CA-58 and I-40

[Quillz]

I believe the idea behind CalTRANS turning all of CA-58 between Bakersfield and Barstow a freeway is so that one day it will become a westward extension of I-40. Now, I'm curious if CA-58 will be truncated to Bakersfield or if it will remain concurrent with I-40.

Ideally, I think they would want I-40 to end at an Interstate highway (I-5).  Of course, CA-99 is proposed to be an Interstate (I-9), so I-40 ending there wouldn't be too bad (and they could run it concurrent with CA-99 to I-5 if they really wanted to).

That's what I was thinking... The proposed Interstate 9 would run from Wheeler Ridge to Stockton (along CA-4), and then you could either route I-40 further west to Buttonwillow along CA-58 or have it concurrent with CA-99/Future I-9 down to Wheeler Ridge.

I remember at one point in time there was an actual plan to try to bring I-70 to California, possibly to Fresno or Merced. I don't think it's even geographically possible, though.

[KEK Inc.]

I believe the idea behind CalTRANS turning all of CA-58 between Bakersfield and Barstow a freeway is so that one day it will become a westward extension of I-40. Now, I'm curious if CA-58 will be truncated to Bakersfield or if it will remain concurrent with I-40.

Ideally, I think they would want I-40 to end at an Interstate highway (I-5).  Of course, CA-99 is proposed to be an Interstate (I-9), so I-40 ending there wouldn't be too bad (and they could run it concurrent with CA-99 to I-5 if they really wanted to).

That's what I was thinking... The proposed Interstate 9 would run from Wheeler Ridge to Stockton (along CA-4), and then you could either route I-40 further west to Buttonwillow along CA-58 or have it concurrent with CA-99/Future I-9 down to Wheeler Ridge.

I remember at one point in time there was an actual plan to try to bring I-70 to California, possibly to Fresno or Merced. I don't think it's even geographically possible, though.

Nevada shouldn't be a problem, but going through the Sierras is a big issue.  I'd run it through CA-108 and CA-120 into Stockton (perhaps into the Bay Area and replace I-205/I-580 [between Castro V. and Altamont]/I-238 anyone?).  CA-108 can get narrow in spots, and I believe there's a tunnel, so that would be quite a project.

[TheStranger]

I remember at one point in time there was an actual plan to try to bring I-70 to California, possibly to Fresno or Merced. I don't think it's even geographically possible, though.

I actually don't recall this being anything other than something suggested at roadgeek websites and MTR.  Do yo have any links to documentation of this beyond the speculative stage?

[Kniwt]

I actually don't recall this being anything other than something suggested at roadgeek websites and MTR.  Do yo have any links to documentation of this beyond the speculative stage?

There's no link provided, but California Highways has this:

Back in the sixties, Caltrans wanted to upgrade Route 108 to a freeway all the way over the pass. They had detailed plans drawn up that included a seven mile long tunnel that would start in what is now the Carson Iceberg Wilderness and terminated near the Marine base. The proposal was abandoned due to community opposition.

[Quillz]

I remember at one point in time there was an actual plan to try to bring I-70 to California, possibly to Fresno or Merced. I don't think it's even geographically possible, though.

I actually don't recall this being anything other than something suggested at roadgeek websites and MTR.  Do yo have any links to documentation of this beyond the speculative stage?

I don't, I just recall reading about it, probably related to the Route 108 extension that was also proposed.

[roadfro]

I remember at one point in time there was an actual plan to try to bring I-70 to California, possibly to Fresno or Merced. I don't think it's even geographically possible, though.

I actually don't recall this being anything other than something suggested at roadgeek websites and MTR.  Do yo have any links to documentation of this beyond the speculative stage?

I can't remember the site I saw it on, but this was actually a proposal. I want to say it was listed in a book of proposals for additions to the Interstate system in the 70s. Nevada DOT either proposed or supported the plan, which would have brought I-70 across Nevada roughly following the US 50 corridor.

[KEK Inc.]

I remember at one point in time there was an actual plan to try to bring I-70 to California, possibly to Fresno or Merced. I don't think it's even geographically possible, though.

I actually don't recall this being anything other than something suggested at roadgeek websites and MTR.  Do yo have any links to documentation of this beyond the speculative stage?

I can't remember the site I saw it on, but this was actually a proposal. I want to say it was listed in a book of proposals for additions to the Interstate system in the 70s. Nevada DOT either proposed or supported the plan, which would have brought I-70 across Nevada roughly following the US 50 corridor.

If they were to cut through CA-108, it would probably make more sense to follow the US-6 corridor.

[TheStranger]

I remember at one point in time there was an actual plan to try to bring I-70 to California, possibly to Fresno or Merced. I don't think it's even geographically possible, though.

I actually don't recall this being anything other than something suggested at roadgeek websites and MTR.  Do yo have any links to documentation of this beyond the speculative stage?

I can't remember the site I saw it on, but this was actually a proposal. I want to say it was listed in a book of proposals for additions to the Interstate system in the 70s. Nevada DOT either proposed or supported the plan, which would have brought I-70 across Nevada roughly following the US 50 corridor.

Would it have gone through California, or followed Alt US 50 west to end at I-80 in Fernley?  (One very early US highway map had US 50 following Alt 50 there to end at US 40, instead of continuing to Carson City and Sacramento via South Lake Tahoe)

[Bickendan]

Eh, it could be signed as future I-40, but 5 corners (US-395 jct) and some places in the mountains are going to require some upgrades.  I find it interesting that CA-58 is the only highway in the state that uses MUTCD mile markers.  Generally, California uses its own mile marker system that resets by county, but you have to pull off the road and use an electron microscope to read it.

Couldn't be any worse than the stretch of I-5 north of Yreka.  Last time I was down that way in 2002, the divider between the two sides of the freeway was just paint--no barriers, no physical barriers.

There would be a certain logic with having I-40 go all the way to I-5, but at least the way I perceive things, there are certain California state routes that kind of just have a reputation for being "big deals" on par with US Highways or Interstates as it is.  I'd say CA-58 is in that boat.  I'd also throw CA-89 into the mix as well--it's a sensical way to get to Reno from Medford/Ashland area.

-Alex (Tarkus)

I drove that a week ago and I can vouch that there's jersey barriers, but I know what you meant.  I went 80 up that hill between CA-3 and CA-96.  I travel between Portland and the Bay Area quite frequently, and I believe they retrofitted I-5 north of Weed back in '06. 

They divided the roadway? Aww... I didn't notice driving up (in the dark) back in '08. Now only Montana can claim the undivided interstate

The Siskyou Summit is barely Interstate legal...  It's way too steep, and the runaway truck ramps are placed in retarded places that are steeper than the actual road.


[/quote]That is a fun, fun hill to drive.

[KEK Inc.]

They divided the roadway? Aww... I didn't notice driving up (in the dark) back in '08. Now only Montana can claim the undivided interstate

Yeah.  California did a big retrofit project north of Weed, that included repaving the road and adding a median. 

That is a fun, fun hill [Siskyou Summit] to drive.

Not when you have a 2000 Mercury Mystique I-4 on a 110º day.  My car didn't really make it up the hill.   

I was going 80 up it with my V6 2002 Nissan Maxima at night, though.    It's obviously more fun to drive down it, but I wouldn't want to be in a truck with failing brakes, since ODOT placed the runaway truck ramps in awful places.

[roadfro]

I can't remember the site I saw it on, but this was actually a proposal. I want to say it was listed in a book of proposals for additions to the Interstate system in the 70s. Nevada DOT either proposed or supported the plan, which would have brought I-70 across Nevada roughly following the US 50 corridor.

Would it have gone through California, or followed Alt US 50 west to end at I-80 in Fernley?  (One very early US highway map had US 50 following Alt 50 there to end at US 40, instead of continuing to Carson City and Sacramento via South Lake Tahoe)

From what I recall, the map only showed a rough estimate of the proposed routing in Nevada only. The impression I got was that the proposed I-70 would follow the US 50 corridor westward through Nevada starting roughly near Ely, going through Fallon and Carson City, and entering California on the south side of Lake Tahoe.

What I saw may have been a scan of the "Yellow Book"...I'm still not sure what site and haven't had time to look.

[Revive 755]

I can't remember the site I saw it on, but this was actually a proposal. I want to say it was listed in a book of proposals for additions to the Interstate system in the 70s. Nevada DOT either proposed or supported the plan, which would have brought I-70 across Nevada roughly following the US 50 corridor.

I think you are thinking of Kurumi's site which has a map with 1970 interstate requests that has an I-40 extension to I-5 and a US 50 route from Sacramento to the Utah border:
http://www.kurumi.com/roads/3di/pics/map-isr-1970.jpg

[roadfro]

^ That looks like what I remember, thanks!

[Henry]

I can't remember the site I saw it on, but this was actually a proposal. I want to say it was listed in a book of proposals for additions to the Interstate system in the 70s. Nevada DOT either proposed or supported the plan, which would have brought I-70 across Nevada roughly following the US 50 corridor.

I think you are thinking of Kurumi's site which has a map with 1970 interstate requests that has an I-40 extension to I-5 and a US 50 route from Sacramento to the Utah border:
http://www.kurumi.com/roads/3di/pics/map-isr-1970.jpg

Why, then, wasn't the route connected to Cove Fort? That indeed would've made a great western expansion of I-70, but I don't see this happening for decades, what with US 50's reputation as the Loneliest Road in America.

As for CA 58's "freewayization," I too am under the impression that they're doing this for a possible western extension of I-40; have always been for years. I'd prefer that it follow the CA 58 corridor to at least I-5, rather than go into LA via I-15 and I-210; after all, another I-x0 interstate already goes there (I-10). And though I prefer I-7 for the proposed CA 99 upgrade, I-9 works just as well because at least it honors the Route 99 legacy (even with one less "9" in its designation).

[rschen7754]

Yeah, it seems that from US 395 west to SR 99 SR 58 is above 90% freeway. Doesn't seem like plans have started for anything from I-5 to SR 99 though...

[Quillz]

Yeah, it seems that from US 395 west to SR 99 SR 58 is above 90% freeway. Doesn't seem like plans have started for anything from I-5 to SR 99 though...

I believe that's because any planned I-40 extension would likely only travel as far west as Bakersfield. I see little purpose for I-40 to connect to I-5, as it's located in the rural reaches of the Central Valley. This is also why CA-58 west of Buttonwillow has never been proposed to be widened.

EDIT: If CalTRANS did want I-40 to terminate at I-5, though, it could be accomplished via a concurrency with CA-99 from Bakersfield south to Wheeler Ridge.

[Brandon]

Yeah, it seems that from US 395 west to SR 99 SR 58 is above 90% freeway. Doesn't seem like plans have started for anything from I-5 to SR 99 though...

I believe that's because any planned I-40 extension would likely only travel as far west as Bakersfield. I see little purpose for I-40 to connect to I-5, as it's located in the rural reaches of the Central Valley. This is also why CA-58 west of Buttonwillow has never been proposed to be widened.

EDIT: If CalTRANS did want I-40 to terminate at I-5, though, it could be accomplished via a concurrency with CA-99 from Bakersfield south to Wheeler Ridge.

Through that nasty loop ramp at the C-58 and C-99 interchange?  Better that I-40 goes north than south there.

[agentsteel53]

that would be a really awkwardly-shaped hook on the west end of I-40; much worse than its east end!

and yes that old loop ramp is quite substandard

[rschen7754]

Yeah, it seems that from US 395 west to SR 99 SR 58 is above 90% freeway. Doesn't seem like plans have started for anything from I-5 to SR 99 though...

I believe that's because any planned I-40 extension would likely only travel as far west as Bakersfield. I see little purpose for I-40 to connect to I-5, as it's located in the rural reaches of the Central Valley. This is also why CA-58 west of Buttonwillow has never been proposed to be widened.

EDIT: If CalTRANS did want I-40 to terminate at I-5, though, it could be accomplished via a concurrency with CA-99 from Bakersfield south to Wheeler Ridge.

Through that nasty loop ramp at the C-58 and C-99 interchange?  Better that I-40 goes north than south there.

Yeah, and at Wheeler Ridge you'd need to add a ramp from SR 99 south to I-5 north.

[national highway 1]

A better idea: Why not route future I-40 onto CA 223 to junction I-5?

[Quillz]

They'd have to rebuilt that entire route to Interstate standards. Last time I was on it, I recall it being just two lanes wide for most of its length.

[hm insulators]

Another possibility might be to route I-40's extension to I-5 north along California 99 north of Bakersfield, then west along 46.

[Alps]

There's a difference between Fictional Highways and regular highways. Please, if you want to discuss possible routings, go over to that other board.

[andy3175]

The plan for CA 58 between CA 99 and I-5 is as follows:

http://www.bakersfield.com/news/local/x735122832/New-freeway-builds-on-old-alignment

New freeway builds on old alignment
BY GRETCHEN WENNER AND JAMES BURGER, The Bakersfield Californian
Staff writers gwenner@bakersfield.com, jburger@bakersfield.com
Saturday, Apr 17 2010 12:00 PM

Last Updated Saturday, Apr 17 2010 12:00 PM

Years from now, Bakersfield's "freeway to nowhere" will lose its dead end and Highway 58 will carry drivers to Interstate 5.

Not for a long time, though. Decades, probably.

But with the Westside Parkway finally under construction, a dusty old plan that established a freeway alignment from Mohawk Street to I-5 is getting new life. State transportation officials now plan to link that stretch to Highway 58 and one day adopt it into the state system.

The plan is possible because of the former Kern River Freeway alignment, which city and county officials approved in 1991.

If nothing seems duller than a freeway alignment, keep in mind what happens without one.

Take 58's abrupt halt at the Wild West Shopping Center on Real Road, for example.

The notorious dead end evolved in part because a route west wasn't preserved with an official alignment, said Craig Pope, Kern County's roads commissioner.

Hundreds of homes and businesses will now have to be paved over when the California Department of Transportation, or Caltrans, eventually selects a route connecting 58 to the eastern tip of the Westside Parkway at Mohawk Street.

When an alignment is in place, planners can prevent development from encroaching on the corridor, Pope said.

That's what happened with what's now the Westside Parkway.

"The use by the city and county of the specific plan line process is allowing the construction of over eight miles of new freeway through a metropolitan area without the taking of one single residence or business," wrote Ted Wright, TRIP program manager for the city of Bakersfield, in an e-mail.

The parkway is actually a segment of the former Kern River Freeway, between Mohawk and Heath Road at Stockdale Highway. Even as Bakersfield grew rapidly in recent years, the freeway's path remained untouched because of the 1991 alignment.

West of Heath Road, the freeway alignment continues -- on paper -- along the north side of the Cross Valley Canal, which runs south of Stockdale Highway. It ends about a half mile west of Enos Lane. Environmental documents currently being drawn up by Caltrans extend the route all the way to I-5.

Caltrans looks at the whole stretch -- from 58 to I-5 -- as a three-part plan it has dubbed the Centennial Corridor Project. (It's a different beast than a former route by the same name once planned for downtown Bakersfield.)

Caltrans officials couldn't say when the environmental reports would be finished, but the process started in fall 2008.

The revival of the old route shows how difficult it is to make new freeways come true.

A few years back, local officials had set aside plans for the controversial Kern River Freeway -- renaming the section between Mohawk and Heath as the Westside Parkway -- and were instead pondering a future I-5 connection along Seventh Standard Road.

But in 2005, former Rep. Bill Thomas secured $630 million in federal highway funds for the metro Bakersfield area. Though the Westside Parkway is being built mostly with state and local funds, the Thomas money dramatically altered regional transportation planning here, bringing together city, county and state officials in the Thomas Roads Improvement Program, or TRIP, offices. That's where the Westside Parkway -- and plans for 58's eventual connection to I-5 -- are being hatched.

Caltrans could, of course, change its mind about building the segments that will connect 58 to I-5. But if the pieces come together, the project's backbone will have been the old Kern River Freeway alignment.

"The county did something right back in the '80s," said Cheryl Casdorph, a planner with Kern County's Planning Department.

[andy3175]

On August 2, 2013, the first segment of the Westside Parkway in Bakersfield opened to traffic:

http://www.bakersfieldcalifornian.com/local/breaking-news/x1691371030/Westside-Parkway-Bakersfields-first-new-freeway-in-37-years-opens-to-drivers-with-speeches-patriotic-songs-and-a-classic-car-cruise

With prophetic and playful words, patriotic songs, the snip of a red ribbon, and a promenade of classic cars, Bakersfield on Friday inaugurated a five-mile, $178 million stretch of the Westside Parkway, the city's first new freeway in 37 years. The entire freeway was open by 12:20 p.m. Friday, following speeches by current and former public officials, presentation of colors by the West High School Navy Junior ROTC Cadets, and a performance of "The Star-Spangled Banner" by students in Liberty High School's band camp.

The Parkway begins at Truxtun Avenue in the east, and currently ends at Allen Road in the west, with interchanges at Truxtun Avenue, Mohawk Street, Coffee Road, Calloway Drive, and Allen Road. Planning for it began in the 1980s, with construction starting in 2009. It is the city's first new freeway since the completion of Highway 58 in 1976. Now landscaped with wood chips from the city's solid waste department, the Parkway will receive an estimated $20 million in more permanent – and lush – groundcover once officials find the money. Work began in March on its final, $30.1 million segment, extending the Parkway west to the intersection of Heath Road and Stockdale Highway. That portion is expected to open in 2014. An Environmental Impact Report on the controversial Centennial Corridor freeway segment that will link the Parkway to Highway 58 – southeast of the Parkway's eastern terminus – is expected in late 2013 or early 2014. Ultimately, the entire freeway will connect to Interstate 5.

Regards,
Andy