California's original numbering plan

[TheStranger]

31 - jumps inland, now under I-15 around Norco

31 was not a pre-1964 route; the streets that it used before I-15 was built in the area (Hammer and Miliken Avenues) are still in existence as well.  Not sure if the northern part past I-10 was ever signed or built as Route 31.

[agentsteel53]

31 was not a pre-1964 route; the streets that it used before I-15 was built in the area (Hammer and Miliken Avenues) are still in existence as well.  Not sure if the northern part past I-10 was ever signed or built as Route 31.

oh okay.  explains why I've never seen a bear 31...

[DTComposer]

As I was looking, I realized there was a pattern starting at 4 as well, but it goes south to north and is much more spread out:

4: Pinole-Antioch-Stockton-Angel's Camp-Woodfords
8: Stockton-Jackson
12: Sebastopol-Napa-Lodi-San Andreas
16: Rumsey-Woodland-Sacramento-Plymouth
20: Ukiah-Colusa-Yuba City-Grass Valley-Cisco
24: Oakland-Rio Vista-Sacramento-Yuba City-Oroville-Quincy (crosses a lot in the first section)
28: (this is the screwy one) Albion-Cloverdale-St Helena-Winters-Davis (it's kinda between 12 and 20)
32: Orland-Chico-Chester
36: Fortuna-Red Bluff-Mineral
40: (skipped because of US 40)
44: Redding-Viola

Again, not perfect, but there is a pattern.

[TheStranger]

DTComposer: Was 28 ever signed?  I've heard of it, and some of it eventually became today's signed Route 128, but it wasn't a sign number by the 1950s (when current Route 28 along north Lake Tahoe was established).

[NE2]

I thought it became 128 when they decided to sign 28 to match Nevada.

[agentsteel53]

I thought it became 128 when they decided to sign 28 to match Nevada.

that is what I have heard too, and that this took place around 1951.

I've never seen a bear 28 or 128.

[DTComposer]

DTComposer: Was 28 ever signed?  I've heard of it, and some of it eventually became today's signed Route 128, but it wasn't a sign number by the 1950s (when current Route 28 along north Lake Tahoe was established).

I'm not sure about in the field, but it is signed in my 1944 atlas, which I'll scan if I get a free moment.

[DTComposer]

DTComposer: Was 28 ever signed?  I've heard of it, and some of it eventually became today's signed Route 128, but it wasn't a sign number by the 1950s (when current Route 28 along north Lake Tahoe was established).

Here it is, running from the coast at upper left to Davis at lower right:

[myosh_tino]

The routing of highway 28 in that old map matches the current-day routing of CA-128 except CA-128 doesn't make it to Davis.  It ends in Winters at I-505.

[TheStranger]

The routing of highway 28 in that old map matches the current-day routing of CA-128 except CA-128 doesn't make it to Davis.  It ends in Winters at I-505.

Interestingly, the legislative route for today's 128 does extend from 505 in Winters to Davis, but this has never been signed (it follows the Russell Boulevard corridor approximately).

[Quillz]

DTComposer: Was 28 ever signed?  I've heard of it, and some of it eventually became today's signed Route 128, but it wasn't a sign number by the 1950s (when current Route 28 along north Lake Tahoe was established).

Here it is, running from the coast at upper left to Davis at lower right:

Wow, some of those old highways looked interesting, and many of them were much longer than what remains today. I wish US-99 was still around...

[agentsteel53]

just noticed 37 running all the way up to Monticello. Is that 121 now?  I can't quite correlate it with the modern map.

[NE2]

Most likely 37 ended at 28 south of Monticello. Yes, that's 121.

[DTComposer]

just noticed 37 running all the way up to Monticello. Is that 121 now?  I can't quite correlate it with the modern map.

Yes, the southern part is still around as 121. The northern part is, I believe, Steele Canyon Road (not a state highway) and ran to Monticello, which is now underneath Lake Berryessa. What was 28 then ran southeast through what is now the Putah Creek portion of the lake, where it joins up with the present highway (128).

[agentsteel53]

which is now underneath Lake Berryessa

that explains why I am having so much trouble reconciling the two!  usually I'm quite good at looking at a new map and plucking out the old alignment ... being under a lake makes things a tad more difficult

[NE2]

I recommend old topos: http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/topo/250k/ (Santa Rosa covers this area, and they have pre- and post-lake)