Auburn, CA bypass?

[MrAndy1369]

Do you think a bypass should be added for Auburn, CA? As it stands now, SR-49 has a lot of traffic going up/down the hill and a lot of annoying stoplights. Yes, I know there's Bell Road as a potential bypass to the 80, but it's a bit out of the way.

It'd be nice if a bypass was added, perhaps starting at the Cramer Road area and ending at Newscastle. A full freeway would probably be overkill; a 4-lane expressway would suffice.

Speaking of which...any other bypasses/new expressways or freeways planned for the area? I think the NE Sacramento area could use more of those... it's pretty congested now.

[sparker]

Back in the mid/late '60's, when Auburn Dam was still an active project (the dam was to be sited just downstream from the present CA 49 crossing), the concept was to shunt traffic east from Grass Valley Way (49 north of I-80) east over the Forestville Bridge (scaring the shit out of acrophobics!) and then on a new-terrain connection south of there (IIRC, involving another relatively high bridge over the middle American River branch) back to the original CA 49 alignment near the town of Cool.  Of course, when the Auburn Dam was cancelled, those plans were also shelved; AFAIK, nothing certain has been forwarded to replace them; CA 49 still crawls down into the American River canyon south of downtown and back out farther south.  That gorge is the principal obstacle to an efficient N-S bypass route; regardless of the exact routing, it needs to be crossed.  Chances are that any bypass, if indeed deployed, would be at best a 4-lane expressway with at-grade intersections (at least north of I-80; south of there it would probably drop to 2 lanes simply to reduce development costs).  But the greatest volume of traffic on CA 49 has always been northward toward Grass Valley; development in the immediate area has exacerbated that trend, while development southward has always been inhibited by the lack of an efficient river crossing.  It's a true "Catch-22" type of situation; the slow & dangerous road through the canyon has held back development south of Auburn itself; while the lack of such development means that the overall traffic hasn't seen a "spike" as of yet, which indicates that upgrades may not be forthcoming. 

Except for the under-development expressway between CA 99 and Lincoln, there's not much happening in regard to new roads north and east of Sacramento.  And -- as long as we're on the subject of that expressway -- does anyone out there have an inkling whether the new road will be a state highway with actual field designation? (I'm thinking it may be the long-kicked-around CA 102).   

[Max Rockatansky]

Back in the mid/late '60's, when Auburn Dam was still an active project (the dam was to be sited just downstream from the present CA 49 crossing), the concept was to shunt traffic east from Grass Valley Way (49 north of I-80) east over the Forestville Bridge (scaring the shit out of acrophobics!) and then on a new-terrain connection south of there (IIRC, involving another relatively high bridge over the middle American River branch) back to the original CA 49 alignment near the town of Cool.  Of course, when the Auburn Dam was cancelled, those plans were also shelved; AFAIK, nothing certain has been forwarded to replace them; CA 49 still crawls down into the American River canyon south of downtown and back out farther south.  That gorge is the principal obstacle to an efficient N-S bypass route; regardless of the exact routing, it needs to be crossed.  Chances are that any bypass, if indeed deployed, would be at best a 4-lane expressway with at-grade intersections (at least north of I-80; south of there it would probably drop to 2 lanes simply to reduce development costs).  But the greatest volume of traffic on CA 49 has always been northward toward Grass Valley; development in the immediate area has exacerbated that trend, while development southward has always been inhibited by the lack of an efficient river crossing.  It's a true "Catch-22" type of situation; the slow & dangerous road through the canyon has held back development south of Auburn itself; while the lack of such development means that the overall traffic hasn't seen a "spike" as of yet, which indicates that upgrades may not be forthcoming. 

Except for the under-development expressway between CA 99 and Lincoln, there's not much happening in regard to new roads north and east of Sacramento.  And -- as long as we're on the subject of that expressway -- does anyone out there have an inkling whether the new road will be a state highway with actual field designation? (I'm thinking it may be the long-kicked-around CA 102).   

There would definitely need to be an accompanying bridge over the Middle Fork to complete a bypass.  The grade on 49 is pretty big descending down into the American River Canyon but a new span doesn't stand a chance with the Auburn Dam project dead.  That area is way too like now for outdoor activity not to get a serious fight if the project was ever revisited.  These photos ought to convey the height of the bridge that would be needed to connect over the Middle Fork to the Forest Hill Bridge:

IMG_0259 by Max Rockatansky, on Flickr

49 would be on the low bridge on the left in this photo.

IMG_0285 by Max Rockatansky, on Flickr

IMG_0260 by Max Rockatansky, on Flickr

[sparker]

Over the past 50-60 years several plans have been proffered for CA 49 bypasses of various towns along its route; Placerville and Auburn collecting the lion's share of those.  But none have come to pass; except for local deliveries, CA 49 never seems to have become a freight artery of any note; the towns through which it passes all have connections down into the Valley for any necessary commercial activity.  And the tourist traffic is likely to find the present roadway configuration "quaint" (if a little lacking in safety features) -- so there hasn't been much of a consistent push to upgrade CA 49 except along that one Auburn-Grass Valley stretch that sees mixed traffic use in significant quantity.  It's really not on any major "radar screen", so it's likely to maintain its status quo for the foreseeable future.

If the Auburn Dam had actually been built, the two lower bridges shown in Max's center picture would have been inundated, with CA 49 relocated to the ridge to the right (out of frame in the photo) and eventually crossing the high Foresthill Bridge at upper right.

[Max Rockatansky]

Over the past 50-60 years several plans have been proffered for CA 49 bypasses of various towns along its route; Placerville and Auburn collecting the lion's share of those.  But none have come to pass; except for local deliveries, CA 49 never seems to have become a freight artery of any note; the towns through which it passes all have connections down into the Valley for any necessary commercial activity.  And the tourist traffic is likely to find the present roadway configuration "quaint" (if a little lacking in safety features) -- so there hasn't been much of a consistent push to upgrade CA 49 except along that one Auburn-Grass Valley stretch that sees mixed traffic use in significant quantity.  It's really not on any major "radar screen", so it's likely to maintain its status quo for the foreseeable future.

If the Auburn Dam had actually been built, the two lower bridges shown in Max's center picture would have been inundated, with CA 49 relocated to the ridge to the right (out of frame in the photo) and eventually crossing the high Foresthill Bridge at upper right.

The Grass Valley to Auburn section seems to be the only part of 49 anyone wants seriously updated at all.  I thought that the divided highway between the two cities was perfectly adequate when I used it at rush hour last year.  The biggest problem bypass routes like the freeway from Grass Valley to Nevada City present is that it defeats the tourist oriented approach 49 has due to the association with the Gold Rush.  Bypass routes to the south on 49 in Mokelumne Hill and San Andreas include "Historic 49" signage to at least attract visitors to the original alignments and the towns on them.  Auburn kind of already signs Historic US 40 (which I believe was initially over on Lincoln Way and not High Street which seems too modern) so there is definitely some sort of tourism appeal there too with 49.  Granted, it probably is annoying hitting all those stop lights...

In regards to my Lincoln Way theory there isn't enough detail in 1935 to be certain on the Placer County Map:

https://www.davidrumsey.com/luna/servlet/detail/RUMSEY~8~1~247328~5515375:Placer-County-?sort=Pub_List_No_InitialSort%2CPub_Date%2CPub_List_No%2CSeries_No&qvq=q:placer%2Bcounty;sort:Pub_List_No_InitialSort%2CPub_Date%2CPub_List_No%2CSeries_No;lc:RUMSEY~8~1&mi=4&trs=10


Incidentally I found these old maps of 49 from 1951 and 1960 by the Golden Chain Council:

https://www.davidrumsey.com/luna/servlet/detail/RUMSEY~8~1~262187~5523602:California-s-Golden-Chain---the-Mot?sort=Pub_List_No_InitialSort%2CPub_Date%2CPub_List_No%2CSeries_No&qvq=q:placer%2Bcounty;sort:Pub_List_No_InitialSort%2CPub_Date%2CPub_List_No%2CSeries_No;lc:RUMSEY~8~1&mi=8&trs=10

https://www.davidrumsey.com/luna/servlet/detail/RUMSEY~8~1~268663~90042959:Golden-Chain-Council--Highway-map-o?sort=Pub_List_No_InitialSort%2CPub_Date%2CPub_List_No%2CSeries_No&qvq=q:placer%2Bcounty;sort:Pub_List_No_InitialSort%2CPub_Date%2CPub_List_No%2CSeries_No;lc:RUMSEY~8~1&mi=9&trs=10

The 1960 map wasn't a bad attempted but weird to see CA 123 north out of Merced. 

[sparker]

Yeah -- except for the Auburn-Grass Valley segment, the motto for CA 49 may as well be "keep it quaint!".  I for one don't see any push for wholesale improvement of most of that route either south of Auburn nor north of Nevada City.  For the traffic (both volume and type) it handles, it's adequate -- and it's more than a little fun to snake through and around some of the towns along its length -- better than a "soulless" bypass.