News:

Thank you for your patience during the Forum downtime while we upgraded the software. Welcome back and see this thread for some new features and other changes to the forum.

Main Menu

🛣 Headlines About California Highways – February 2022

Started by cahwyguy, February 27, 2022, 05:57:10 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

cahwyguy

Well, it's nearly that time again (and close enough for me). Here are your headlines about California Highways for February 2022: https://cahighways.org/wordpress/?p=16230

As always, ready, set, discuss.

P.S.: Still wondering what has happened to Sparker. He hasn't posted since mid September. I miss his insights.

P.P.S.: Update to the California Highway pages should be posted in the next day or two.

Daniel - California Highway Guy ● Highway Site: http://www.cahighways.org/ ●  Blog: http://blog.cahighways.org/ ● Podcast (CA Route by Route): http://caroutebyroute.org/ ● Follow California Highways on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/cahighways


Max Rockatansky

It has always fascinated me that the junction of CA 46 and CA 41 couldn't get an update despite being so infamous that it has become part of pop culture courtesy James Dean (when the former US 466).  Interesting to see CA 41 north to Kettleman referred to as a "Blood Alley."  That certainly isn't an enjoyable stretch and has a surprisingly amount of traffic.  Really CA 41 probably could be justified for a four-lane expressway conversion between CA 46 north CA 198 IMO.

pderocco

Well, a few more miles of CA-138 in Phelan. It's advancing in dribs and drabs. What I want to know is, when are they going to fourlane the road across the railroad tracks and Cajon creek? About six years ago, they spent a little money widening the roadbed, and even the bridge over the creek (although probably not by enough). I would think that would have priority, given that practically everyone who drives the ten miles or so that they've widened ends upon going through that choke point. As does everyone going in and out of Wrightwood.

M3100

I'm curious about the UP rail bridge demolition in Auburn.  Is it really being demolished, or just refurbished?  It's an enormously high bridge over I-80 (if I understand correctly).

Max Rockatansky

Quote from: M3100 on March 04, 2022, 08:39:32 PM
I'm curious about the UP rail bridge demolition in Auburn.  Is it really being demolished, or just refurbished?  It's an enormously high bridge over I-80 (if I understand correctly).

I read it as the structure was being refurbished.

Captured a decent photo the last time I was up in Auburn:

https://flic.kr/p/2mnbB66

ClassicHasClass

Yeah, I love that bridge. It's used a lot, so I interpret it as a refurbishment as well.

mrsman

Volunteers needed for LA Mobility Plan initiative, and a call to fix dangerous 2 Freeway/Glendale Blvd stub (BikinginLA). [...] Streetsblog's Joe Linton calls on Caltrans to fix the 2 Freeway stub, where a bike rider was the victim of a hit-and-run on Glendale Blvd last month. Linton writes that the freeway was part of the infamous Beverly Hills Freeway, which was cancelled in the 1960s when residents of the "wealthier and whiter neighborhoods"  it was supposed to go through rose up against it. Unlike the less wealthy and white neighborhoods that were obliterated to build some of LA's other freeways. Today unfinished freeway merges with heavily travelled, high-speed Glendale Blvd, with its heavily travelled, high-speed slip lanes dangerously dumping freeway traffic onto the boulevard.

There's a video of the hit and run on the bicycle rider here.  Not for the faint of heart, but it seems like the bike rider was able to walk away from the incident:

https://twitter.com/LAPDCTD24/status/1488996895410176005

[IMO, it appears like pure road rage, as the car could have easily passed the biker by going into the left lane.]

While I support an I-710 extension to Pasadena and a CA-2 extension to US 101, knowing that such plans are DOA, I do feel that something constructive should be done as to how these freeway termini interact with surface streets.  710 Certainly gets far more attention, but this incident does speak to the need to construct a safer southern terminus for the 2 freeway.  South of the Fletcher exit, the 2 freeway is 4 lanes SB.  The exit at I-5 can be reconfigured so that only 2 lanes continue south of I-5.  From there, the two lanes should be redirected onto the Glendale Blvd north exit.  Despite its name, traffic exiting here can make the left turn onto Glendale Blvd south, at a better interface with pedestrian and bicycle traffic.  It is absolutely horrendous for bicyclists who are in the right lane to be suddenly thrust in the middle of fast moving traffic



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.