California

[jdbx]

That is the Eucalyptus forest near San Juan Bautista in cover image.   

An area where a surprising number of people whom I know have received speeding tickets, myself included (granted mine was 25 years ago).

Certain lots of cover to hide a patrol car with stuff like Rocks Road and random-access driveways.

Heh.  Saw someone pulled over there last week.

The corridor through Prunedale has always fascinated me.  It was once intended to be bypassed by way of a proper freeway alignment which would have been located just to the east.  The existing expressway pretty much has been blown out as much as it can be without actually being fully limited access.  If one looks close there are numerous places where the now blocked off left turn lanes are obvious.

I wonder why it never was built (I think the alignment still shows up on maps to this day?) because the traffic backups in that area can be horrendous on weekends.

There was just a lot of resistance to freeways being constructed in the Monterey area (which Prunedale more or is influenced by).  CA 68, CA 1 and CA 156 also had freeway adoptions which would have connected with the rest of the Freeways & Expressways system.  It is the largest metro area in the state without four lane outlet to the rest of the state. 

US-101 through this area is far better than it used to be with the elimination of left turns and the addition of those interchanges at Crazy Horse Road and over by the red barn.  Getting CA-156 up to 4-lanes doesn't seem like it would be a heavy lift, it's not that long of a 2-lane stretch, and a safety argument can certainly be made.

[Max Rockatansky]

That is the Eucalyptus forest near San Juan Bautista in cover image.   

An area where a surprising number of people whom I know have received speeding tickets, myself included (granted mine was 25 years ago).

Certain lots of cover to hide a patrol car with stuff like Rocks Road and random-access driveways.

Heh.  Saw someone pulled over there last week.

The corridor through Prunedale has always fascinated me.  It was once intended to be bypassed by way of a proper freeway alignment which would have been located just to the east.  The existing expressway pretty much has been blown out as much as it can be without actually being fully limited access.  If one looks close there are numerous places where the now blocked off left turn lanes are obvious.

I wonder why it never was built (I think the alignment still shows up on maps to this day?) because the traffic backups in that area can be horrendous on weekends.

There was just a lot of resistance to freeways being constructed in the Monterey area (which Prunedale more or is influenced by).  CA 68, CA 1 and CA 156 also had freeway adoptions which would have connected with the rest of the Freeways & Expressways system.  It is the largest metro area in the state without four lane outlet to the rest of the state. 

US-101 through this area is far better than it used to be with the elimination of left turns and the addition of those interchanges at Crazy Horse Road and over by the red barn.  Getting CA-156 up to 4-lanes doesn't seem like it would be a heavy lift, it's not that long of a 2-lane stretch, and a safety argument can certainly be made.

I believe safety is currently the motivating factor driving the push to get 156 to four lanes between Castroville and Prunedale.  The four lane extension east of San Juan Bautista is coming along nicely.

[Voyager]

That is the Eucalyptus forest near San Juan Bautista in cover image.   

An area where a surprising number of people whom I know have received speeding tickets, myself included (granted mine was 25 years ago).

Certain lots of cover to hide a patrol car with stuff like Rocks Road and random-access driveways.

Heh.  Saw someone pulled over there last week.

The corridor through Prunedale has always fascinated me.  It was once intended to be bypassed by way of a proper freeway alignment which would have been located just to the east.  The existing expressway pretty much has been blown out as much as it can be without actually being fully limited access.  If one looks close there are numerous places where the now blocked off left turn lanes are obvious.

I wonder why it never was built (I think the alignment still shows up on maps to this day?) because the traffic backups in that area can be horrendous on weekends.

There was just a lot of resistance to freeways being constructed in the Monterey area (which Prunedale more or is influenced by).  CA 68, CA 1 and CA 156 also had freeway adoptions which would have connected with the rest of the Freeways & Expressways system.  It is the largest metro area in the state without four lane outlet to the rest of the state. 

US-101 through this area is far better than it used to be with the elimination of left turns and the addition of those interchanges at Crazy Horse Road and over by the red barn.  Getting CA-156 up to 4-lanes doesn't seem like it would be a heavy lift, it's not that long of a 2-lane stretch, and a safety argument can certainly be made.

The western end of 156 is actually planned to be converted to a full freeway, finally giving Monterey full freeway access.

https://www.tamcmonterey.org/highway-156

[Max Rockatansky]

That is the Eucalyptus forest near San Juan Bautista in cover image.   

An area where a surprising number of people whom I know have received speeding tickets, myself included (granted mine was 25 years ago).

Certain lots of cover to hide a patrol car with stuff like Rocks Road and random-access driveways.

Heh.  Saw someone pulled over there last week.

The corridor through Prunedale has always fascinated me.  It was once intended to be bypassed by way of a proper freeway alignment which would have been located just to the east.  The existing expressway pretty much has been blown out as much as it can be without actually being fully limited access.  If one looks close there are numerous places where the now blocked off left turn lanes are obvious.

I wonder why it never was built (I think the alignment still shows up on maps to this day?) because the traffic backups in that area can be horrendous on weekends.

There was just a lot of resistance to freeways being constructed in the Monterey area (which Prunedale more or is influenced by).  CA 68, CA 1 and CA 156 also had freeway adoptions which would have connected with the rest of the Freeways & Expressways system.  It is the largest metro area in the state without four lane outlet to the rest of the state. 

US-101 through this area is far better than it used to be with the elimination of left turns and the addition of those interchanges at Crazy Horse Road and over by the red barn.  Getting CA-156 up to 4-lanes doesn't seem like it would be a heavy lift, it's not that long of a 2-lane stretch, and a safety argument can certainly be made.

The western end of 156 is actually planned to be converted to a full freeway, finally giving Monterey full freeway access.

https://www.tamcmonterey.org/highway-156

Segment 2 appears to be expressway.  I'm not sure how that segment would work with an access drive to a neighborhood.

[Voyager]

That is the Eucalyptus forest near San Juan Bautista in cover image.   

An area where a surprising number of people whom I know have received speeding tickets, myself included (granted mine was 25 years ago).

Certain lots of cover to hide a patrol car with stuff like Rocks Road and random-access driveways.

Heh.  Saw someone pulled over there last week.

The corridor through Prunedale has always fascinated me.  It was once intended to be bypassed by way of a proper freeway alignment which would have been located just to the east.  The existing expressway pretty much has been blown out as much as it can be without actually being fully limited access.  If one looks close there are numerous places where the now blocked off left turn lanes are obvious.

I wonder why it never was built (I think the alignment still shows up on maps to this day?) because the traffic backups in that area can be horrendous on weekends.

There was just a lot of resistance to freeways being constructed in the Monterey area (which Prunedale more or is influenced by).  CA 68, CA 1 and CA 156 also had freeway adoptions which would have connected with the rest of the Freeways & Expressways system.  It is the largest metro area in the state without four lane outlet to the rest of the state. 

US-101 through this area is far better than it used to be with the elimination of left turns and the addition of those interchanges at Crazy Horse Road and over by the red barn.  Getting CA-156 up to 4-lanes doesn't seem like it would be a heavy lift, it's not that long of a 2-lane stretch, and a safety argument can certainly be made.

The western end of 156 is actually planned to be converted to a full freeway, finally giving Monterey full freeway access.

https://www.tamcmonterey.org/highway-156

Segment 2 appears to be expressway.  I'm not sure how that segment would work with an access drive to a neighborhood.

I looked through all the planning docs and it looks like its going to be a full freeway for at least some of the alternatives.

https://www.cahighways.org/ROUTE156.html

[stevashe]

Segment 2 appears to be expressway.  I'm not sure how that segment would work with an access drive to a neighborhood.

I looked through all the planning docs and it looks like its going to be a full freeway for at least some of the alternatives.

https://www.cahighways.org/ROUTE156.html

The TAMC page states that neighborhood access is provided by building the new lanes parallel to the existing highway, which itself will be converted to a frontage road.

[Plutonic Panda]

I was doing some food delivery today, I came across this new development. Unfortunately GSV is an updated to show it, but the aerial imagery has been updated.

The weird situation here is that W Erwin St. is a two-way street. Erwin St. right to the north of W Erwin is one way but it's separated by a landscaped median/retaining slope. It's odd that's there's a one way sign on the street when there's no possible way to turn onto the other Erwin St. due to a physical obstruction.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/1zN3TVs8q4LfG2kJ6?g_st=com.google.maps.preview.copy

[mrsman]

I was doing some food delivery today, I came across this new development. Unfortunately GSV is an updated to show it, but the aerial imagery has been updated.

The weird situation here is that W Erwin St. is a two-way street. Erwin St. right to the north of W Erwin is one way but it's separated by a landscaped median/retaining slope. It's odd that's there's a one way sign on the street when there's no possible way to turn onto the other Erwin St. due to a physical obstruction.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/1zN3TVs8q4LfG2kJ6?g_st=com.google.maps.preview.copy

This is a unique application of a common traffic strategy, especially in L.A.  Keeping traffic from commercial developments (like malls that used to be there Laurel Plaza / Macy's ) or high density apartments/condos (what's currently there) from having easy access to local neighborhood streets.

[roadfro]

I was doing some food delivery today, I came across this new development. Unfortunately GSV is an updated to show it, but the aerial imagery has been updated.

The weird situation here is that W Erwin St. is a two-way street. Erwin St. right to the north of W Erwin is one way but it's separated by a landscaped median/retaining slope. It's odd that's there's a one way sign on the street when there's no possible way to turn onto the other Erwin St. due to a physical obstruction.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/1zN3TVs8q4LfG2kJ6?g_st=com.google.maps.preview.copy

This is a unique application of a common traffic strategy, especially in L.A.  Keeping traffic from commercial developments (like malls that used to be there Laurel Plaza / Macy's ) or high density apartments/condos (what's currently there) from having easy access to local neighborhood streets.

I haven't seen this traffic flow separation treatment before, but I rather like the application. Good way to separate the established neighborhood from commercial traffic without being overly restrictive to movements of either user type.

[jdbx]

I was doing some food delivery today, I came across this new development. Unfortunately GSV is an updated to show it, but the aerial imagery has been updated.

The weird situation here is that W Erwin St. is a two-way street. Erwin St. right to the north of W Erwin is one way but it's separated by a landscaped median/retaining slope. It's odd that's there's a one way sign on the street when there's no possible way to turn onto the other Erwin St. due to a physical obstruction.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/1zN3TVs8q4LfG2kJ6?g_st=com.google.maps.preview.copy

This is a unique application of a common traffic strategy, especially in L.A.  Keeping traffic from commercial developments (like malls that used to be there Laurel Plaza / Macy's ) or high density apartments/condos (what's currently there) from having easy access to local neighborhood streets.

I haven't seen this traffic flow separation treatment before, but I rather like the application. Good way to separate the established neighborhood from commercial traffic without being overly restrictive to movements of either user type.

I have seen this treatment pretty often around the state.  Every time I see it, it is when a major street is fronted by houses, and seems to be for the purpose of allowing people to enter/exit their street or driveway without having to contend with traffic on the major street.

[mrsman]

I was doing some food delivery today, I came across this new development. Unfortunately GSV is an updated to show it, but the aerial imagery has been updated.

The weird situation here is that W Erwin St. is a two-way street. Erwin St. right to the north of W Erwin is one way but it's separated by a landscaped median/retaining slope. It's odd that's there's a one way sign on the street when there's no possible way to turn onto the other Erwin St. due to a physical obstruction.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/1zN3TVs8q4LfG2kJ6?g_st=com.google.maps.preview.copy

This is a unique application of a common traffic strategy, especially in L.A.  Keeping traffic from commercial developments (like malls that used to be there Laurel Plaza / Macy's ) or high density apartments/condos (what's currently there) from having easy access to local neighborhood streets.

I haven't seen this traffic flow separation treatment before, but I rather like the application. Good way to separate the established neighborhood from commercial traffic without being overly restrictive to movements of either user type.

I have seen this treatment pretty often around the state.  Every time I see it, it is when a major street is fronted by houses, and seems to be for the purpose of allowing people to enter/exit their street or driveway without having to contend with traffic on the major street.

Sure.  Major streets will have service roads for this exact purpose.  And it seems like they put in a cheap version of that here.

From my looking at historic aerials, it seems to have been there for a long time.

This shopping center reminds me of this one in Pico-Robertson area:

https://www.google.com/maps/place/1700+La+Cienega+Blvd,+Los+Angeles,+CA+90035/@34.045153,-118.3807134,90m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m6!3m5!1s0x80c2b96e6fc3fa4d:0x51226138dc111888!8m2!3d34.0469702!4d-118.3760094!16s%2Fg%2F11vs3w9rf1?entry=ttu&g_ep=EgoyMDI1MDUxNS4wIKXMDSoASAFQAw%3D%3D

OK, so 18th is the northern boundary of this shopping center.  There is no special implementation of traffic calming, but 18th west of Holt is a narrow street, just like Erwin east of Radford.  The street widens along the property of the shopping center.  It is known that with the increased traffic serving the shopping center merits a wider street, so that traffic from the shopping center can better reach La Cienega (or Laurel Canyon for the first case).

So it seems, to me, that the original orientation was simply to widen Erwin in a similar manner to the way 18th was widened.  But then, they decided to put in the traffic calming and separated normal Erwin from the housing on the north with a service road that was shoe-horned in.  And while dead-ending Agnes, Ben, and Gentry north at Erwin is an option, this is more effective for calming the traffic for the houses that face Erwin, so that it's easier to get out of their driveway.

[Plutonic Panda]

But why is there a one-way sign on the street that is clearly a two-way street?

[roadfro]

But why is there a one-way sign on the street that is clearly a two-way street?

Managed to find a street view of it. Agreed, that shouldn't have been installed there.