CA 99 - The Final Countdown

[707]

With the interchanges between Chowchilla and Merced completed, it seems SR 99 is now a freeway from I-5 at Wheeler Ridge to US 50/I-80 BUS in Sacramento. This marks a sad end of an era for US 99 fans. At the same time, it made me want to ask a question and start a thread to keep tabs on the final years of CA 99. Where do the final upgrades to Interstate standards need to be made/are being made in preparation to turn CA 99 into an Interstate?

[Henry]

There are still some substandard sections that need to be upgraded before it can become an Interstate. And seeing that CA forbids route duplication, what will become of CA 7 and/or CA 9 if the corresponding Interstate number is assigned to the Wheeler Ridge-Sacramento section? I must agree, though, that it would be sad to see another part of old US 99 go.

[coatimundi]

There is still a ton of US 99 left. In pretty much any town in the valley with a "Golden State Avenue", that's 99, and most towns have it. It's even in some rural areas, and it's even numbered in places. It would be nice to get some "Historic 99" signs up along that stretch like we already have in the San Fernando Valley. May pump some much-needed tourist traffic into the old route in northern Fresno.

There's way too much work to do to get CA 99 up to modern interstate standards anytime soon.

[The Ghostbuster]

I would hold off on The Final Countdown. CA 99 between Mettler and Sacramento will likely be around for some time to come.

[wdcrft63]

Is there any official commitment to get CA 99 up to interstate standards?

[kkt]

With the interchanges between Chowchilla and Merced completed, it seems SR 99 is now a freeway from I-5 at Wheeler Ridge to US 50/I-80 BUS in Sacramento. This marks a sad end of an era for US 99 fans. At the same time, it made me want to ask a question and start a thread to keep tabs on the final years of CA 99. Where do the final upgrades to Interstate standards need to be made/are being made in preparation to turn CA 99 into an Interstate?

California doesn't care nearly as much as, say, Arizona, Texas, or N.C. about whether a route is an interstate or a state route freeway.  And why should they?  Interstates don't come with any more maintenance or construction money than any other part of the national highway system.  An interstate would mean that if they ever wanted to reroute it they'd have to get permission.  And there'd be signs and maps to change.

Yes, CA 7 or CA 9 would have to get their number changed.  Not a huge expense, but some, and unpopular with people who live near them.

I'd also be interested in the answer to the poster's question, though, about what specific areas of 99 south of US 50 would need to be upgraded to qualify as an interstate today.

[myosh_tino]

From my understanding, the biggest issue pertains to interchange spacing and vertical clearance.  IINM, modern Interstate standards specify a minimum distance of 1 mile between interchanges and a minimum vertical clearance of 14-16 ft depending on the surroundings.

Because of the age of CA-99, there are numerous overpasses that are not up to Interstate standards for vertical clearance and would need to either be replaced or raised.  Either way, the cost would be substantial.

Edit: Boy is my grammar horrible right now...

[kkt]

From my understanding, the biggest issue pertains to interchange spacing and vertical clearance issues.  IINM, modern Interstate standards specify a minimum distance of 1 mile between interchanges and a minimum vertical clearance of 14-16 ft depending on the surroundings.

Because of the age of CA-99, there are numerous overpasses that are not up to Interstate standards for vertical clearance and would need to either be replaced or raised.  Either way, the cost to modify or replace all of the substandard overpasses would be substantial.

Thanks!

[brad2971]

With the interchanges between Chowchilla and Merced completed, it seems SR 99 is now a freeway from I-5 at Wheeler Ridge to US 50/I-80 BUS in Sacramento. This marks a sad end of an era for US 99 fans. At the same time, it made me want to ask a question and start a thread to keep tabs on the final years of CA 99. Where do the final upgrades to Interstate standards need to be made/are being made in preparation to turn CA 99 into an Interstate?

California doesn't care nearly as much as, say, Arizona, Texas, or N.C. about whether a route is an interstate or a state route freeway.  And why should they?  Interstates don't come with any more maintenance or construction money than any other part of the national highway system.  An interstate would mean that if they ever wanted to reroute it they'd have to get permission.  And there'd be signs and maps to change.

Yes, CA 7 or CA 9 would have to get their number changed.  Not a huge expense, but some, and unpopular with people who live near them.

I'd also be interested in the answer to the poster's question, though, about what specific areas of 99 south of US 50 would need to be upgraded to qualify as an interstate today.

Frankly, SR 7 is for all intents and purposes, a glorified border crossing. I doubt locals in Imperial County would care if you gave that new highway another number.

SR 9, OTOH, well...let's just not go there. Too many coastal folks all too willing to get in a snit over changing that.

[BakoCondors]

From my understanding, the biggest issue pertains to interchange spacing and vertical clearance.  IINM, modern Interstate standards specify a minimum distance of 1 mile between interchanges and a minimum vertical clearance of 14-16 ft depending on the surroundings.

Because of the age of CA-99, there are numerous overpasses that are not up to Interstate standards for vertical clearance and would need to either be replaced or raised.  Either way, the cost would be substantial.

Edit: Boy is my grammar horrible right now...

Tulare County's portion of 99 is woefully inadequate, most of it having been built in the mid-to-late 1950s and never modified. There is work ongoing to add lanes but ramp configurations and curvatures are almost certainly substandard. In my neck of the woods, Kern County, much upgrade work has been done to the 99 over the last 30 years or so, altering the freeway originally built between 1963 and 1971. I would wager that most of it is at or close to Interstate standard everywhere in the county, with the exception of the city of Delano, another 1950s relic with unusual ramp placements and configurations.

[Max Rockatansky]

From my understanding, the biggest issue pertains to interchange spacing and vertical clearance.  IINM, modern Interstate standards specify a minimum distance of 1 mile between interchanges and a minimum vertical clearance of 14-16 ft depending on the surroundings.

Because of the age of CA-99, there are numerous overpasses that are not up to Interstate standards for vertical clearance and would need to either be replaced or raised.  Either way, the cost would be substantial.

Edit: Boy is my grammar horrible right now...

Tulare County's portion of 99 is woefully inadequate, most of it having been built in the mid-to-late 1950s and never modified. There is work ongoing to add lanes but ramp configurations and curvatures are almost certainly substandard. In my neck of the woods, Kern County, much upgrade work has been done to the 99 over the last 30 years or so, altering the freeway originally built between 1963 and 1971. I would wager that most of it is at or close to Interstate standard everywhere in the county, with the exception of the city of Delano, another 1950s relic with unusual ramp placements and configurations.

Exit 58 even has a relic right-on/right-off ramp in the north bound lanes at Girard Street.  The best part is that they are mostly relic right on/right off ramps.  Girard Street has a big one in the northbound lanes at exit 58 while there are twin pair of them on Ellington and Fremont.  Definitely showing their age on all of them with the ramp design but still neat to see.

[Concrete Bob]

Quite honestly, I am just happy that CA 99 is (or will be) a freeway from Sacramento to Wheeler Ridge.  I believe SR 99 is now the longest non-tolled, non-interstate freeway in the United States.   

Besides Tulare County, there are still some "substandard" freeway sections of CA 99 through  Chowchilla and north of Lodi towards Elk Grove in Sacramento County. 

I am all for having CA 99 be signed as either I-7 or I-9. Without deviating into "fictitious territory."  I would like to see the routing continue up the Business 80 corridor (CA 51) to the junction with I -80.  Caltrans and local officials are looking at upgrading this section to modern interstate standards, and I think it is a natural terminous for the route, if it is ever re-designated as either I -7 or I -9.

[jeffe]

From my understanding, the biggest issue pertains to interchange spacing and vertical clearance.  IINM, modern Interstate standards specify a minimum distance of 1 mile between interchanges and a minimum vertical clearance of 14-16 ft depending on the surroundings.

Because of the age of CA-99, there are numerous overpasses that are not up to Interstate standards for vertical clearance and would need to either be replaced or raised.  Either way, the cost would be substantial.

Edit: Boy is my grammar horrible right now...

Tulare County's portion of 99 is woefully inadequate, most of it having been built in the mid-to-late 1950s and never modified. There is work ongoing to add lanes but ramp configurations and curvatures are almost certainly substandard. In my neck of the woods, Kern County, much upgrade work has been done to the 99 over the last 30 years or so, altering the freeway originally built between 1963 and 1971. I would wager that most of it is at or close to Interstate standard everywhere in the county, with the exception of the city of Delano, another 1950s relic with unusual ramp placements and configurations.

Caltrans has a map and list of all of the deficiencies on CA-99 that prevent it from meeting Interstate Standards.

The major deficiencies are:

• Vertical Clearance
• Interchange Spacing
• Shoulder Width
• Median Width

The full list of "Interstate 99 Designation Issues" are here: http://www.dot.ca.gov/dist6/planning/inter99impact/

To help with the interchange spacing issues, there is also a map and list of possible interchange closures.

[jrouse]

Quite honestly, I am just happy that CA 99 is (or will be) a freeway from Sacramento to Wheeler Ridge.  I believe SR 99 is now the longest non-tolled, non-interstate freeway in the United States.   

Besides Tulare County, there are still some "substandard" freeway sections of CA 99 through  Chowchilla and north of Lodi towards Elk Grove in Sacramento County. 

I am all for having CA 99 be signed as either I-7 or I-9. Without deviating into "fictitious territory."  I would like to see the routing continue up the Business 80 corridor (CA 51) to the junction with I -80.  Caltrans and local officials are looking at upgrading this section to modern interstate standards, and I think it is a natural terminous for the route, if it is ever re-designated as either I -7 or I -9.

The Interstate proposal, as I understand it, runs as far north as Stockton, with the CA-4 Crosstown Freeway serving as the link to I-5.  So the portion between Stockton and Sacramento would not be Interstate and thus would not need to be upgraded to Interstate standards.

[kkt]

Caltrans has a map and list of all of the deficiencies on CA-99 that prevent it from meeting Interstate Standards.

The major deficiencies are:

• Vertical Clearance
• Interchange Spacing
• Shoulder Width
• Median Width

The full list of "Interstate 99 Designation Issues" are here: http://www.dot.ca.gov/dist6/planning/inter99impact/

To help with the interchange spacing issues, there is also a map and list of possible interchange closures.

Very helpful!

For the people living along Route 9 in Santa Cruz, I wouldn't worry about having new stationery printed up just yet.

I'm laughing because the first vertical clearance deficiency is the very first one!  The 99/I-5 split at Wheeler Ridge.

[emory]

I'd certainly like to see CA 99 become an interstate in the future if only to open up another round of 3-digit interstates. Partial freeway routes that go through cities along the 99 corridor could be upgraded and re-designated. Existing freeways connecting I-5 and CA 99 like the freeway portion of CA 120 could be renumbered.

[SeriesE]

I'd certainly like to see CA 99 become an interstate in the future if only to open up another round of 3-digit interstates. Partial freeway routes that go through cities along the 99 corridor could be upgraded and re-designated. Existing freeways connecting I-5 and CA 99 like the freeway portion of CA 120 could be renumbered.

That section of 120 should be an I-205 extension IMO

[The Ghostbuster]

IMHO, if CA 99 does get an Interstate designation, it should go to Sacramento. Stopping it in Stockton wouldn't cut it for me.

[emory]

IMHO, if CA 99 does get an Interstate designation, it should go to Sacramento. Stopping it in Stockton wouldn't cut it for me.

Agreed. Take it all the way to US 50. The northern segment of CA 99 can remain CA 99.

[Occidental Tourist]

IMHO, if CA 99 does get an Interstate designation, it should go to Sacramento. Stopping it in Stockton wouldn't cut it for me.

Agreed. Take it all the way to US 50. The northern segment of CA 99 can remain CA 99.

Or take it a little further up the road to 80 so we can get rid of this Business 80 Loop nonsense.  I'd even support a hybrid I-9/CA-9 designation scenario like with the 110, 210, and 15, if that would get rid of hidden 51.

[jeffe]

Yes, having the new Interstate connect with I-5 in Stockton via CA-4 does seem strange, but as jrouse noted, it is the official plan:

Interstate designation, under the current proposal, would apply to the 260 mile segment between the junction of State Route 99 with I-5 south of Bakersfield to I-5 in Stockton using State Route 4 as the connector to I-5. Since there is an I-99 route currently in existence in Pennsylvania, it is anticipated that should designation be granted, the Route 99 designation would become I-7 or I-9 to satisfy Interstate numbering convention.

Source: Route 99 Corridor Enhancement Master Plan, Chapter 3, Page 57 Published in 2005


There is also an updated Business Plan (February 2013) which details the implementation and progress of various projects:

Priority Category 1–Freeway Conversion
Because all non-freeway sections have been eliminated, this Priority Category is now deemed complete and is only included in this Business Plan update for information purposes.

Priority Category 2–Capacity-Increasing Projects
Priority Category 2 consists of projects that will widen Route 99 to a minimum of 6 lanes throughout the corridor. Projects to widen Route 99 to 8 lanes in some urban areas, where feasible, are also included in this category. While the primary goal of these projects is to increase capacity to meet demand, there are safety benefits as well. Eliminating or reducing the incidences of stop-and-go traffic on the route will reduce the number of congestion-related accidents that currently occur.

As a result of projects either under construction or now fully funded all existing at grade intersections will be eliminated within the next two years.

Priority Category 3–Major Operational Improvements
This category consists of projects that will improve existing outdated interchanges and construct auxiliary lanes in urban areas. As with Priority Category 2, these projects also have a safety related benefit.

Priority Category 4–New Interchanges
Priority Category 4 consists of projects that will construct interchanges at new locations on Route 99. The new interchanges are proposed to accommodate growth and development along Route 99.

Summary Status of Priority Categories
Seven projects, a mix of Categories 1, 2, and 3, have been completed. Of these, three additional projects have been completed since the 2009 update of the Route 99 Business Plan. Thirteen more are currently in construction.

Source: Updated Route 99 Corridor Business Plan, February 2013, page iii

[DTComposer]

Caltrans has a map and list of all of the deficiencies on CA-99 that prevent it from meeting Interstate Standards.

The major deficiencies are:

• Vertical Clearance
• Interchange Spacing
• Shoulder Width
• Median Width

The full list of "Interstate 99 Designation Issues" are here: http://www.dot.ca.gov/dist6/planning/inter99impact/

To help with the interchange spacing issues, there is also a map and list of possible interchange closures.

So if interchange spacing is an issue, is that going to be addressed on the CA-4 portion as well? There's four exits in a 1-1/2 mile stretch in downtown Stockton.

[ZLoth]

Is there enough traffic between Stockton and Wheeler Ridge on I-5 to justify upgrading CA-99 to Interstate standards?

[Max Rockatansky]

Is there enough traffic between Stockton and Wheeler Ridge on I-5 to justify upgrading CA-99 to Interstate standards?

I would love to see which one gets more traffic or how close they really are.  It might be the simple fact that CA 99 is substandard to Interstate grades but I've always found it to be a more difficult drive than I-5.  It always feels like there is a lot of distribution center traffic on 99 not to mention agricultural trucking, I actually kind of prefer a quiet drive on 41, 43 or 65 if I'm going to Fresno sometimes just avoid the freeway traffic.

[Henry]

Although I wouldn't mind seeing CA 4 in Stockton becoming an Interstate, I think it should be a spur of the CA 99 Interstate and not a part of the Interstate itself. Either I-x07 or I-x09 would do.