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

California

Started by andy3175, July 20, 2016, 12:17:21 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

sparker

Quote from: paulthemapguy on March 21, 2018, 04:11:27 PM
Hi everyone who is more familiar with California than I.  I am putting together a map of places where I can most efficiently snap a photo of a standalone shield for every state, federal, and Interstate highway in California.  California signs its numbered highways so poorly that I need to check on Google StreetView to find a standing example of a sign before I even can start thinking of photographing one in the wild.  My idea of "conquering"/"clinching" a state is to take a photo of every state, federal, or Interstate highway, so this fits my modus operandae.

I'm encountering a problem, though--I can't find any standalone spade shields for a number of state highways.  I wanted to enlist the help of people who know their way around California, in trying to determine if any signs for these routes still exist in the wild.  Is anyone aware of any standalone cutout shields for the following California highways?  (BGS's and unisigns are not what I'm looking for.)

CA-66, CA-83, CA-112, CA-114, CA-130, CA-153, CA-200, CA-222, CA-259 & CA-710.

This is the map I'm putting together, by the way https://drive.google.com/open?id=1Sfrrmdkzj0UPkJDkVS4V4LAKpo8fh3va&usp=sharing


Addressing your list:  I'm unaware of any remaining CA 66 shields; the victim of relinquishment fever.  You may find some CA 83 shields in central Ontario; check at the intersections of Holt (old US 70/99) and Mission Blvd. to the south of there (old US/CA 60).  There might be some straggler reassurance shields (83 was always sporadic at best), but also some approach shields on Mission Blvd. itself.  You won't find any CA 112 shields at all; it was originally signed as CA 61 -- but most of those shields have disappeared as well.  CA 114 never had any reassurance shields, just trailblazers from US 101 (which seem to have come & gone).  There may be a few actual Caltrans-posted CA 130 shields up on Mt. Hamilton Road near the Lick Observatory; none are left down in San Jose (again, relinquishment).  There was a single CA 153 shield on state park grounds right after the CA 49 junction a few years back; whether it's still there today is unknown to me.  CA 200: can't tell you if any reassurance and/or trailblazer shields still exist.  CA 222: never any shields or BGS reference, just white paddle mileposts.  CA 259: AFAIK, one shield SB right after the overpass from WB 210.  And I don't think D7 ever minted any "CA 710" shields for the north (Pasadena) stub-end of the I-710 freeway; the south (Alhambra) stub-end references I-710 only.  Hope that at least partially answers your questions. 


skluth

I don't think CA 66 exists anymore.

CA 83 - southbound just south of the CA 60 interchange
CA-112 - allegedly unsigned route
CA-114 - ?
CA-130 - eastbound just before Quimby Road (near Jos Grant Park)
CA-15 - ?
CA-200 - possibly hidden
CA-222 - unsigned
CA-259 - unsigned
CA-710 - ?

You might try the California Highways site at https://www.cahighways.org. They have some pics of CA 112 signs, though no standalone shields.

TheStranger

I have photographed Route 112 shields before, back in 2012:
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=6339.msg139285#msg139285

There was a CA 114 shield at the Willow Road/US 101 junction in Menlo Park a couple of years ago, I think it's now gone.

Chris Sampang

sparker

Quote from: skluth on March 21, 2018, 04:49:08 PM
I don't think CA 66 exists anymore.

CA 83 - southbound just south of the CA 60 interchange
CA-112 - allegedly unsigned route
CA-114 - ?
CA-130 - eastbound just before Quimby Road (near Jos Grant Park)
CA-15 - ?
CA-200 - possibly hidden
CA-222 - unsigned
CA-259 - unsigned
CA-710 - ?

You might try the California Highways site at https://www.cahighways.org. They have some pics of CA 112 signs, though no standalone shields.


I was returning to San Jose from Alameda on that very section of unsigned 112 Monday (3/12/18) right where the pictured overhead CA 112 sign was located -- and it isn't there any longer; the only signage is new reflective signage for I-880; nothing referencing CA 112 or even CA 61.  That sign was likely D4 taking things literally, as they do from time to time (e.g., the trailblazer signage on US 101 referencing CA 114 in Menlo Park).  Historically, such signage tends to stay up for a couple of years before removal (usually when maintenance is required).   

silverback1065

california's surface state routes aren't signed well at all in major metros.  i think 66 does still exist, but it's completely unsigned, except on one bgs i believe.  it exists in 2 sections according to wikipedia (which my be old info now)

Max Rockatansky

Quote from: silverback1065 on March 22, 2018, 09:56:46 AM
california's surface state routes aren't signed well at all in major metros.  i think 66 does still exist, but it's completely unsigned, except on one bgs i believe.  it exists in 2 sections according to wikipedia (which my be old info now)

Very little of CA 66 is still under state maintenance.  Daniel details the current relinquishment on CAhighways:

https://www.cahighways.org/065-072.html#066

With so little of the actual route being maintained by Caltrans and the high likelihood of sign theft it probably isn't worth signing 66 anymore.  Seems like it's a trend with Caltrans in general  not signing non-arterial urban surface routes lately. 

sparker

Quote from: Max Rockatansky on March 22, 2018, 11:54:18 AM
Quote from: silverback1065 on March 22, 2018, 09:56:46 AM
california's surface state routes aren't signed well at all in major metros.  i think 66 does still exist, but it's completely unsigned, except on one bgs i believe.  it exists in 2 sections according to wikipedia (which my be old info now)

Very little of CA 66 is still under state maintenance.  Daniel details the current relinquishment on CAhighways:

https://www.cahighways.org/065-072.html#066

With so little of the actual route being maintained by Caltrans and the high likelihood of sign theft it probably isn't worth signing 66 anymore.  Seems like it's a trend with Caltrans in general  not signing non-arterial urban surface routes lately. 

Starting back in 1994, Caltrans seems to have quite deliberately endeavored to de-emphasize (including removal or non-replacement of signage) urban routes, arterial or not (not too many of the latter in greater L.A.); instead steering through traffic to the nearest freeway by default.  I would bet that by 2025 most of the CA 1 surface mileage south of I-10 in D7 will be relinquished -- with the exception of the airport tunnel and possibly the L.A. River crossings; the local jurisdictions, including L.A. County, have shown reluctance to assume maintenance of structures.  About the only surface facility that will likely remain state-maintained will be CA 47 along Alameda Avenue, as part of the port access program (that includes any and all Terminal Island approaches).

Max Rockatansky

#507
Part of CA 132 washed out near Coulterville during heavy rain today:

http://www.fresnobee.com/news/state/california/article206403404.html

CA 120 in Groveland was flowing like a river:

https://www.facebook.com/pgiedt/videos/2035997756414938/?fref=gs&dti=555758981241965&hc_location=group

pderocco

QuoteAll of my signs are laid out by hand using Photoshop.  I don't know of any single program that will do all of this for you automatically.

Visio is a nice drawing program. You can create your own library of shapes, and resize them easily.

pderocco

#509
Quote
The only thing I ever remember about Baker is that it's the site of the "World's Tallest Thermometer".

It was the Bun Boy thermometer. The restaurant has closed, and I don't think anything has opened up in its place. The thermometer itself was working long after, but I don't think it is now.

The Mad Greek Cafe is a pretty good lunch place, if you're passing through. There was a Starbucks in Baker for a while, but it closed. Somehow three of them have survived in Barstow, though. Go figure.


pderocco

Quote from: andy3175 on March 17, 2018, 01:53:08 AM



As usual with newspapers, the picture is unrelated. That's I-10 WB just before the White Water rest area near Palm Springs.


pderocco

Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 26, 2018, 12:38:38 AM
Incidentally when did people start referring to I-5 as "The Grapevine" as opposed as how it was with US 99 and the Ridge Route?   I've always been curious to pinpoint when that nickname changed in the public eye, almost all the old photos of Grapevine Canyon usually have "Ridge Route" attached somewhere as a description.

I know this is a bit stale, but it's interesting. I don't know when the term Grapevine started, but back in the 19th century the Spanish referred to that canyon going down into the Central Valley as Cañada de las Uvas, which roughly means Glen of Grapes. It was clogged with desert wild grape, and a few patches of them still remain. I think people started associating the name with what's really the Five Mile Grade above Castaic because they didn't know where the Grapevine was and just figured it was probably where the two sides of the road got twisted across each other.

I've driven the old Ridge Route a couple of times, before it was closed by a slide in 2005. Last I was up there, a year ago, the northern gate was open, but it has about a foot of deeply rutted dried mud on part of the road, so I didn't dare tackle it with my 2wd car.

silverback1065

is california 1 still closed from last yrs mud slides?

Max Rockatansky

Quote from: silverback1065 on March 23, 2018, 07:43:53 AM
is california 1 still closed from last yrs mud slides?

Yes the Mud Creek Slide is still being repaired.  Essentially you can loop back to G14 via the Nacimiento-Fergusson Road to completed a quasi-through route.

I'm watching the news right now and looking at the Caltrans Quick Map.  So far I've seen the following closures related to the storms the past three days:

-  CA 140 is closed on the El Portal Road due to a rock slide.
-  CA 59 is closed between El Nido and Merced due to a washout.
-  CA 49 is closed between Bear Valley and Moccasin due to a washout.
-  CA 269 is flooded south of CA 198. 
-  CA 1 has several new slides but I don't know how serious any of them are. 

Max Rockatansky

Quote from: pderocco on March 23, 2018, 03:55:22 AM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 26, 2018, 12:38:38 AM
Incidentally when did people start referring to I-5 as "The Grapevine" as opposed as how it was with US 99 and the Ridge Route?   I've always been curious to pinpoint when that nickname changed in the public eye, almost all the old photos of Grapevine Canyon usually have "Ridge Route" attached somewhere as a description.

I know this is a bit stale, but it's interesting. I don't know when the term Grapevine started, but back in the 19th century the Spanish referred to that canyon going down into the Central Valley as Cañada de las Uvas, which roughly means Glen of Grapes. It was clogged with desert wild grape, and a few patches of them still remain. I think people started associating the name with what's really the Five Mile Grade above Castaic because they didn't know where the Grapevine was and just figured it was probably where the two sides of the road got twisted across each other.

I've driven the old Ridge Route a couple of times, before it was closed by a slide in 2005. Last I was up there, a year ago, the northern gate was open, but it has about a foot of deeply rutted dried mud on part of the road, so I didn't dare tackle it with my 2wd car.

I ran the Old Ridge Route and Ridge Route Alternate back in late 2016.  You'd definitely would need something with high clearance and wide tires to make through slide sections of the Old Ridge Route.

IMG_2025 by Max Rockatansky, on Flickr


NE2

Quote from: sparker on March 22, 2018, 10:12:51 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on March 22, 2018, 11:54:18 AM
Quote from: silverback1065 on March 22, 2018, 09:56:46 AM
california's surface state routes aren't signed well at all in major metros.  i think 66 does still exist, but it's completely unsigned, except on one bgs i believe.  it exists in 2 sections according to wikipedia (which my be old info now)

Very little of CA 66 is still under state maintenance.  Daniel details the current relinquishment on CAhighways:

https://www.cahighways.org/065-072.html#066

With so little of the actual route being maintained by Caltrans and the high likelihood of sign theft it probably isn't worth signing 66 anymore.  Seems like it's a trend with Caltrans in general  not signing non-arterial urban surface routes lately. 

Starting back in 1994, Caltrans seems to have quite deliberately endeavored to de-emphasize (including removal or non-replacement of signage) urban routes, arterial or not (not too many of the latter in greater L.A.); instead steering through traffic to the nearest freeway by default.  I would bet that by 2025 most of the CA 1 surface mileage south of I-10 in D7 will be relinquished -- with the exception of the airport tunnel and possibly the L.A. River crossings; the local jurisdictions, including L.A. County, have shown reluctance to assume maintenance of structures.  About the only surface facility that will likely remain state-maintained will be CA 47 along Alameda Avenue, as part of the port access program (that includes any and all Terminal Island approaches).

Since when is Alameda Avenue state maintained?
pre-1945 Florida route log

I accept and respect your identity as long as it's not dumb shit like "identifying as a vaccinated attack helicopter".

sparker

Quote from: NE2 on March 24, 2018, 02:02:53 AM
Quote from: sparker on March 22, 2018, 10:12:51 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on March 22, 2018, 11:54:18 AM
Quote from: silverback1065 on March 22, 2018, 09:56:46 AM
california's surface state routes aren't signed well at all in major metros.  i think 66 does still exist, but it's completely unsigned, except on one bgs i believe.  it exists in 2 sections according to wikipedia (which my be old info now)

Very little of CA 66 is still under state maintenance.  Daniel details the current relinquishment on CAhighways:

https://www.cahighways.org/065-072.html#066

With so little of the actual route being maintained by Caltrans and the high likelihood of sign theft it probably isn't worth signing 66 anymore.  Seems like it's a trend with Caltrans in general  not signing non-arterial urban surface routes lately. 

Starting back in 1994, Caltrans seems to have quite deliberately endeavored to de-emphasize (including removal or non-replacement of signage) urban routes, arterial or not (not too many of the latter in greater L.A.); instead steering through traffic to the nearest freeway by default.  I would bet that by 2025 most of the CA 1 surface mileage south of I-10 in D7 will be relinquished -- with the exception of the airport tunnel and possibly the L.A. River crossings; the local jurisdictions, including L.A. County, have shown reluctance to assume maintenance of structures.  About the only surface facility that will likely remain state-maintained will be CA 47 along Alameda Avenue, as part of the port access program (that includes any and all Terminal Island approaches).

Since when is Alameda Avenue state maintained?

According to cahighways.org:

"In 1982, the language was added to note that Route 47 shall also include that portion of Henry Ford Avenue from Route 47 to Alameda Street and that portion of Alameda Street from Henry Ford Avenue to Route 91........."

The portion of Alameda St. from PCH (CA 1) to CA 91 was improved to a multilane arterial by 2002, at which time it was signed as CA 47; all this was done as part of a demonstration project between the Port of Los Angeles, the City of Los Angeles, and Caltrans.  The portion of Route 47 north of CA 91 was supplanted by the Alameda Corridor rail project; the southern end of that project, where the tracks descend into the trench extending to just south of downtown L.A., is almost directly beneath the CA 91 freeway overpass.  Caltrans performs the maintenance of the CA 47 section of Alameda Avenue; the cost is split between the three entities (port, city, Caltrans). 

The last time I was in the area was 2011; at that time the expressway segment from just north of PCH south to the CA 47/103 merge just north of the Heim Bridge was in the initial stages of construction, as was the bridge replacement itself.  It would be useful if current L.A. area posters could update the forum as to the current status of the project.

NE2

I'm pretty sure that part of SR 47 isn't included in Caltrans GIS data. It is signed but that doesn't always translate to maintenance.
pre-1945 Florida route log

I accept and respect your identity as long as it's not dumb shit like "identifying as a vaccinated attack helicopter".

Occidental Tourist

Quote from: sparker on March 24, 2018, 03:38:20 AM
The last time I was in the area was 2011; at that time the expressway segment from just north of PCH south to the CA 47/103 merge just north of the Heim Bridge was in the initial stages of construction, as was the bridge replacement itself.  It would be useful if current L.A. area posters could update the forum as to the current status of the project.

The northbound viaduct, roadway, and bridge are completed and carrying both directions of traffic as of a couple of months ago.

sparker

Quote from: Occidental Tourist on March 28, 2018, 10:16:20 AM
Quote from: sparker on March 24, 2018, 03:38:20 AM
The last time I was in the area was 2011; at that time the expressway segment from just north of PCH south to the CA 47/103 merge just north of the Heim Bridge was in the initial stages of construction, as was the bridge replacement itself.  It would be useful if current L.A. area posters could update the forum as to the current status of the project.

The northbound viaduct, roadway, and bridge are completed and carrying both directions of traffic as of a couple of months ago.

Thanks!  I'll have to check it out when I'm down there this fall. 

sparker

Looks like the initial phase of the CA 132 freeway project in Modesto, extending west from CA 99 north of the present 99/108/132 interchange, got FHWA approval (a FONSI) and is slated to break ground in a bit over a year.  Interestingly -- as anyone who's driven NB on CA 99 through the area has likely observed, this project uses much of the grading done when the 132 was originally planned and when the 99 freeway was constructed through Modesto in the early '60's.  Prior to the 1957 relocation of I-5 to the Westside/LRN 238 freeway, where it resides today, this interchange would have functioned as the southern split between I-5E and I-5W, with the latter branch turning west parallel to existing CA 132. 

The plans for the new freeway (which will be constructed further west as an expressway in phase 2)are interesting in that they call for an extension of the new freeway east across the UP tracks to Needham Street north of downtown Modesto -- but it appears that CA 132 will not actually merge with the main CA 99 carriageways but parallel them on the outside and merge with the existing N-S couplet flanking the existing freeway and forming the present access from 99 to 108/132.  Since the project includes revising much of CA 99 in the area, one wonders if that includes raising or rebuilding the lower-than-standard overcrossings (a common thing for CA freeways designed and built in the late '50's and early '60's), some of which are well below 15' clearance.

The project specs can be found at: http://www.dot.ca.gov/d10/x-project-sr132west.html     

NE2

Why wouldn't 132 use Needham to 14th?
pre-1945 Florida route log

I accept and respect your identity as long as it's not dumb shit like "identifying as a vaccinated attack helicopter".

skluth

Quote from: NE2 on April 02, 2018, 03:21:07 PM
Why wouldn't 132 use Needham to 14th?

I imagine future GPS apps will route traffic along the Needham to Downey to 19th to La Loma to Yosemite. Who knows what California will do?

sparker

Quote from: skluth on April 02, 2018, 03:34:46 PM
Quote from: NE2 on April 02, 2018, 03:21:07 PM
Why wouldn't 132 use Needham to 14th?

I imagine future GPS apps will route traffic along the Needham to Downey to 19th to La Loma to Yosemite. Who knows what California will do?

Caltrans is loath to assume maintenance of any streets it's currently not maintaining; and the city of Modesto would also probably balk at assuming maintenance of the structures along the current CA 132 alignment.  Thus the path of least resistance for Caltrans is to plop eastward 132 traffic right onto the existing facility.  If GPS/Waze apps select another and possibly more efficient path, then that's what'll occur regardless of who maintains the routing.  The Needham cutoff would be more applicable to eastbound 108 traffic than 132 in any case, since 132 multiplexes SSE with Biz 99 around the city center before eventually reaching Yosemite Ave.   



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.