CA-58 and I-40

[Max Rockatansky]

58 to 40 functions as the all-weather outlet for trucks to/from the S.F. Bay Area, Sacramento, and central valley produce.
Some go over Donner Pass (I-80) but it takes more gas going up the hill and there's the risk of delays due to closure.

Agreed, but as many of us (myself included) have stated before, a good consolation for an I-40 extension is to just renumber CA-58 as CA-40 for the sake of continuity.

Yes, I think that it would be a good way to go.

Could be a good way to go. But it's not a route number continuity issue as things stand now, since 58 & 40 do not form a continuous highway mainline at I-15.

And the two routes were never a continuation of the same number.  In pre-freeway days, there were 3 highways going through Barstow:

US 66:  Needles - Barstow - San Bernardino
US 466:  Las Vegas - Barstow - Bakersfield
US 91: Las Vegas - Barstow - San Bernardino

Through town, US 66 followed what you now see on Google Maps as being: "National Trails Highway", the I-40 ROW, and Main Street through central Barstow.  US 466 followed a parallel alignment following "Yermo Rd", the I-15 ROW, and "Old Hwy 58".  The roadway passed through North Barstow.  It was parallel and came within 1/2 mile of US 66, but never intersected with it.  US 91 followed the US 466 routing, turned on 1st Ave, and then turned on Main Street to continue to San Bernardino.

Of course, maps that weren't so fine tuned showed US 466 as following US 66's east-west trajectory to reach Bakersfield, as US 66 turned to the southwest to reach San Bernardino, but there never was any such grand intersection like this.  People would definitely make the connection by using 1st Ave, though, as the family in "Grapes of Wrath" and other "Okies" of course made this connection.

Even in the more modern era, I-40 does not have a direct exit to I-15 north.  So one could not travel from I-40 to old  CA-58 without encountering a stoplight until the modern CA-58 expressway was completed.  Of course now with the modern 58, it's possible and if the rest of 58 were upgraded to a freeway, there would be no problem with extending I-40 to reach I-5.  (With a short multiplex at I-15.)

But there is no rush right now.

Not to go off on subject too much but US 466 is a fascinating weird alignment.  It actually did intersect US 66 but out in Arizona at Beale Street at two different intersections from 1934 to 1969.  In 1934 the route made sense because US 93 had not come south from Glendale Nevada and US 466 was the only US Route over the Hoover Dam....even thought the Hoover Dam was not completed until 1936.  Ironically US 93 was extended over the Hoover Dam also in 1936 leaving US 466 in a huge multiplex with US 91 and US 93 for most it's alignment.  US 93 and US 466 would even end at US 66 until 1965 in Kingman until US 93 was extended to a southern terminus at US 89 near Congress, AZ.  Of course in 1969 California gave US 466 the boot but Arizona did as well which left it completely multiplexed and isolated in Nevada into the early 1970s. 

So basically the current alignment of CA 58 would have made the most sense for US 466 post 1936 even though it wouldn't connect directly to US 66.  It's just amazing to me that so many huge multiplexes and terminus points were allowed to be shared for so long.  You wouldn't ever see anything like this today after the US Route purge in California and current AASHTO policy.

But I digress, since the multiplex with I-15 would be minimal wouldn't be in the interest of Caltrans just to sign the route that way?  Hell they have a million split routes all over the state I'm not sure why a short gap in the route log would upset the system.  Technically Highways like Highway 1 end every time they hit US 101 before another branch start and you have all the CA 190s, CA 65s on top CA 178 routes to show splits exist in the state log book.  Hell I-210 and CA 210 are a good example of an state road eventually being upgraded to an Interstate already in place in California.  The main difference is though that Caltrans can't approval for an I-40 extension to I-5 for whatever reason and they got the go ahead for I-210. 

[TheStranger]

  Hell I-210 and CA 210 are a good example of an state road eventually being upgraded to an Interstate already in place in California.  The main difference is though that Caltrans can't approval for an I-40 extension to I-5 for whatever reason and they got the go ahead for I-210. 

210 as an Interstate east of Route 57 has still yet to be approved (it was submitted in the late 90s).  Interestingly, Route 15 as an interstate south of I-8 in San Diego HAS been approved but has not yet been signed (pending an interchange reconfiguration at Route 94).

[Max Rockatansky]

  Hell I-210 and CA 210 are a good example of an state road eventually being upgraded to an Interstate already in place in California.  The main difference is though that Caltrans can't approval for an I-40 extension to I-5 for whatever reason and they got the go ahead for I-210. 

210 as an Interstate east of Route 57 has still yet to be approved (it was submitted in the late 90s).  Interestingly, Route 15 as an interstate south of I-8 in San Diego HAS been approved but has not yet been signed (pending an interchange reconfiguration at Route 94).

I was under the impression that Caltrans had the okay to put the I-210 signs up once the upgrades were complete?  I haven't been down to San Diego since 2011, they STILL haven't gotten rid of those left side ramps on CA 15?

[mgk920]

The current CA-4 extension in Stockton also included a new right-of-way through a built-up area. The Grand Parkway (SH 99) around Houston also ran through an existing neighborhood with trailer homes.

Interesting, the current Google Maps aerial image shows bridgework for a westward extension of the CA 4 freeway under construction, with that work just ending short of the industrial area there.  How far is CalTrans going with this project and what other details on it are available?

Maybe, just maybe the two 'ends' of the CA 4 freeway will someday connect to each other.



Mike

[DTComposer]

The current CA-4 extension in Stockton also included a new right-of-way through a built-up area. The Grand Parkway (SH 99) around Houston also ran through an existing neighborhood with trailer homes.

Interesting, the current Google Maps aerial image shows bridgework for a westward extension of the CA 4 freeway under construction, with that work just ending short of the industrial area there.  How far is CalTrans going with this project and what other details on it are available?

Maybe, just maybe the two 'ends' of the CA 4 freeway will someday connect to each other.



Mike

It's a very limited project - they're extending the viaduct southwest over the railroad to Navy Avenue and removing the Fresno Avenue ramps, so that trucks accessing the port facilities no longer go through the residential neighborhood. The new terminus at Navy Way will be at-grade, and the design seems to be such that they're not planning for any extension further than that.

So far as I can tell, the project does nothing to facilitate traffic between Stockton and Antioch; Charter Way to/from I-5 will continue to be the route of choice for that.

[jeffe]

There's a map and a computer generated video of the extension available on the Caltrans website here: http://www.dot.ca.gov/dist10/environmental/projects/sr4crosstown/index.html

As DTComposer noted it really won't help traffic between Stockton and Antioch. 

However, Tillie Lewis Drive will be improved and a new traffic signal installed at the intersection with CA 4. So if westbound traffic really wanted to, it could take the new extension to Navy Drive, backtrack east one block and then take Tillie Lewis Drive to CA 4.

As for a further extension west, if the roadway continued on its current heading there's a large artificial pond to be crossed which would require a bridge of about equal length to the viaduct being built now.  Of course, this pond does not seem very deep so a new roadway could simply be built on fill. 

Perhaps a more likely alignment would be to have the roadway head south along the empty land between Army Court and the San Joaquin River.  It could then connect to CA 4 near the current bridge over the river.

[jeffe]

After posting, I realized that talking about the CA-4 extension in Stockton is drifting a bit from the original topic of CA-58 and I-40.  I found this thread which is specifically targeted at the extension: https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=12121

[Great Lakes Roads]

Sorry for bumping a 10-year old thread, but...

Kern County got awarded a BUILD grant to study on extending I-40 westward from Barstow to I-5 west of Bakersfield! 

[Max Rockatansky]

Sorry for bumping a 10-year old thread, but...

Kern County got awarded a BUILD grant to study on extending I-40 westward from Barstow to I-5 west of Bakersfield! 

Citation?

[Great Lakes Roads]

Sorry for bumping a 10-year old thread, but...

Kern County got awarded a BUILD grant to study on extending I-40 westward from Barstow to I-5 west of Bakersfield! 

Citation?

https://www.transportation.gov/policy-initiatives/build/awarded-projects-tigerraisebuild-2009-2026

[FredAkbar]

https://www.transportation.gov/policy-initiatives/build/awarded-projects-tigerraisebuild-2009-2026

Saving others a download:

Year: FY 2026
Round: BUILD 26
State(s): California
Applicant: Kern County
Project Name: I-40 Corridor Extension
Project Description: The project will evaluate feasibility, safety, and economic benefits of improvements along the corridor located along State Route 58 between I-5 west of Bakersfield and the I-15/I-40 connections in Barstow.
Award Amount: $1,370,000
Total Project Cost: $1,400,000
Amount Requested: $1,370,000
Congressional District: CA-023
Primary Project Type: Road
Capital/Planning: Planning
Urban/Rural: Rural
Applicant Type: E: Regional Organization

[The Ghostbuster]

CA 58 will likely never become an extension of Interstate 40. I wouldn't mind if they eventually upgrade it to freeway standards between Interstates 5 and 15.

[FredAkbar]

What I'd like is a Barstow bypass for 15-bound traffic, basically where old Highway 58 is. It seems very inefficient for 58->15 travelers to dip down toward the south end of Barstow, just to drive back up north through the city. That seems like it would alleviate a lot of the traffic headaches in and just north of the city.

That would be more valuable IMO than making Stockdale Highway access-controlled. Whether the road is literally designated as I-40 or not seems somewhat irrelevant.

[Bobby5280]

The problem with the I-15/I-40 interchange isn't so much that it's on the SW corner of Barstow. It's that the interchange is a cheap, trumpet design with 40mph clover curves. Plenty of empty land is available around that interchange for it to be re-vamped into a directional Y interchange with ramps of 55mph or faster geometry. A better designed Y interchange would also not appear like it's an out of the way drive either.

The segment of CA-58 from Barstow to Tehachapi is easily upgradeable to full Interstate standards. But I can't see I-40 getting signed along CA-58 unless it's built to full Interstate standards from Barstow thru Bakersfield and on to I-5.

From a construction/budgetary standpoint, the biggest obstacle for extending I-40 to Barstow is the not-freeway portion from Tehachapi to the CA-223 intersection near Bealville. The highway geometry might be pass-able and the shoulders look wide enough. The problem is all the at-grade dirt road connections and other miscellaneous roadside pull-offs. California seems to look for any excuse it can to not sign an Interstate highway as an Interstate. CA-210 and CA-15 say hello.

If the political landscape shifts to where inland valley cities like Bakersfield and Fresno get more attention then it could put some momentum behind an I-40 upgrade thru Bakersfield, as well as more Interstate quality upgrade efforts along CA-99. I think it still makes a difference for a lot of cities to feel like they're more visible on the maps if they have an Interstate highway running thru town. Fresno and Bakersfield might be the biggest cities in the lower 48 to not have any Interstate highways.

[pderocco]

What I'd like is a Barstow bypass for 15-bound traffic, basically where old Highway 58 is. It seems very inefficient for 58->15 travelers to dip down toward the south end of Barstow, just to drive back up north through the city. That seems like it would alleviate a lot of the traffic headaches in and just north of the city.

That would be more valuable IMO than making Stockdale Highway access-controlled. Whether the road is literally designated as I-40 or not seems somewhat irrelevant.

The link looks like it's about improving CA-58 between I-5 and I-40, not extending I-40. I don't expect to see the latter in my lifetime, given the difficulty of upgrading so much of 58 to Interstate standards, but it could and probably will be upgraded to something less.

As to North Barstow, I think a bypass could be cool, but I don't think shaving four miles off an already full freeway route is as important as replacing nine miles of two-lane road with a new freeway route.

[cahwyguy]

As I always like to say in these discussions: Please be realistic. What are the realistic benefits of signing I-40 between Barstow and Bakersfield, and what are the costs? These would be independent of any roadway improvements, as those would be driven by traffic.

The answer: Very few benefits, and lots of costs both for the state and for businesses. It's not like the 1960s, where there is significant 90% federal funding available for construction of new highways. With GPS and apps, the particular shape of a sign means little these days. The costs of changing signs and postmiles paddles would be significant.

In short: Although map completists would love to see it as I-40, it's not likely to happen. The same is likely true for the Route 210 and Route 15 portions: There's little reason these days to change the signage. The cost isn't justified.

[ElishaGOtis]

What I'd like is a Barstow bypass for 15-bound traffic, basically where old Highway 58 is. It seems very inefficient for 58->15 travelers to dip down toward the south end of Barstow, just to drive back up north through the city. That seems like it would alleviate a lot of the traffic headaches in and just north of the city.

That would be more valuable IMO than making Stockdale Highway access-controlled. Whether the road is literally designated as I-40 or not seems somewhat irrelevant.

The link looks like it's about improving CA-58 between I-5 and I-40, not extending I-40. I don't expect to see the latter in my lifetime, given the difficulty of upgrading so much of 58 to Interstate standards, but it could and probably will be upgraded to something less.

As to North Barstow, I think a bypass could be cool, but I don't think shaving four miles off an already full freeway route is as important as replacing nine miles of two-lane road with a new freeway route.

Project Name: I-40 Corridor Extension

I think it's far more feasible than one may think. There are only a handful of sections that aren't to design-exception-feasible standards, most of which can be mitigated by a single frontage road.

As I always like to say in these discussions: Please be realistic. What are the realistic benefits of signing I-40 between Barstow and Bakersfield, and what are the costs? These would be independent of any roadway improvements, as those would be driven by traffic.

The answer: Very few benefits, and lots of costs both for the state and for businesses. It's not like the 1960s, where there is significant 90% federal funding available for construction of new highways. With GPS and apps, the particular shape of a sign means little these days. The costs of changing signs and postmiles paddles would be significant.

In short: Although map completists would love to see it as I-40, it's not likely to happen. The same is likely true for the Route 210 and Route 15 portions: There's little reason these days to change the signage. The cost isn't justified.

Here's a justification not many think about: National Defense. Edwards AFB is directly along the corridor, and upgrading the route to known standards increases operational efficiency for that and other nearby installations (not to mention general traffic safety).

[stevashe]

The problem with the I-15/I-40 interchange isn't so much that it's on the SW corner of Barstow. It's that the interchange is a cheap, trumpet design with 40mph clover curves. Plenty of empty land is available around that interchange for it to be re-vamped into a directional Y interchange with ramps of 55mph or faster geometry. A better designed Y interchange would also not appear like it's an out of the way drive either.

Umm... There's only 1 ramp posted at 40 mph, and it's NB I-15 to WB CA 58. That's not a major movement so it would be a major waste of money to reconstruct the whole interchange just for that. The other ramps are already 50-55 mph which includes the ramps for theoretical I-40 thru traffic.

[Max Rockatansky]

A initial feasibility study really isn't much at the end of the day.  Then again this is the first time I believe any official source has expressed interest in extending I-40 since 1968?

[ClassicHasClass]

Here's a justification not many think about: National Defense. Edwards AFB is directly along the corridor, and upgrading the route to known standards increases operational efficiency for that and other nearby installations (not to mention general traffic safety).

Depends on which way they're going and how far. To get to CA 99 or I-15 from Edwards is expressway-freeway already. Converting the few at-grades on that section of the alignment would accomplish approximately nothing for defense transport, and there just doesn't seem to be much call for defense uses between CA 99 and I-5.

[Max Rockatansky]

Here's a justification not many think about: National Defense. Edwards AFB is directly along the corridor, and upgrading the route to known standards increases operational efficiency for that and other nearby installations (not to mention general traffic safety).

Depends on which way they're going and how far. To get to CA 99 or I-15 from Edwards is expressway-freeway already. Converting the few at-grades on that section of the alignment would accomplish approximately nothing for defense transport, and there just doesn't seem to be much call for defense uses between CA 99 and I-5.

Usually, the military only cares if they have access to a freeway or divided four-lane highway at best.  There are plenty of large bases in California which aren't on the Interstate system.  NAS North Island, Vandenburg Space Force Base and NAS Lemoore come to mind. 

Even Rosamond Boulevard east of 14 is four lanes approaching the main gate to Edwards AFB.  Most people who work at that base commute from Palmdale and Lancaster.  The North Gate portion of Rosamond is located off of an already existing interchange along 58 and I'm sure could easily be widened if traffic warranted it.

[Bobby5280]

In short: Although map completists would love to see it as I-40, it's not likely to happen. The same is likely true for the Route 210 and Route 15 portions: There's little reason these days to change the signage. The cost isn't justified.

Signage is the least of the problems. Most of CA-58 between Barstow and Bakersfield is pretty close to Interstate standards. But, as I said earlier, that section between Tehachapi and Bealville is a big problem.

The faces of modern highway signs have a fairly limited life span. Type III reflective vinyl lasts only so many years. The effects of sunlight, weather, dirt, etc slowly degrade the material. Different DOT sign departments and contractors have different methods they use for producing the graphics. None of those methods are permanent. Some states (such as Oklahoma) will layer cheap "engineers grade" vinyl lettering over the top of green type III reflective backgrounds. The cheap reflective vinyl starts peeling away in as little as 2 or 3 years if conditions are bad enough.

The point is these agencies have to periodically replace sign panel graphics on an ongoing basis anyway. The notion of adding an Interstate marker to these signs being a budget buster is ridiculous.

[ElishaGOtis]

In short: Although map completists would love to see it as I-40, it's not likely to happen. The same is likely true for the Route 210 and Route 15 portions: There's little reason these days to change the signage. The cost isn't justified.

Signage is the least of the problems. Most of CA-58 between Barstow and Bakersfield is pretty close to Interstate standards. But, as I said earlier, that section between Tehachapi and Bealville is a big problem.

The faces of modern highway signs have a fairly limited life span. Type III reflective vinyl lasts only so many years. The effects of sunlight, weather, dirt, etc slowly degrade the material. Different DOT sign departments and contractors have different methods they use for producing the graphics. None of those methods are permanent. Some states (such as Oklahoma) will layer cheap "engineers grade" vinyl lettering over the top of green type III reflective backgrounds. The cheap reflective vinyl starts peeling away in as little as 2 or 3 years if conditions are bad enough.

The point is these agencies have to periodically replace sign panel graphics on an ongoing basis anyway. The notion of adding an Interstate marker to these signs being a budget buster is ridiculous.

It quite literally was one of many reasons why 795 is being delayed apparently. Due to the dimensions of the shields, entire signs need to be replaced rather than simply placing overlays. I think (I'll double check this tomorrow).

[Bobby5280]

Which I-795 project are you describing? If a green sign panel is made barely big enough to hold the lettering, highway marker and other graphics then, yeah, a wider 3-digit Interstate shield might not work as a drop-in replacement. A new, larger sign panel would be a necessity.

One thing I've noticed with some Interstate highway upgrade projects is they'll replace entire sign structures, even if an existing structure isn't in the way. Those monotube pole structures are pretty popular as a replacement for the older style truss gantries. But those thick pylons cost a lot. They don't get installed everywhere.

[Road Hog]

If the traffic count supports it, I'm all in favor of an interstate-quality highway between Barstow and Bakersfield. The problem is, it can't get a blue shield until and unless a) CA 99 gets a shield; or b) CA 58 gets built out all the way to I-5, which seems very unlikely.