I-680 over the Benicia-Martinez Bridge and the legacy/history of CA 21

[Max Rockatansky]

Recently while on a trip to the Bay Area I drove over Carquinez Straight via I-680 on the 2007 Benicia-Martinez Bridge.  Really no conversation regarding I-680 can be had without CA 21 since it largely was built directly over the corridor.  There was some interesting findings I had while researching the map history of CA 21.  First; there is a chance that CA 21 was signed on non-state roads from Pleasant Hill to the ferry in Martinez from the early 1940s until LRN 75 was officially given a spur route.  Secondly; I never found any evidence that CA 21 ever extended beyond Warm Springs on official state highway maps to San Jose via LRN 5.

https://surewhynotnow.blogspot.com/2019/02/interstate-680-over-benicia-martinez.html

My photo set for the Benicia-Martinez Bridge/I-680 can be found below:

https://flic.kr/s/aHsmAAvVfY

[sparker]

Recently while on a trip to the Bay Area I drove over Carquinez Straight via I-680 on the 2007 Benicia-Martinez Bridge.  Really no conversation regarding I-680 can be had without CA 21 since it largely was built directly over the corridor.  There was some interesting findings I had while researching the map history of CA 21.  First; there is a chance that CA 21 was signed on non-state roads from Pleasant Hill to the ferry in Martinez from the early 1940s until LRN 75 was officially given a spur route.  Secondly; I never found any evidence that CA 21 ever extended beyond Warm Springs on official state highway maps to San Jose via LRN 5.

https://surewhynotnow.blogspot.com/2019/02/interstate-680-over-benicia-martinez.html

My photo set for the Benicia-Martinez Bridge/I-680 can be found below:

https://flic.kr/s/aHsmAAvVfY

The disposition of SSR 21 between SSR 24/LRN 75 at Pleasant Hill and the Martinez ferry terminal in the 1940's is unclear; I never found mention, much less maps, of any state-maintained surface route in CH&PW until the I-680 alignment was adopted in 1957, when the illustrated map showed the Contra Costa Blvd./Jones St. alignment through southern Martinez in relation to the new freeway, which actually overlaid C.C. Blvd. at its intersection with SSR 4/LRN 106, but shifted east to bypass central Martinez in order to access the Benicia Bridge's alignment previously adopted.

But moving further south along SSR 21 -- prior to the deployment of the freeway network in the South Bay, it never extended as a surface facility any farther than the intersection of Mission Blvd. and Warm Springs Blvd -- the present site of the CA 262/Warm Springs intersection in Fremont.  When the SSR 17 "Nimitz" freeway was completed, SSR 21 was multiplexed with SSR 9 along LRN 5 from the south end of the Sunol Grade (LRN 108) all the way to SSR 17, where SSR 21 terminated as a signed route; until the '64 renumbering, SSR 9 continued as a multiplex on the SSR 17 freeway to Milpitas, where it turned west along what is now CA 237.   

[Max Rockatansky]

Something I'll need to clarify after re-reading the blog post and path of 21 is the maintenance was never likely at state level in Martinez aside from possibly the ferry.  In Benicia it is very clear that section ended up in state hands but most of that route was anyways given it was a segment of LRN 7. 

Speaking of LRN 7 anyone have any idea when US 40 officially shifted to the Carinquz Bridge?  The 1928 State highway map seems to suggest US 40 stayed on the ferry route or was shifted into non-state controlled roads until maybe circa 1930?

[TheStranger]

But moving further south along SSR 21 -- prior to the deployment of the freeway network in the South Bay, it never extended as a surface facility any farther than the intersection of Mission Blvd. and Warm Springs Blvd -- the present site of the CA 262/Warm Springs intersection in Fremont.  When the SSR 17 "Nimitz" freeway was completed, SSR 21 was multiplexed with SSR 9 along LRN 5 from the south end of the Sunol Grade (LRN 108) all the way to SSR 17, where SSR 21 terminated as a signed route; until the '64 renumbering, SSR 9 continued as a multiplex on the SSR 17 freeway to Milpitas, where it turned west along what is now CA 237.   

So Route 262's history can be deduced as such:

- built as Route 9/21 east of Warm Springs Road ca. 1940s
- extended west to the Nimitz Freeway in the 1950s; Route 21 extended west along this entire segment (the only part to ever be built as freeway)
- when I-680 was commissioned in 1957, all of this (today's 262) was part of 680 alignment
- at the 1964 renumbering, 17 was proposed to continue east on all of 262 to then follow the new Milpitas-Alum Rock freeway alignment, with 680 being the only designation on the Nimitz from 262 to 101
- in 1965, 680 shifted to the Milpitas-Alum Rock freeway alignment entirely, 17 legislatively restored to the Nimitz Freeway south of 262 (though had never left), 262 created.  238 along former 17 (Warm Springs Road/Oakland Road) existed until that newer portion of 680 was built, but unclear if 238 was signed along 262 east of Warm Springs Road, or on the former portion of 9/21 on Mission Boulevard between 238 and 262.

[Max Rockatansky]

But moving further south along SSR 21 -- prior to the deployment of the freeway network in the South Bay, it never extended as a surface facility any farther than the intersection of Mission Blvd. and Warm Springs Blvd -- the present site of the CA 262/Warm Springs intersection in Fremont.  When the SSR 17 "Nimitz" freeway was completed, SSR 21 was multiplexed with SSR 9 along LRN 5 from the south end of the Sunol Grade (LRN 108) all the way to SSR 17, where SSR 21 terminated as a signed route; until the '64 renumbering, SSR 9 continued as a multiplex on the SSR 17 freeway to Milpitas, where it turned west along what is now CA 237.   

So Route 262's history can be deduced as such:

- built as Route 9/21 east of Warm Springs Road ca. 1940s
- extended west to the Nimitz Freeway in the 1950s; Route 21 extended west along this entire segment (the only part to ever be built as freeway)
- when I-680 was commissioned in 1957, all of this (today's 262) was part of 680 alignment
- at the 1964 renumbering, 17 was proposed to continue east on all of 262 to then follow the new Milpitas-Alum Rock freeway alignment, with 680 being the only designation on the Nimitz from 262 to 101
- in 1965, 680 shifted to the Milpitas-Alum Rock freeway alignment entirely, 17 legislatively restored to the Nimitz Freeway south of 262 (though had never left), 262 created.  238 along former 17 (Warm Springs Road/Oakland Road) existed until that newer portion of 680 was built, but unclear if 238 was signed along 262 east of Warm Springs Road, or on the former portion of 9/21 on Mission Boulevard between 238 and 262.

Here is what I got regarding the route 262 looking at all the state highway maps:

https://surewhynotnow.blogspot.com/2019/02/interstate-238-interstate-numbering.html

https://surewhynotnow.blogspot.com/2019/02/california-state-route-262.html

Essentially 262 has been tossed around pretty much for the word go even when US Routes were in the area. 

[TheStranger]

But moving further south along SSR 21 -- prior to the deployment of the freeway network in the South Bay, it never extended as a surface facility any farther than the intersection of Mission Blvd. and Warm Springs Blvd -- the present site of the CA 262/Warm Springs intersection in Fremont.  When the SSR 17 "Nimitz" freeway was completed, SSR 21 was multiplexed with SSR 9 along LRN 5 from the south end of the Sunol Grade (LRN 108) all the way to SSR 17, where SSR 21 terminated as a signed route; until the '64 renumbering, SSR 9 continued as a multiplex on the SSR 17 freeway to Milpitas, where it turned west along what is now CA 237.   

So Route 262's history can be deduced as such:

- built as Route 9/21 east of Warm Springs Road ca. 1940s
- extended west to the Nimitz Freeway in the 1950s; Route 21 extended west along this entire segment (the only part to ever be built as freeway)
- when I-680 was commissioned in 1957, all of this (today's 262) was part of 680 alignment
- at the 1964 renumbering, 17 was proposed to continue east on all of 262 to then follow the new Milpitas-Alum Rock freeway alignment, with 680 being the only designation on the Nimitz from 262 to 101
- in 1965, 680 shifted to the Milpitas-Alum Rock freeway alignment entirely, 17 legislatively restored to the Nimitz Freeway south of 262 (though had never left), 262 created.  238 along former 17 (Warm Springs Road/Oakland Road) existed until that newer portion of 680 was built, but unclear if 238 was signed along 262 east of Warm Springs Road, or on the former portion of 9/21 on Mission Boulevard between 238 and 262.

Here is what I got regarding the route 262 looking at all the state highway maps:

https://surewhynotnow.blogspot.com/2019/02/interstate-238-interstate-numbering.html

https://surewhynotnow.blogspot.com/2019/02/california-state-route-262.html

Essentially 262 has been tossed around pretty much for the word go even when US Routes were in the area.

Thanks for the links! It is crazy to think how that short connector at various points has been part of two different past US routes.

SAMSUNG-SM-G930A

[Max Rockatansky]

But moving further south along SSR 21 -- prior to the deployment of the freeway network in the South Bay, it never extended as a surface facility any farther than the intersection of Mission Blvd. and Warm Springs Blvd -- the present site of the CA 262/Warm Springs intersection in Fremont.  When the SSR 17 "Nimitz" freeway was completed, SSR 21 was multiplexed with SSR 9 along LRN 5 from the south end of the Sunol Grade (LRN 108) all the way to SSR 17, where SSR 21 terminated as a signed route; until the '64 renumbering, SSR 9 continued as a multiplex on the SSR 17 freeway to Milpitas, where it turned west along what is now CA 237.   

So Route 262's history can be deduced as such:

- built as Route 9/21 east of Warm Springs Road ca. 1940s
- extended west to the Nimitz Freeway in the 1950s; Route 21 extended west along this entire segment (the only part to ever be built as freeway)
- when I-680 was commissioned in 1957, all of this (today's 262) was part of 680 alignment
- at the 1964 renumbering, 17 was proposed to continue east on all of 262 to then follow the new Milpitas-Alum Rock freeway alignment, with 680 being the only designation on the Nimitz from 262 to 101
- in 1965, 680 shifted to the Milpitas-Alum Rock freeway alignment entirely, 17 legislatively restored to the Nimitz Freeway south of 262 (though had never left), 262 created.  238 along former 17 (Warm Springs Road/Oakland Road) existed until that newer portion of 680 was built, but unclear if 238 was signed along 262 east of Warm Springs Road, or on the former portion of 9/21 on Mission Boulevard between 238 and 262.

Here is what I got regarding the route 262 looking at all the state highway maps:

https://surewhynotnow.blogspot.com/2019/02/interstate-238-interstate-numbering.html

https://surewhynotnow.blogspot.com/2019/02/california-state-route-262.html

Essentially 262 has been tossed around pretty much for the word go even when US Routes were in the area.

Thanks for the links! It is crazy to think how that short connector at various points has been part of two different past US routes.

SAMSUNG-SM-G930A

It's one of the weirdest numbering quirks in the entire state highway system in my opinion.  Not only that tiny piece of 262 managed to hang on but it's still relevant today.  It might not even be around as a state highway if 237 was completed to plan.  Personally I think it would be amusing throw up some Historic US 48/101E shields just for fun.  I'm surprised actually there had never really been a push to sign historic US Routes in the Bay Area...at least none that I'm aware of (aside from Hyde Street Pier).   

[TheStranger]

It's one of the weirdest numbering quirks in the entire state highway system in my opinion.  Not only that tiny piece of 262 managed to hang on but it's still relevant today.  It might not even be around as a state highway if 237 was completed to plan.  Personally I think it would be amusing throw up some Historic US 48/101E shields just for fun.  I'm surprised actually there had never really been a push to sign historic US Routes in the Bay Area...at least none that I'm aware of (aside from Hyde Street Pier).   

I'm not 100% sure but I feel like I've seen some historic US 40 signage on San Pablo Avenue in Contra Costa County.  I know I've seen it in Vallejo in the past.

As to why historic US route signage is extremely rare out here: My feeling is that with US 101 still an active route, signing its historic alignment could potentially induce confusion (as opposed to when "Historic 66" is the only 66-numbered road in the area, due to I-40 and I-15 and Route 210 etc. being the modern through routes).

--

The 262 corridor is an example of one road out here that has spent time over the years as a US route, a state route, and (briefly) as a (planned) Interstate - though not quite as dramatically as the Harbor Freeway (variously US 6, Route 11, and I-110).  Similar situation would be the Southern Freeway in SF (US 101, Route 82 briefly, then I-280).    262's uniqueness comes from how many different numbered designations have been on that segment of road (48, 101E, 9, 21, 17, 680, 238, 262) - might be the most of any stretch of road in California.

[Max Rockatansky]

It's one of the weirdest numbering quirks in the entire state highway system in my opinion.  Not only that tiny piece of 262 managed to hang on but it's still relevant today.  It might not even be around as a state highway if 237 was completed to plan.  Personally I think it would be amusing throw up some Historic US 48/101E shields just for fun.  I'm surprised actually there had never really been a push to sign historic US Routes in the Bay Area...at least none that I'm aware of (aside from Hyde Street Pier).   

I'm not 100% sure but I feel like I've seen some historic US 40 signage on San Pablo Avenue in Contra Costa County.  I know I've seen it in Vallejo in the past.

As to why historic US route signage is extremely rare out here: My feeling is that with US 101 still an active route, signing its historic alignment could potentially induce confusion (as opposed to when "Historic 66" is the only 66-numbered road in the area, due to I-40 and I-15 and Route 210 etc. being the modern through routes).

--

The 262 corridor is an example of one road out here that has spent time over the years as a US route, a state route, and (briefly) as a (planned) Interstate - though not quite as dramatically as the Harbor Freeway (variously US 6, Route 11, and I-110).  Similar situation would be the Southern Freeway in SF (US 101, Route 82 briefly, then I-280).    262's uniqueness comes from how many different numbered designations have been on that segment of road (48, 101E, 9, 21, 17, 680, 238, 262) - might be the most of any stretch of road in California.

Even more so parts of US 101 in San Francisco are still on the original alignment on Van Ness.  I can confirm Historic US 40 is signed in Fairfield and Dixon but those are more of the fringe of the Bay Area I suppose.  I didn't see anything on CA 123 and San Pablo Avenue south of CA 13.  Altamont Pass seems like it would be prime for historic signage given that was a primary path of travel all the way back to the El Camino Viejo and even Lincoln Highway.

Regarding 262 it has by far carried the most designations of any highway I've encountered in California. 

[TheStranger]

Even more so parts of US 101 in San Francisco are still on the original alignment on Van Ness.  I can confirm Historic US 40 is signed in Fairfield and Dixon but those are more of the fringe of the Bay Area I suppose.  I didn't see anything on CA 123 and San Pablo Avenue south of CA 13.  Altamont Pass seems like it would be prime for historic signage given that was a primary path of travel all the way back to the El Camino Viejo and even Lincoln Highway.

While parts of old US 66 along State Route 66 in the Inland Empire are signed as Historic 66 or even as US 66 straight up, since the highway itself is officially 66 it isn't too much of an issue.  (Compare to when "Historic Route 163" signage was placed on the Cabrillo Freeway in San Diego some years ago, when the historic designation actually is US 395.)

Between Lombard and Turk Street, Van Ness Avenue has always been US 101 in that stretch since the early 1930s.  South of Turk to Fell Street, it has been part of the route from the 1930s to 1956, and then again from 1989-present.   From Fell to Market, it was part of the original US 101/US 101W, then bypassed ca. 1935-1936 by the Fell-10th-Potrero routing, then re-added in 1956 as a temporary connector to the Central Freeway, before becoming permanently part of the route again after 1989 (along with the 1956-era South Van Ness connection).

Regarding 262 it has by far carried the most designations of any highway I've encountered in California. 

The most interesting part is that of all the designations that 262 has had, only 680 has not been signed in some form on there as far as I know (though we haven't seen any photos of signage during the early 60s to verify this).

[sparker]

^^^^^^^^
Post-'64 renumbering, what is now CA 262 retained -- on a strictly temporary basis -- a CA 21 designation until about 1967.  It was legislatively a part of I-680 until the 1965 San Jose rerouting; at that time it became Route 262, but only on the very short segment from (then) CA 17 to Warm Springs Road, which still carried the designation of CA 238.  That route retained signage north on Old Oakland Road from US 101 into Milpitas, then on Main Street in Milpitas, which segued into Warm Springs Road north of downtown.  238 used Warm Springs north to Mission Blvd., where it turned east, multiplexed, signage-wise, with CA 21 to the foot of the Sunol Grade; CA 238 continued north on Mission Blvd. to Niles and Hayward, while the signed CA 21 -- legislatively 680 -- headed over the hill to Sunol.  That segment was taken out of service circa 1967 so that the I-680 freeway could be laid directly over its alignment; traffic was detoured along CA 84 through Niles Canyon in the interim.  In the meantime, I-680 had been steadily built south through Danville and Dublin; construction had reached the Pleasanton area by late 1968.  The stretch from Pleasanton through Sunol and over the hill into Fremont was opened to traffic in 1969, at which time all CA 21 signage south of the Benicia Bridge was removed.  FYI, most of the last remaining 21 shields were still black-and-white 1953 or 1957 post "bear" spec, some with button copy -- something I noticed on a trip to the Bay Area (I was a student at UC Riverside at the time) in late winter 1969, just before the last stretch of I-680 north of Fremont was completed.  A later trip (fall 1970) showed signage from NB CA 17 indicating "TO I-680"; that sort of signage, accompanied by CA 238 reassurance shields east of Warm Springs Blvd, continued to the interim southern end of I-680 at the present 680/238 interchange in east Fremont.  By that time, I-680's next construction phase, south to Calaveras Blvd. in Milpitas (aka CA 237's eastern extension, also U.C. at the time), was well under way; it opened in spring 1971.  Two years later, CA 238's surface routing from north San Jose to present CA 262 was relinquished and signage removed; it was truncated back to its current southern end, and the portion from Warm Springs east to the I-680 freeway was allotted to CA 262 -- and the section of CA 238 between the two Mission Blvd. interchanges was also relinquished (made redundant by I-680).  Of course, there was a CA 238 freeway planned from the big I-680 curve in Fremont north to I-580 in Hayward, but that project, long formally adopted, was stopped by local protestation; the freeway alignment itself was revoked in 1976 and all properties previously purchased for the ROW were resold.     

[bing101]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uDANVQqVNiA&lc=z23yhvpxtsfijtzmcacdp432gfkerogbz4wmjj11qndw03c010c.1552083393216043


Asphalt Planet does a segment on I-680.

[bing101]

Justin Yee and the ROckersk08 Crew did a tour of I-680.



   

[bing101]

There used to be a CA-21 GreenOut on I-780 for northbound I-680 in Benicia and this was prior to the I-680 @ I-780 interchange being renovated to make way for the new Northbound Benicia Bridge.

[sparker]

There used to be a CA-21 GreenOut on I-780 for northbound I-680 in Benicia and this was prior to the I-680 @ I-780 interchange being renovated to make way for the new Northbound Benicia Bridge.

Greenouts have been common on most of Caltrans' BGS's statewide, particularly on the darker green porcelain signs dating from the '60's; this included the approach signs on both I-80 (north end) and I-680 (south end) for the short section of CA 21 remaining after I-680 was completed over the former SSR 21 alignment in its original iteration.  I recall my first time using the CA 21 freeway between Benicia and Fairfield in the summer of 1970, not long after the freeway upgrade had been completed; it was very well signed from both directions, but was greened out some five years later when 680 was realigned over it and the Benicia-Vallejo segment became I-780.  D4 is famous/notorious for holding on to the old porcelain signs as long as possible, generally only replacing them when the facilities themselves are upgraded.  This has led to the area being "greenout central", particularly with those signs that showed the old state highway symbols in pre-'64 black-on-white; there were a lot of those on US 101 and the old CA 17 freeway (now I-880).  The CA 21 signage since greened-out with I-680 shields (some just 36x36 reassurance shields green-backed and pasted over the "21" shields) persisted until the 2nd bridge reconfiguration that moved the toll booths from the north to the south side of the twin bridges.       

[TheStranger]

When I think of ancient District 4 signage, I think of the couple of examples on I-80 in Vacaville on pull-through signage eastbound, with blank spaces where a US 40 shield was removed. In the right light, the outline of the old shield can still be noticed!

[bing101]

When I think of ancient District 4 signage, I think of the couple of examples on I-80 in Vacaville on pull-through signage eastbound, with blank spaces where a US 40 shield was removed. In the right light, the outline of the old shield can still be noticed!

True most parts of Solano county has their Button Copy removed except for a few areas. I know San Francisco proper has no Button copy as of this posting and they all have retroreflective signs.

[TheStranger]

I know San Francisco proper has no Button copy as of this posting and they all have retroreflective signs.

This isn't entirely the case.

The onramp for US 101 south at 10th Street is button copy, while there are two onramp signs for I-80 east that are plastic with non-working internal lighting, one at 5th Street and one at 1st Street.  (The technology is similar to the backlit I-80/I-780 sign in Vallejo)

[sparker]

I know San Francisco proper has no Button copy as of this posting and they all have retroreflective signs.

This isn't entirely the case.

The onramp for US 101 south at 10th Street is button copy, while there are two onramp signs for I-80 east that are plastic with non-working internal lighting, one at 5th Street and one at 1st Street.  (The technology is similar to the backlit I-80/I-780 sign in Vallejo)

Most Caltrans districts tend to replace signage on the main highway well before trailblazer signage on adjoining surface streets; this observation is particularly valid in urban areas such as S.F. 

[TheStranger]

I know San Francisco proper has no Button copy as of this posting and they all have retroreflective signs.

This isn't entirely the case.

The onramp for US 101 south at 10th Street is button copy, while there are two onramp signs for I-80 east that are plastic with non-working internal lighting, one at 5th Street and one at 1st Street.  (The technology is similar to the backlit I-80/I-780 sign in Vallejo)

Most Caltrans districts tend to replace signage on the main highway well before trailblazer signage on adjoining surface streets; this observation is particularly valid in urban areas such as S.F. 

It's been a couple of years since I've driven on the Santa Ana Freeway portion of US 101 - are the narrow one-line overhead exit signs still around in that area?  Those seem to be very late 50s

[bing101]

I know San Francisco proper has no Button copy as of this posting and they all have retroreflective signs.

This isn't entirely the case.

The onramp for US 101 south at 10th Street is button copy, while there are two onramp signs for I-80 east that are plastic with non-working internal lighting, one at 5th Street and one at 1st Street.  (The technology is similar to the backlit I-80/I-780 sign in Vallejo)

Most Caltrans districts tend to replace signage on the main highway well before trailblazer signage on adjoining surface streets; this observation is particularly valid in urban areas such as S.F. 

I know in Burbank on the surface streets connected to I-5 North ramp Control Cities still say Bakersfield  even though Caltrans has been using Sacramento as its Control City for North I-5 for 4 decades.

[Techknow]

I know San Francisco proper has no Button copy as of this posting and they all have retroreflective signs.

This isn't entirely the case.

Anecdotal examples from me: Driving northbound I-280 when entering SF, the guide sign at the Geneva Avenue exit that said CCSF and Cow Palace is button copy. And when driving southbound towards the Monterey Blvd exit, the "City College Sunset Blvd" sign is also button copy. Perhaps all freeway overhead signs in SF are all retroreflective, but not all of them on freeway

[TheStranger]

Just remembered the last button copy pull through in SF:
280 north at Cesar Chavez!

Here's the specific spot on Google Maps:

https://www.google.com/maps/@37.7420939,-122.397712,3a,75y,20.07h,92.82t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sIRdMRIKms9-EIPez1ENe1w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

[DTComposer]

Most if not all of the signage has been replaced along US-101 on the southern Peninsula, but two interesting examples remain:

-On US-101 south in Mountain View, the pull-through sign with the old outline-style US shield, and the green-out panel above that covers "BYPASS"
https://www.google.com/maps/@37.4211476,-122.0929846,3a,37.5y,124.14h,99.41t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sgGfriX1uJMenbNzgttaFMw!2e0!3e11!7i16384!8i8192

-On US-101 north in Sunnyvale, referring to the former surface road name of CA-237 (which has been freeway for 20+ years), also with green-out replacing the abbreviation "Mt" with "Mtn"
https://www.google.com/maps/@37.4006574,-122.0349021,3a,75y,320.98h,86.8t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sNM5lhXM4Q5cBBVfVy_A9_g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

[Max Rockatansky]

Most if not all of the signage has been replaced along US-101 on the southern Peninsula, but two interesting examples remain:

-On US-101 south in Mountain View, the pull-through sign with the old outline-style US shield, and the green-out panel above that covers "BYPASS"
https://www.google.com/maps/@37.4211476,-122.0929846,3a,37.5y,124.14h,99.41t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sgGfriX1uJMenbNzgttaFMw!2e0!3e11!7i16384!8i8192

I've actually captured a picture of that old US 101 green-out shield myself:

101USk by Max Rockatansky, on Flickr