Today at 01:45:35 PM
Re: California
« Reply #1351 on: September 20, 2021, 02:20:38 PM »

Didn't get a photo of it yet, but as of this month the ramp from Route 82/El Camino Real south to I-380 east in San Bruno is now signed as "Freeway Entrance - I-380 TO US 101" rather than "Freeway Entrance - US 101" as it had been for decades (at least since the early 90s).

---

Posted it in my roadtrip thread for the SF-Daytona journey, but I did see California-style freeway entrance signage in West Virginia as well:
DSC_7845 by Chris Sampang, on Flickr
« Last Edit: September 20, 2021, 02:26:32 PM by TheStranger »
Logged
Chris Sampang

TheStranger

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 4498
  • Last Login: Today at 01:45:35 PM
Re: California
« Reply #1352 on: September 23, 2021, 03:21:01 PM »

Closure this weekend in SF on the ramp from I-80 west to US 101/Central Freeway north, to repair broken guardrail

https://dot.ca.gov/caltrans-near-me/district-4/d4-projects/d4-sf-wb-80-to-nb-hwy-101-connector?fbclid=IwAR0vaCMA-6M2rNAVx4CIX6xACRrXwYqUrUPWIClSJDml_uzQaTSlEavPKSQ

(This ramp was itself slated to be part of I-80 until the mid 1960s when the Western Freeway was canceled)

SM-G973U1

Logged
Chris Sampang

Buffaboy

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1161
  • Make I-90 thru Buffalo 8 lanes NOW!

  • Age: 25
  • Location: Buffalo and Sacramento
  • Last Login: July 01, 2022, 07:24:10 PM
Re: California
« Reply #1353 on: September 23, 2021, 06:29:15 PM »

Why does California not have a statewide toll road like NYS, Indiana, New Jersey, Florida and others?
Logged
What's not to like about highways and bridges, intersections and interchanges, rails and planes?

My Wikipedia county SVG maps: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Buffaboy

Max Rockatansky

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 19124
  • Age: 39
  • Location: Route 9, Sector 26
  • Last Login: Today at 07:36:05 PM
    • Gribblenation
Re: California
« Reply #1354 on: September 23, 2021, 06:41:55 PM »

Why does California not have a statewide toll road like NYS, Indiana, New Jersey, Florida and others?

It just never became a thing with how early limited access State Highways were funded.  Most toll facilities have been largely limited to bridges until fairly recently.  Considering the cost of fuel from California blend gasoline coupled with a high gas tax large toll facility highways likely won't become a popular notion any time soon (but it would be preferable IMO to a mileage tax).
Logged

TJS23

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 21
  • Location: California
  • Last Login: January 31, 2022, 03:25:46 PM
Re: California
« Reply #1355 on: September 23, 2021, 07:43:18 PM »

Crazy observation of the day, I was driving back to Westwood in LA from SD at 2am and the metering lights were on for the Wilshire Blvd onramp even though the road was practically empty :-D
Logged

kkt

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6276
  • Location: Seattle, Washington
  • Last Login: Today at 05:07:11 PM
Re: California
« Reply #1356 on: September 23, 2021, 08:41:12 PM »

Why does California not have a statewide toll road like NYS, Indiana, New Jersey, Florida and others?

A better question is why so many eastern states have toll roads instead of paying for their freeways with gas taxes.  Most of the money the tolls collect goes to pay the toll takers, not to pay for road construction or maintenance.  Collecting gas taxes is very efficient.
Logged

Alps

  • y u m
  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 14997
  • Elimitante the truck trarffic,

  • Age: 39
  • Location: New Jersey
  • Last Login: July 02, 2022, 10:29:21 PM
    • Alps' Roads
Re: California
« Reply #1357 on: September 23, 2021, 11:45:55 PM »

Why does California not have a statewide toll road like NYS, Indiana, New Jersey, Florida and others?

A better question is why so many eastern states have toll roads instead of paying for their freeways with gas taxes.  Most of the money the tolls collect goes to pay the toll takers, not to pay for road construction or maintenance.  Collecting gas taxes is very efficient.

False. Very false. By far most of the money collected pays for maintenance, construction, operations.

Rothman

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10305
  • Last Login: Today at 06:59:34 PM
Re: California
« Reply #1358 on: September 24, 2021, 09:00:17 AM »

Why does California not have a statewide toll road like NYS, Indiana, New Jersey, Florida and others?

A better question is why so many eastern states have toll roads instead of paying for their freeways with gas taxes.  Most of the money the tolls collect goes to pay the toll takers, not to pay for road construction or maintenance.  Collecting gas taxes is very efficient.

False. Very false. By far most of the money collected pays for maintenance, construction, operations.
*citation needed*

Public authorities don't have a clean history in this regard.  Wonder how toll revenues are confirmed to prevent skimming off the top. :D

Do they release finance statements to the public?
Logged
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position(s) of NYSDOT.

skluth

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2163
  • Age: 66
  • Location: Palm Springs, CA
  • Last Login: Today at 03:13:26 PM
Re: California
« Reply #1359 on: September 24, 2021, 06:24:32 PM »

Why does California not have a statewide toll road like NYS, Indiana, New Jersey, Florida and others?

A better question is why so many eastern states have toll roads instead of paying for their freeways with gas taxes.  Most of the money the tolls collect goes to pay the toll takers, not to pay for road construction or maintenance.  Collecting gas taxes is very efficient.

False. Very false. By far most of the money collected pays for maintenance, construction, operations.
*citation needed*

Public authorities don't have a clean history in this regard.  Wonder how toll revenues are confirmed to prevent skimming off the top. :D

Do they release finance statements to the public?

I don't know about most toll roads. But when I lived in Tidewater, the Chesapeake Bay Bridge-Tunnel (CBBT) would issue bonds to pay for improvements. Those bonds were paid off through tolls collected as is all the maintenance. It exists as a separate entity from the rest of the Virginia DOT. Information can be found on the website I've linked.

Otherwise I've only lived in Wisconsin and Missouri which don't have toll roads. I do know Illinois has a separate authority for their toll highways which pays for maintenance and improvements, which is why Illinois toll roads are better than their other interstates.
Logged

Max Rockatansky

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 19124
  • Age: 39
  • Location: Route 9, Sector 26
  • Last Login: Today at 07:36:05 PM
    • Gribblenation
Re: California
« Reply #1360 on: September 24, 2021, 06:31:00 PM »

Interesting to note; I think you can trace the state’s hesitancy to use toll facilities back to the 19th Century.  Many early highways in California were toll road franchises in the Sierra Nevada Mountains.  Most franchise holders usually couldn’t pull a profit or phoned in maintenance towards the end of their agreement.  A large chunk the early State Highway System emphasized towards rebuilding former franchise toll road corridors.  In fact, the first State Highway was the Lake Tahoe Wagon Road which had constructed as a toll facility. 
Logged

Alps

  • y u m
  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 14997
  • Elimitante the truck trarffic,

  • Age: 39
  • Location: New Jersey
  • Last Login: July 02, 2022, 10:29:21 PM
    • Alps' Roads
Re: California
« Reply #1361 on: September 25, 2021, 02:02:46 AM »

Why does California not have a statewide toll road like NYS, Indiana, New Jersey, Florida and others?

A better question is why so many eastern states have toll roads instead of paying for their freeways with gas taxes.  Most of the money the tolls collect goes to pay the toll takers, not to pay for road construction or maintenance.  Collecting gas taxes is very efficient.

False. Very false. By far most of the money collected pays for maintenance, construction, operations.
*citation needed*

Public authorities don't have a clean history in this regard.  Wonder how toll revenues are confirmed to prevent skimming off the top. :D

Do they release finance statements to the public?
knowledge I have may or may not be publicly available, but I believe agencies do have publicly available financial statements you can peruse. Unfortunately because of my privy nature to these things I can't even cite the agencies in question where my knowledge stems from.

J N Winkler

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 7618
  • Location: Wichita, Kansas
  • Last Login: Today at 07:24:44 PM
Re: California
« Reply #1362 on: September 25, 2021, 03:27:07 AM »

Why does California not have a statewide toll road like NYS, Indiana, New Jersey, Florida and others?

The California legislature commissioned a highway financing study in 1946 as part of the policy development that led to the Collier-Burns Act of 1947.  The study's authors looked at the interurban toll roads that were then being developed in the Eastern states and specifically rejected that method of funding new road capacity because most auto travel in California was within cities, meaning urban freeways were seen as the more pressing need.  Later on, in 1951, the Division of Highways (Caltrans' predecessor agency) studied a Los Angeles-San Francisco toll road, and judged it infeasible because US 99 and US 101 would have siphoned off too much traffic.

A better question is why so many eastern states have toll roads instead of paying for their freeways with gas taxes.  Most of the money the tolls collect goes to pay the toll takers, not to pay for road construction or maintenance.  Collecting gas taxes is very efficient.

The story varies from state to state, but common themes included a desire to avoid raising fuel taxes just to cater to interurban traffic and studies showing that turnpike corridors served very high percentages of out-of-state traffic.  (We see similar dynamics today in Florida relying on turnpikes to keep the gas tax lower than it would otherwise be, and Arizona and Wyoming trying to toll I-15 and I-80 respectively.)

As a general rule, economists consider turnpikes a second-best approach because tolls claw back a part of the consumer's surplus arising from the improvement.  A common theme in the highway finance literature of the late 1940's and the 1950's is amazement at motorists' willingness to pay what were then fantastic sums to use toll roads.

I can't speak for all toll agencies, but I would expect that most if not all of the traditional public-authority turnpikes publish annual reports that include financial statements.  I work to the rule of thumb that toll collection and related overheads are about 30% of tolls collected, but the actual numbers and the way they are reported vary from agency to agency.  For example, in the fiscal year ended June 30, 2018, the Kansas Turnpike Authority reported spending $7.8 million to collect $118 million in tolls, or 6.7%.  The question is what expenses are reported under other headings that would vanish if toll collection stopped overnight.

It's certainly true that collection expenses associated with fuel taxes are quite low--about 1%.
Logged
"It is necessary to spend a hundred lire now to save a thousand lire later."--Piero Puricelli, explaining the need for a first-class road system to Benito Mussolini

kkt

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6276
  • Location: Seattle, Washington
  • Last Login: Today at 05:07:11 PM
Re: California
« Reply #1363 on: September 26, 2021, 02:31:07 PM »

Why does California not have a statewide toll road like NYS, Indiana, New Jersey, Florida and others?

The California legislature commissioned a highway financing study in 1946 as part of the policy development that led to the Collier-Burns Act of 1947.  The study's authors looked at the interurban toll roads that were then being developed in the Eastern states and specifically rejected that method of funding new road capacity because most auto travel in California was within cities, meaning urban freeways were seen as the more pressing need.  Later on, in 1951, the Division of Highways (Caltrans' predecessor agency) studied a Los Angeles-San Francisco toll road, and judged it infeasible because US 99 and US 101 would have siphoned off too much traffic.

A better question is why so many eastern states have toll roads instead of paying for their freeways with gas taxes.  Most of the money the tolls collect goes to pay the toll takers, not to pay for road construction or maintenance.  Collecting gas taxes is very efficient.

The story varies from state to state, but common themes included a desire to avoid raising fuel taxes just to cater to interurban traffic and studies showing that turnpike corridors served very high percentages of out-of-state traffic.  (We see similar dynamics today in Florida relying on turnpikes to keep the gas tax lower than it would otherwise be, and Arizona and Wyoming trying to toll I-15 and I-80 respectively.)

As a general rule, economists consider turnpikes a second-best approach because tolls claw back a part of the consumer's surplus arising from the improvement.  A common theme in the highway finance literature of the late 1940's and the 1950's is amazement at motorists' willingness to pay what were then fantastic sums to use toll roads.

I can't speak for all toll agencies, but I would expect that most if not all of the traditional public-authority turnpikes publish annual reports that include financial statements.  I work to the rule of thumb that toll collection and related overheads are about 30% of tolls collected, but the actual numbers and the way they are reported vary from agency to agency.  For example, in the fiscal year ended June 30, 2018, the Kansas Turnpike Authority reported spending $7.8 million to collect $118 million in tolls, or 6.7%.  The question is what expenses are reported under other headings that would vanish if toll collection stopped overnight.

It's certainly true that collection expenses associated with fuel taxes are quite low--about 1%.

Thank you, I appreciate the explanation.
Logged

gonealookin

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 589
  • Location: Lake Tahoe - NV side
  • Last Login: June 24, 2022, 09:43:20 PM
Re: California
« Reply #1364 on: September 30, 2021, 02:42:58 PM »

In an alleged DUI crash, a Toyota Tundra smacked the aging Mt. Murphy Bridge near Coloma and caused significant damage.

Quote
Levi Nuesmeyer, 37, of Placerville was arrested early Saturday morning on suspicion of driving under the influence after the 2022 Toyota Tundra he was driving reportedly struck railing and a column on the bridge.
...
County Department of Transportation Maintenance Division staff assessed the bridge and reported “severe structural damage caused by a reckless driver running into one of the main columns.” DOT officials say they expect the bridge to remain closed for “several months” until repairs are made.

We'll see if they repair it or just tear it down.  The bridge was due for replacement in the near future anyway.

Quote
The Mt. Murphy Bridge was built in 1915. “The main span is 160 feet long with two concrete approach structures of 140 feet and 60 feet long, which were rebuilt in 1931. The bridge approaches are narrow (10.5-feet) with no separation of vehicles from pedestrians,” states a DOT fact sheet, which also notes that due to the popularity of the state park about 38,000 pedestrians cross the bridge every year.

Despite upkeep efforts, the bridge has received a failing grade from Caltrans for more than a decade and DOT staff’s preference is an on-alignment alternative that requires demolition of the old structure and building a new, wider bridge in its place that will include a separated, 8-foot-wide sidewalk for pedestrians and a lookout over the river on the west side.

Mt. Murphy Bridge on Bridgehunter.
Logged

Max Rockatansky

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 19124
  • Age: 39
  • Location: Route 9, Sector 26
  • Last Login: Today at 07:36:05 PM
    • Gribblenation
Re: California
« Reply #1365 on: September 30, 2021, 03:28:50 PM »

Geeze, good thing I already took pictures of that bridge. 
Logged

Techknow

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 243
  • Location: San Francisco, CA
  • Last Login: Today at 03:02:13 AM
Re: California
« Reply #1366 on: October 03, 2021, 05:45:12 PM »

Drove around some highways in the Bay Area yesterday! From San Francisco, I crossed north of the Golden Gate Bridge to drive in CA 1 between Mill Valley to Muir and Stinson Beach. This section of CA 1 has been opened for over two years but the last time I went to Bolinas it was closed for a long time so I never got to drive on it until now. There are some nice scenic views over valleys but nowhere to stop easily.

That day was a busy day for traffic though and even though it was clear skies it was also foggy in a lot of areas. At some point the other direction was blocked due to a car accident. I saw some CHP vehicles a few minutes later and I decided to take the Panoramic Highway to go back east to US 101 rather than get stuck on slow moving traffic. Going east was very nice because there was no traffic on my lane through Mt. Tam state park although there were some cars coming in the opposite direction so it's hard to say which highway takes less time to get from one side to another, it'd depend on the time of day.

Then I went to clinch CA 131 on Tiburon and drove through the Richmond Bridge on I-580 and went back home at SF. On I-580 I wanted to see if a certain guide sign was replaced because it was said that it would be replaced with external exit tabs. Sorry folks but I can say the graffiti-damaged sign has yet to be replaced with anything. I can say now that I been on all of I-580 though! Getting back home was just typical stop-and-go traffic on the Bay Bridge and I-80, but that was the only toll I had to pay!
Logged

Max Rockatansky

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 19124
  • Age: 39
  • Location: Route 9, Sector 26
  • Last Login: Today at 07:36:05 PM
    • Gribblenation
Re: California
« Reply #1367 on: October 03, 2021, 05:53:29 PM »

Panoramic Highway is almost always faster than CA 1 to Stinson Beach. 
Logged

TheStranger

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 4498
  • Last Login: Today at 01:45:35 PM
Re: California
« Reply #1368 on: October 04, 2021, 06:12:47 PM »

Noticed a couple of days ago that the South Airport Boulevard exit off US 101 southbound now has the larger-sized (national MUTCD style) exit gore point sign, as opposed to the vertical or square California-style gore point signage.
Logged
Chris Sampang

kernals12

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2249
  • Love highways and cars. Hate public transit.

  • Location: Suburban Boston
  • Last Login: Today at 06:35:11 PM
Re: California
« Reply #1369 on: October 31, 2021, 07:00:26 PM »

According to Wikipedia, there were proposals in the 70s to make the Big Sur Highway into a 4 lane freeway and the only thing stopping that from happening was the creation of the California Coastal Commission. Is that true or is it because, as I suspect, the terrain and seismic risks make building a 4 lane freeway impossible?
Logged

Max Rockatansky

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 19124
  • Age: 39
  • Location: Route 9, Sector 26
  • Last Login: Today at 07:36:05 PM
    • Gribblenation
Re: California
« Reply #1370 on: October 31, 2021, 07:48:34 PM »

According to Wikipedia, there were proposals in the 70s to make the Big Sur Highway into a 4 lane freeway and the only thing stopping that from happening was the creation of the California Coastal Commission. Is that true or is it because, as I suspect, the terrain and seismic risks make building a 4 lane freeway impossible?

Would be news to me, but if it was the 1970s it would have been post CHPW where it could easily be referenced.  The closest freeway segment to Big Sur is Carmel-Castroville.  CA 1 (old CA 3 and US 101A was planned for a freeway upgrade in addition to a segment over Montara Mountain.

Pertaining to the CHPWs it was a publication that ran from 1924-67.  Generally freeways Route adoptions were well publicized in the 1950s/1960s CHPW era.  The blog on did on the overall history on CA 1 in Big Sur and the Monterey Peninsula has sublinks to the applicable CHPW volumes hosted on archive.org.  You can run a simple search for notable words (example; “Sur”) to narrow down what your looking for.

https://www.gribblenation.org/2020/02/california-state-route-1-cabrillo.html?m=1

Also Daniel’s site doesn’t list a freeway alignment being adopted for CA 1 in Big Sur:

https://www.cahighways.org/ROUTE001.html

Here is the relevant text:

[SHC 253.2] From Route 101 near San Luis Obispo to San Simeon; the northern limits of Carmel to the west city limits of Santa Cruz; the Higgins-Purisima Road to Route 280 south of San Francisco. Constructed as freeway for 5 miles near Morro Bay, from Route 68 to Route 156, from south of Watsonville to Santa Cruz, and from Pacifica to Route 280. Added to the Freeway and Expressway system in 1959 (Chapter 1062).

It sounds like you might have encountered someone who thinks Cambria and/or Carmel is part of the Big Sur Area in that Wikipedia article.
« Last Edit: October 31, 2021, 08:01:38 PM by Max Rockatansky »
Logged

kernals12

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2249
  • Love highways and cars. Hate public transit.

  • Location: Suburban Boston
  • Last Login: Today at 06:35:11 PM
Re: California
« Reply #1371 on: October 31, 2021, 10:11:05 PM »

According to Wikipedia, there were proposals in the 70s to make the Big Sur Highway into a 4 lane freeway and the only thing stopping that from happening was the creation of the California Coastal Commission. Is that true or is it because, as I suspect, the terrain and seismic risks make building a 4 lane freeway impossible?

Would be news to me, but if it was the 1970s it would have been post CHPW where it could easily be referenced.  The closest freeway segment to Big Sur is Carmel-Castroville.  CA 1 (old CA 3 and US 101A was planned for a freeway upgrade in addition to a segment over Montara Mountain.

Pertaining to the CHPWs it was a publication that ran from 1924-67.  Generally freeways Route adoptions were well publicized in the 1950s/1960s CHPW era.  The blog on did on the overall history on CA 1 in Big Sur and the Monterey Peninsula has sublinks to the applicable CHPW volumes hosted on archive.org.  You can run a simple search for notable words (example; “Sur”) to narrow down what your looking for.

https://www.gribblenation.org/2020/02/california-state-route-1-cabrillo.html?m=1

Also Daniel’s site doesn’t list a freeway alignment being adopted for CA 1 in Big Sur:

https://www.cahighways.org/ROUTE001.html

Here is the relevant text:

[SHC 253.2] From Route 101 near San Luis Obispo to San Simeon; the northern limits of Carmel to the west city limits of Santa Cruz; the Higgins-Purisima Road to Route 280 south of San Francisco. Constructed as freeway for 5 miles near Morro Bay, from Route 68 to Route 156, from south of Watsonville to Santa Cruz, and from Pacifica to Route 280. Added to the Freeway and Expressway system in 1959 (Chapter 1062).

It sounds like you might have encountered someone who thinks Cambria and/or Carmel is part of the Big Sur Area in that Wikipedia article.

There seems to an assumption in popular culture that every time a freeway is cancelled it was some great big David vs Goliath battle when really, most freeways die with a whimper, being too expensive to build.
Logged

Max Rockatansky

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 19124
  • Age: 39
  • Location: Route 9, Sector 26
  • Last Login: Today at 07:36:05 PM
    • Gribblenation
Re: California
« Reply #1372 on: October 31, 2021, 10:28:20 PM »

According to Wikipedia, there were proposals in the 70s to make the Big Sur Highway into a 4 lane freeway and the only thing stopping that from happening was the creation of the California Coastal Commission. Is that true or is it because, as I suspect, the terrain and seismic risks make building a 4 lane freeway impossible?

Would be news to me, but if it was the 1970s it would have been post CHPW where it could easily be referenced.  The closest freeway segment to Big Sur is Carmel-Castroville.  CA 1 (old CA 3 and US 101A was planned for a freeway upgrade in addition to a segment over Montara Mountain.

Pertaining to the CHPWs it was a publication that ran from 1924-67.  Generally freeways Route adoptions were well publicized in the 1950s/1960s CHPW era.  The blog on did on the overall history on CA 1 in Big Sur and the Monterey Peninsula has sublinks to the applicable CHPW volumes hosted on archive.org.  You can run a simple search for notable words (example; “Sur”) to narrow down what your looking for.

https://www.gribblenation.org/2020/02/california-state-route-1-cabrillo.html?m=1

Also Daniel’s site doesn’t list a freeway alignment being adopted for CA 1 in Big Sur:

https://www.cahighways.org/ROUTE001.html

Here is the relevant text:

[SHC 253.2] From Route 101 near San Luis Obispo to San Simeon; the northern limits of Carmel to the west city limits of Santa Cruz; the Higgins-Purisima Road to Route 280 south of San Francisco. Constructed as freeway for 5 miles near Morro Bay, from Route 68 to Route 156, from south of Watsonville to Santa Cruz, and from Pacifica to Route 280. Added to the Freeway and Expressway system in 1959 (Chapter 1062).

It sounds like you might have encountered someone who thinks Cambria and/or Carmel is part of the Big Sur Area in that Wikipedia article.

There seems to an assumption in popular culture that every time a freeway is cancelled it was some great big David vs Goliath battle when really, most freeways die with a whimper, being too expensive to build.

Pertaining to Cambria the four expressway gets close by way of Cayucos.  North of there I can’t imagine there was much of a justification for expansion.  I believe the downtown bypass in Cambria is considered a two lane expressway.
Logged

Max Rockatansky

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 19124
  • Age: 39
  • Location: Route 9, Sector 26
  • Last Login: Today at 07:36:05 PM
    • Gribblenation
Logged

Alps

  • y u m
  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 14997
  • Elimitante the truck trarffic,

  • Age: 39
  • Location: New Jersey
  • Last Login: July 02, 2022, 10:29:21 PM
    • Alps' Roads
Re: California
« Reply #1374 on: November 02, 2021, 06:50:10 PM »

Discussion of CA 1 around Carmel has been moved to: https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=30492.0

 


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.