AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: 🛣 Headlines About California Highways – March 2021  (Read 537 times)

cahwyguy

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 481
  • California Highway Guy

  • Age: 61
  • Location: Northridge, CA
  • Last Login: April 11, 2021, 07:21:06 PM
    • California Highways
🛣 Headlines About California Highways – March 2021
« on: April 03, 2021, 02:00:52 PM »

Hard to believe, perhaps, but one quarter of 2021 is in the books. I had hope to get out a highway page update in March, but it is slower going than I expected. So I get to add one more headline post to the mix, slowing it down even further. On the plus side, the first of the Moderna shots has been achieved, bringing closer the day that I’ll go out for a roadtrip. So here are the headlines and other things of interest that I collected during the month of March. As I always say, “ready, set, discuss”.

Here's the link: https://cahighways.org/wordpress/?p=16101
Logged
Daniel - California Highway Guy ● Highway Site: http://www.cahighways.org/ ●  Blog: http://blog.cahighways.org/ ● Follow California Highways on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/cahighways

ClassicHasClass

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 387
  • 0-60 in 59.999997 years

  • Location: sunny So Cal
  • Last Login: Today at 12:58:54 AM
    • Floodgap Roadgap
Re: 🛣 Headlines About California Highways – March 2021
« Reply #1 on: April 03, 2021, 06:46:48 PM »

I love that segment of Koyaanisqatsi with CA 480.

They had similar safety nets on I-215 and I-10 for awhile. At least SCE makes token efforts to keep up with infrastructure, which is more than I can say for PG&E.
Logged

M3100

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 215
  • Location: Los Angeles County, CA
  • Last Login: April 13, 2021, 11:23:04 AM
Re: 🛣 Headlines About California Highways – March 2021
« Reply #2 on: April 03, 2021, 09:48:15 PM »

A couple of comments:
- California SR 84 Rio Vista Ferry.  I've never traveled this route; interesting to see a "ferry connection" survives.

- California SR 14 Rosamond project.  I haven't been up that way in several years; sounds like this project will be underway for some time.  I take it this is Kern County, and therefore north of the California SR 138 (from Gorman) interchange.

- Gribblenation item about California 58 as an "extension" of I-40.  I have not driven the entire route, but the segments I have been on had plenty of trucks so I could see it happening [becoming a formal extension of I-40] if the political will came to be.  I don't recall the at-grade intersections noted; maybe this route is similar to US 101 in rural segments of Santa Barbara County, where US 101 loses its 'Freeway' designation due to all of the intersections.
Logged

Max Rockatansky

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 14297
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Route 9, Sector 26
  • Last Login: Today at 01:40:36 AM
    • Gribblenation
Re: 🛣 Headlines About California Highways – March 2021
« Reply #3 on: April 03, 2021, 10:21:52 PM »

A couple of comments:
- California SR 84 Rio Vista Ferry.  I've never traveled this route; interesting to see a "ferry connection" survives.

- California SR 14 Rosamond project.  I haven't been up that way in several years; sounds like this project will be underway for some time.  I take it this is Kern County, and therefore north of the California SR 138 (from Gorman) interchange.

- Gribblenation item about California 58 as an "extension" of I-40.  I have not driven the entire route, but the segments I have been on had plenty of trucks so I could see it happening [becoming a formal extension of I-40] if the political will came to be.  I don't recall the at-grade intersections noted; maybe this route is similar to US 101 in rural segments of Santa Barbara County, where US 101 loses its 'Freeway' designation due to all of the intersections.

CA 220 also has the J-Mack Ferry which isn't too far from CA 84 and the Real McCoy II.  It is actually a lot of fun chaining both ferries back to back but you can be pretty much get on the Ryer Island Ferry whenever desired given it is cable driven. 

Pertaining to CA 58 and I-40 I thought it was important (having written the Gribblenation article in question) to put it out there that there isn't real plans for the corridor to become an Interstate.  For some reason sites like Freewayjim are running wild with the assumption that CA 58 west to Bakersfield (sometimes further) is planned to become I-40.  I think that the poorly written Wikipedia page on CA 58 and the logical looking corridor has people getting the wrong idea.

At least people aren't taking Bald Hills Road to detour off of CA 96.  I did that once years ago to cut-off CA 299 and US 101, I wish that I still had photos.

I feel like I've been lucky with the Last Chance Slide over the years.  Every time I've been through US 101 in the area (including last October) it hasn't been a problem.  The issue seems to be so severe that even all the typical environmental red tape isn't proving to be much of a challenge to rerouting inland. 

I'm tempted to make a return trip down to CA 1 in Big Sur given there is another significant slide.  Having the whole place to myself after Mud Creek and Pfeiffer Canyon was a lot of fun.

Getting the new rock shed on CA 140 at the Ferguson Slide will be a huge win after all these decades.  That is by far the best highway to Yosemite and those one lane bridges have been a problem for way too long.  Plus it doesn't hurt my case that I'm sick of taking CA 41 and the Wawona Road 80% of the time.






Logged

Alps

  • Everybody Obeys the Octagon
  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 14019
  • Elimitante the truck trarffic,

  • Age: 38
  • Location: New Jersey
  • Last Login: Today at 01:21:41 AM
    • Alps' Roads

Plutonic Panda

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1671
  • Location: Los Angeles
  • Last Login: Today at 07:40:03 AM
Re: 🛣 Headlines About California Highways – March 2021
« Reply #8 on: April 04, 2021, 12:55:38 AM »

https://www.montereycountyweekly.com/news/cover/a-secret-report-obtained-by-the-weekly-reveals-a-master-plan-to-close-highway-1/article_20a1359e-926d-11eb-9162-eb39166e3b00.html

Ummmmmm what

April Fool’s joke.
Oh thank god lol. My heart dropped for a minute.
"Before (and maybe also after) you read this story, we recommend you take note of the publication date: April 1, or April Fools' Day. "
On April fools day yes but being a thread about articles from March and given this April 3rd I’ll defend my knee jerk reaction to the headline without looking at the specified date lol. I have been fooled for sure.

But oddly enough, I wonder if a point comes if Caltrans just straight up gives up and I’m sure many Big Sur residents wouldn’t oppose it.
Logged

Max Rockatansky

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 14297
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Route 9, Sector 26
  • Last Login: Today at 01:40:36 AM
    • Gribblenation
Re: 🛣 Headlines About California Highways – March 2021
« Reply #9 on: April 04, 2021, 01:01:27 AM »

https://www.montereycountyweekly.com/news/cover/a-secret-report-obtained-by-the-weekly-reveals-a-master-plan-to-close-highway-1/article_20a1359e-926d-11eb-9162-eb39166e3b00.html

Ummmmmm what

April Fool’s joke.
Oh thank god lol. My heart dropped for a minute.
"Before (and maybe also after) you read this story, we recommend you take note of the publication date: April 1, or April Fools' Day. "
On April fools day yes but being a thread about articles from March and given this April 3rd I’ll defend my knee jerk reaction to the headline without looking at the specified date lol. I have been fooled for sure.

But oddly enough, I wonder if a point comes if Caltrans just straight up gives up and I’m sure many Big Sur residents wouldn’t oppose it.

They might say that, but those folks in Gorda weren’t having a good time when they got isolated by Mud Creek and Pfeiffer Canyon.  The only way in and out of there got a time was the Nacimiento-Ferguson Road the which is an infinitely more haggard road than CA 1.  Up in Big Sur (the community) residents actually had to walk a trail to get across Pfeiffer Canyon to get access to the rest of Monterey County. 
Logged

cahwyguy

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 481
  • California Highway Guy

  • Age: 61
  • Location: Northridge, CA
  • Last Login: April 11, 2021, 07:21:06 PM
    • California Highways
Re: 🛣 Headlines About California Highways – March 2021
« Reply #10 on: April 04, 2021, 08:33:16 AM »

Hey, at least I didn't include this one from the CHP: https://www.facebook.com/105100153168416/photos/a.105435643134867/1412857769059308/ . Including that article did prove a good test of who actually reads the headlines :-)
Logged
Daniel - California Highway Guy ● Highway Site: http://www.cahighways.org/ ●  Blog: http://blog.cahighways.org/ ● Follow California Highways on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/cahighways

ClassicHasClass

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 387
  • 0-60 in 59.999997 years

  • Location: sunny So Cal
  • Last Login: Today at 12:58:54 AM
    • Floodgap Roadgap
Re: 🛣 Headlines About California Highways – March 2021
« Reply #11 on: April 04, 2021, 10:33:18 AM »

Including a badly photoshopped picture of the I-70 tunnels!
Logged

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 7775
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: Today at 05:37:29 AM
Re: 🛣 Headlines About California Highways – March 2021
« Reply #12 on: April 04, 2021, 03:22:10 PM »

Re the CA 58-to-I-40 concept:  As iterated previously, it's not on anyone's priority list at present; the elimination of the last section of undivided 2-lane highway rendered the route safer and markedly more efficient as a trucking corridor (except, notably, for the CA 223 intersection, which will likely be the next issue addressed by D6 if and when $$ to fix it are identified).  That being said -- IMO the catalyst for renewed interest in such a concept would be the completion of the Westside CA 58 connector all the way to I-5, including a free-flow interchange for at least WB>NB and SB>EB movements (a relatively high-speed trumpet such as seen with the I-15/CA 58 interchange would certainly suffice).  That "missing link", currently requiring a slog down CA 58 or CA 46, would likely precipitate a significant increase in aggregate truck traffic on 58, particularly with truckers simply looking to bypass the L.A. basin with destinations east on not only I-40 but I-10 (using US 395 as a cutoff).  Also, Bakersfield politicos might well push for Interstate status to place their city on the favored distribution/warehousing map -- with a I-40 extension providing more "bang for the buck" than elevating CA 99 to Interstate status (which would put competing areas, such as Fresno and the chain of "M" cities to the north on that same map).  But since the Westside full-freeway extension doesn't appear to be something planned for the immediate term, it'll still be a decade or more before any such designation machinations emerge. 
Logged

M3100

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 215
  • Location: Los Angeles County, CA
  • Last Login: April 13, 2021, 11:23:04 AM
Re: 🛣 Headlines About California Highways – March 2021
« Reply #13 on: April 07, 2021, 05:34:17 PM »

Per a news item in the [Los Angeles South Bay Area] Daily Breeze, California SR 1 will be closed where it passes under the LAX runway; they are cleaning the tunnel walls.  Closure will be in overnight hours this week (week of April 5, 2021).
Logged

 


Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.