California

[kkt]

Also spotted this on the wall at my hotel in Napa:

It's amusing how I can recognize the age of the map by...seeing the lack of the Route 4 freeway east of Antioch (which opened up in portions almost two decades ago now).

And 17 has turned into 880, so it's after 1984.

[TheStranger]

Also spotted this on the wall at my hotel in Napa:

It's amusing how I can recognize the age of the map by...seeing the lack of the Route 4 freeway east of Antioch (which opened up in portions almost two decades ago now).

And 17 has turned into 880, so it's after 1984.

I was at Cow Palace in ca. 2012 for a minor league hockey game and I never forgot how inside, they had a 1980s Bay Area map showing 17 on the Nimitz Freeway!  (Keeping in mind, the San Jose Sharks' temporary tenure at that barn was...in the early 90s.)

[Plutonic Panda]

This is good news. I prefer expanding highways over investing in transit if you give me an ultimatum. Good thing this article shows that more people support building roads as opposed to public transportation. Regardless, I'm not anti-transit and it seems like we will get some good Transit projects. More infrastructure as needed regardless.

https://rebuildsocal.org/letsbuildca/?fbclid=IwdGRleASYP-xleHRuA2FlbQIxMQBzcnRjBmFwcF9pZAo2NjI4NTY4Mzc5AAEe_OAas6qnUVjdLh7QRmYtjQrCTlvzA9cTE43lofjN_YYu5LJmyrUIJwZn24g_aem_AEVgGSF2RP3MFxHJXF9HqA

[Max Rockatansky]

I would expect 2,750 contractors probably to support something that keeps them employed:

https://rebuildsocal.org/about/

[FredAkbar]

That Rebuild Socal website is useless vaporware. I called out their I-15 corridor project last month when it was included in the CA headlines post.

It's deceptively designed to look like a CalTrans or other government-run project website but it is not actually indicative of anything other than some group lobbying for their wish list.

[Plutonic Panda]

I would expect 2,750 contractors probably to support something that keeps them employed:

https://rebuildsocal.org/about/

It falls in line with my circle as well. Stands to reason there wouldn't be an inherit bias against rail or highways given that both create jobs so I'm not understanding what you're point is.

[Plutonic Panda]

That Rebuild Socal website is useless vaporware. I called out their I-15 corridor project last month when it was included in the CA headlines post.

It's deceptively designed to look like a CalTrans or other government-run project website but it is not actually indicative of anything other than some group lobbying for their wish list.

I beg to differ. At any rate it's an NGO. What am I missing? They are exactly how I found out about the I-15 project. It's very real and is being pushed by several governments and is going to be fundamental to expand that road in a state that passed a (very stupid)law to limit road expansion. The lobby for all sorts of infrastructure projects in Southern California. I'm really not sure what the last two posts are supposed to be about. Is it criticism against the rebuild SoCal?

[FredAkbar]

They are exactly how I found out about the I-15 project.

That's my point, there is no "I-15 project". I'm all for lobbying the government to expand roads, I just think this group's website is misleading. What bill or proposal is the California government actually working on to make this happen?

[FredAkbar]

The website looks very pretty but contains nothing of substance:

- The entries on the "Initiatives" dropdown are not actual initiatives nor is any of that stuff actually being done. It's just things they want to be done.
- The "Policy" dropdown contains a single element "Champions of Infrastructure" which notes some government officials who have advocated for infrastructure improvements. (How naïve of me to think a "Policy" dropdown would contain an actual policy, or even a proposed one.)
- Most of the other pages are recruiting for their cause. Again, yes it's a noble cause, but I would like to see some actual evidence of accomplishments.

[Plutonic Panda]

They are exactly how I found out about the I-15 project.

That's my point, there is no "I-15 project". I'm all for lobbying the government to expand roads, I just think this group's website is misleading. What bill or proposal is the California government actually working on to make this happen?

There's not currently a project but don't you think this is a step in the right direction? What do we need to make this a reality? A state bill would be nice to force Caltrans to do this.

[FredAkbar]

There's not currently a project but don't you think this is a step in the right direction?

Maybe, if their lobbying is effective and they get more people onboard (donations, etc). Though it could also create a false hope or complacency since their website makes it seem like these projects are already happening.

What do we need to make this a reality? A state bill would be nice to force Caltrans to do this.

I doubt a law would be passed just to expand I-15 to 3 lanes each way. But maybe CEQA reform would be the right answer. Get rid of these insane "years of environmental review" requirements for projects that make them infeasible and hopelessly delayed and bogged down in bureaucracy.

Someone like cahwyguy (Daniel) would probably be the right person to answer logistically what would need to happen, specifically for adding a pair of third lanes on I-15. But that would be better addressed in the dedicated Interstate 15 north of Barstow to the State Line thread (or maybe already has been).

[Max Rockatansky]

The real issue any proposed widening of I-15 is going to run into with CEQA is the current policy of VMT reductions.  As long as Brightline West is "being constructed" I don't really realistically see any proposal being able to overcome a VMT study.  Maybe it would be able to actually do that if Brightline somehow collapses before completion or the line just doesn't make much of a decent in traffic figures on I-15 north of Barstow. 

I suspect the only way to really get a widening of I-15 north of Barstow on the table is to make it a political thing about "safety."  So far nobody seems to want to mount campaign weaponing safety (including Rebuild Socal).

[cl94]

If there was any political will, the loophole would be to construct additional lanes as HOV/HOT, which are exempt from the VMT reduction policy and would be eligible for expedited CEQA if within current ROW. This is what was done for the Yolo Causeway widening (much to the ire of certain groups).

(Personal opinion strongly emphasized)

[ElishaGOtis]

The real issue any proposed widening of I-15 is going to run into with CEQA is the current policy of VMT reductions.  As long as Brightline West is "being constructed" I don't really realistically see any proposal being able to overcome a VMT study.  Maybe it would be able to actually do that if Brightline somehow collapses before completion or the line just doesn't make much of a decent in traffic figures on I-15 north of Barstow. 

I suspect the only way to really get a widening of I-15 north of Barstow on the table is to make it a political thing about "safety."  So far nobody seems to want to mount campaign weaponing safety (including Rebuild Socal).

Although one could make a safety argument regarding traffic volumes and congestion, my main concern with widening is speeding (which is already a SERIOUS problem there due to the dumb 70/T55 speed limit), both after construction due to more lanes/width and during the construction phase. That's going to be a hard thing to overlook...

[FredAkbar]

If there was any political will, the loophole would be to construct additional lanes as HOV/HOT, which are exempt from the VMT reduction policy and would be eligible for expedited CEQA if within current ROW. This is what was done for the Yolo Causeway widening (much to the ire of certain groups).

(Personal opinion strongly emphasized)

Are HOV lanes allowed to exist in such rural areas? If there is no restriction, then that may be the easiest path forward since realistically most people headed to Vegas for vacation are probably not driving solo.

Seems like tolled Express Lanes are favored over Carpool lanes of late, but that's a lot of miles of tolling infrastructure to build.

[cl94]

There is no prohibition that I know of. But again, the political will needs to exist, which lol.

[Max Rockatansky]

The real issue any proposed widening of I-15 is going to run into with CEQA is the current policy of VMT reductions.  As long as Brightline West is "being constructed" I don't really realistically see any proposal being able to overcome a VMT study.  Maybe it would be able to actually do that if Brightline somehow collapses before completion or the line just doesn't make much of a decent in traffic figures on I-15 north of Barstow. 

I suspect the only way to really get a widening of I-15 north of Barstow on the table is to make it a political thing about "safety."  So far nobody seems to want to mount campaign weaponing safety (including Rebuild Socal).

Although one could make a safety argument regarding traffic volumes and congestion, my main concern with widening is speeding (which is already a SERIOUS problem there due to the dumb 70/T55 speed limit), both after construction due to more lanes/width and during the construction phase. That's going to be a hard thing to overlook...

The speed limit on I-15 is just a suggestion even now.  So long as you are within 15 MPH of the posted limits it won't draw the attention of CHP.

Speaking of antiquated things.  I've never understood the purpose of having non-commercial traffic go through an Agricultural inspection station.  When the older station in Yermo was up for replacement I'm kind of surprised that never got brought up.  It sure would have saved some money not having to build inspection gantries for general traffic which almost never get staffed.

[cl94]

The real issue any proposed widening of I-15 is going to run into with CEQA is the current policy of VMT reductions.  As long as Brightline West is "being constructed" I don't really realistically see any proposal being able to overcome a VMT study.  Maybe it would be able to actually do that if Brightline somehow collapses before completion or the line just doesn't make much of a decent in traffic figures on I-15 north of Barstow. 

I suspect the only way to really get a widening of I-15 north of Barstow on the table is to make it a political thing about "safety."  So far nobody seems to want to mount campaign weaponing safety (including Rebuild Socal).

Although one could make a safety argument regarding traffic volumes and congestion, my main concern with widening is speeding (which is already a SERIOUS problem there due to the dumb 70/T55 speed limit), both after construction due to more lanes/width and during the construction phase. That's going to be a hard thing to overlook...

The speed limit on I-15 is just a suggestion even now.  So long as you are within 15 MPH of the posted limits it won't draw the attention of CHP.

Speaking of antiquated things.  I've never understood the purpose of having non-commercial traffic go through an Agricultural inspection station.  When the older station in Yermo was up for replacement I'm kind of surprised that never got brought up.  It sure would have saved some money not having to build inspection gantries for general traffic which almost never get staffed.

I can count on one finger the number of times I have seen anyone in the non-commercial booths at the new I-80 bug station, and that's one I pass through decently often. There's usually just a sign saying "NO INSPECTION TODAY | DRIVE SAFELY".

[Max Rockatansky]

The real issue any proposed widening of I-15 is going to run into with CEQA is the current policy of VMT reductions.  As long as Brightline West is "being constructed" I don't really realistically see any proposal being able to overcome a VMT study.  Maybe it would be able to actually do that if Brightline somehow collapses before completion or the line just doesn't make much of a decent in traffic figures on I-15 north of Barstow. 

I suspect the only way to really get a widening of I-15 north of Barstow on the table is to make it a political thing about "safety."  So far nobody seems to want to mount campaign weaponing safety (including Rebuild Socal).

Although one could make a safety argument regarding traffic volumes and congestion, my main concern with widening is speeding (which is already a SERIOUS problem there due to the dumb 70/T55 speed limit), both after construction due to more lanes/width and during the construction phase. That's going to be a hard thing to overlook...

The speed limit on I-15 is just a suggestion even now.  So long as you are within 15 MPH of the posted limits it won't draw the attention of CHP.

Speaking of antiquated things.  I've never understood the purpose of having non-commercial traffic go through an Agricultural inspection station.  When the older station in Yermo was up for replacement I'm kind of surprised that never got brought up.  It sure would have saved some money not having to build inspection gantries for general traffic which almost never get staffed.

I can count on one finger the number of times I have seen anyone in the non-commercial booths at the new I-80 bug station, and that's one I pass through decently often. There's usually just a sign saying "NO INSPECTION TODAY | DRIVE SAFELY".

15-20 years ago, inspectors would regularly stop general traffic at Ag station.  I was leading an 82-car Camaro cruise from Phoenix to Laughlin in 2011 which was routed on CA 62 and US 95.  I told the Ag inspector how many cars we had when I got to the station.  He insisted on questioning everyone but gave up and let us go about 20 cars in.  We had been parking on the shoulder of 62 west of the station.

In 2010 I got into an unpleasant interaction on a work trip to Coachella Valley once with an Ag inspector on I-10 who insisted he "needed" to see inside the trunk of my Ford Fiesta.  The inspector was being pretty short which rubbed me the wrong way.  I told him that I didn't have any produce (which I didn't) and I wasn't going to let him search my trunk without CHP present.  The inspector then said something about "not letting me into California" which prompted me to respond by saying "call CHP then, I'll be heading west."  I drove off (probably not the great idea I've had) and continued on my way to Coachella Valley.  I'm not sure what the problem was on that particular day since that was the only time an inspector asked me to open my trunk.   

[ElishaGOtis]

The real issue any proposed widening of I-15 is going to run into with CEQA is the current policy of VMT reductions.  As long as Brightline West is "being constructed" I don't really realistically see any proposal being able to overcome a VMT study.  Maybe it would be able to actually do that if Brightline somehow collapses before completion or the line just doesn't make much of a decent in traffic figures on I-15 north of Barstow. 

I suspect the only way to really get a widening of I-15 north of Barstow on the table is to make it a political thing about "safety."  So far nobody seems to want to mount campaign weaponing safety (including Rebuild Socal).

Although one could make a safety argument regarding traffic volumes and congestion, my main concern with widening is speeding (which is already a SERIOUS problem there due to the dumb 70/T55 speed limit), both after construction due to more lanes/width and during the construction phase. That's going to be a hard thing to overlook...

The speed limit on I-15 is just a suggestion even now.  So long as you are within 15 MPH of the posted limits it won't draw the attention of CHP.

Speaking of antiquated things.  I've never understood the purpose of having non-commercial traffic go through an Agricultural inspection station.  When the older station in Yermo was up for replacement I'm kind of surprised that never got brought up.  It sure would have saved some money not having to build inspection gantries for general traffic which almost never get staffed.

I can count on one finger the number of times I have seen anyone in the non-commercial booths at the new I-80 bug station, and that's one I pass through decently often. There's usually just a sign saying "NO INSPECTION TODAY | DRIVE SAFELY".

I still am in shock that my dad was actually SEARCHED at one of these Ag stations a long time ago  😂

[epzik8]

The speed limit on I-15 is just a suggestion even now.

The speed limit on I-15 in America is just a suggestion even now.

[Max Rockatansky]

The speed limit on I-15 is just a suggestion even now.

The speed limit on I-15 in America is just a suggestion even now.

I found that not to be the case when I lived out east.  Some of the county deputies and small city cops in Florida loved to set up speed traps.

[gonealookin]

Whoops.  This happened Friday.  https://x.com/ChpUkiah/status/2065836630519456113

Officers responded to a solo-vehicle traffic collision on Hill Rd. at Eel River Ranch Rd. near Covelo after a bridge completely collapsed while a vehicle was crossing it.  The driver sustained only minor injuries.  Motorists are asked to avoid the area and seek alternate routes.

Location:  https://maps.app.goo.gl/zQAkNEDBtmfQ7xPR8

[Max Rockatansky]

I was looking into that earlier in the day when I saw it on the CHP Ukiah Facebook page.  That truss span was constructed in 1925.  It had a 10-ton limit for normal passenger vehicles and doesn't appear to be a situation where the driver did anything wrong.

[cl94]

Yeah, saw that earlier as well. Seems that it was just a normal passenger car driving across the bridge. Of course, based on Facebook comments, that bridge does have a history of trucks using it, which likely contributed to its later collapse.