CA-99 Interstate corridor? (From Bakersfield to Stockton if not Sacramento)

[TheBox]

There hasn't been any relevant threads about the idea of CA-99 being a potential I-7 or I-9 between Bakersfield and Stockton if not Sacramento

So I may as well make one

[Max Rockatansky]

You won't find a recent thread because it isn't happening.  This topic has been talked about in the hobby and forum ad nauseam.   

The basic summary is that the last time Caltrans was interested making CA 99 an Interstate was during the 1980s.  At the time the agency was attempting to add several non-chargeable (meaning not Federal fund matched) Interstates.  Since then Interstate branding for highway has greatly waned in navigational importance for the average driver.  Caltrans presently has no interest in designating any new Interstates even when freeway corridors meet design standards (much of CA 99 does not).  If CA 210 isn't getting rebranded as an Interstate that pretty much is enough to indicate the current mindset. 

Caltrans owned roadways can't have duplicated numbers given they are legislatively defined.  To obtain the numbers 7 or 9 the agency would have to introduce several legislative bills.  CA 9 is a locally famous corridor around Santa Cruz and would draw political ire if Caltrans attempted to reassign it.  The most straightforward number to obtain is 305 since there is no State Route presently legislatively defined as such.   305 would also tie nicely into the FHWA defined corridor of I-305 along US 50 in Sacramento. 

To obtain an Interstate designation the state would also have to put in applications with the FHWA and AASHTO.  Assuming they receive approval from both the CTC would have to program funds for signage replacement (an expensive proposition). 

Also worth noting that CA 99 hasn't been a continuous freeway between Wheeler Ridge and Sacramento until recently.  The newest freeway segment was constructed in southern Merced County in 2016 as a replacement for an expressway grade. 

Also worth noting that there is a fair amount of local attachment to the number 99 given it has been around for a century.  I would imagine it wouldn't be too hard to spin business owners and random people up enough to form a bit of resistant to a change.  Me personally I would throw my hat in with trying to obtain I-99 and give the CA 99 corridor the I-238 treatment.  That of course depends if hypothetically CA 99 is ever rebuilt fully to Interstate design standards. 

Your best reference what is going on currently with CA 99 is going to be CAhighways:

https://www.cahighways.org/ROUTE099.html

If you want something on the general history of US 99 in California my page has that covered:

https://www.gribblenation.org/p/gribblenation-us-route-99-page.html?m=1

[hurricanehink]

I believe the biggest issue in recent years has been improving/expanding the 99 to three lanes in both directions. For example, a portion near Fresno is being rebuilt, at a cost of $290 million, to rebuild an interchange that had been there for 50 years and was out of date. A similar thing is happening with Caltrans rebuilding parts of the 99 through Tulare, where one of the final two lane portions is being expanded to a third lane. Considering how important the 99 is, I wouldn't be surprised if sooner or later it gets added, even if there isn't much of a push right now for the designation. The more important work is maintenance and improvements.

[Max Rockatansky]

What will get you about Tulare is most of that freeway was built in 1953-1954.  It is literally the oldest limited access segment on CA 99.

[The Ghostbuster]

The CA 99 designation is likely here to stay between Mettler and Sacramento. If it were ever to become an Interstate, I'd prefer the Interstate 9 designation to the Interstate 7 designation. All in all, I think California has as many Interstate designations as it will ever have (unless they finally convert CA 905 into Interstate 905).

[Bobby5280]

I don't really care if CA-99 ever gets an Interstate designation. However, I do believe CA-99 should be brought fully up to current Interstate standards from the I-5 split at Wheeler Ridge all the way up to Sacramento. It's almost all limited access, but the highway is still a mixed bag of different design standards. Standards vary on shoulder widths and on/off ramp designs.

I don't know what the deal is with all the random trees growing right next to the road way with no guard rails separating the main lanes from the big tree trunks. It's really common from Delano and farther North. Most other states install guard rails or remove all bushes and trees from the ROW. I imagine they must have some grisly accidents on those stretches of CA-99 from time to time. It would be easy for someone to be texting while driving or doing other distracted nonsense and then drift over the shoulder and then head-on into a tree trunk at high speed. A motorist could really be screwed going into a side-skid.

[Max Rockatansky]

Those are Oleanders.  They look particularly nice when the bloom.  The issue is more that they are toxic. 

[cahwyguy]

Those are Oleanders.  They look particularly nice when the bloom.  The issue is more that they are toxic. 

I also believe there's some sort of blight impacting them now, which is why they are being removed. They were the preferred median when those roads were first upgraded from expressway, as they did a good job of blocking the view of traffic on the other side and were low maintenance.

[Max Rockatansky]

Those are Oleanders.  They look particularly nice when the bloom.  The issue is more that they are toxic. 

I also believe there's some sort of blight impacting them now, which is why they are being removed. They were the preferred median when those roads were first upgraded from expressway, as they did a good job of blocking the view of traffic on the other side and were low maintenance.

Those are Oleanders.  They look particularly nice when the bloom.  The issue is more that they are toxic. 

I also believe there's some sort of blight impacting them now, which is why they are being removed. They were the preferred median when those roads were first upgraded from expressway, as they did a good job of blocking the view of traffic on the other side and were low maintenance.

I find it kind of shame that they are being pulled.  They were just cut down in southern Madera County between Avenues 7 and 12.  At least the Palm & Pine got a bit of a clean up out of it.

[pderocco]

The CA 99 designation is likely here to stay between Mettler and Sacramento. If it were ever to become an Interstate, I'd prefer the Interstate 9 designation to the Interstate 7 designation. All in all, I think California has as many Interstate designations as it will ever have (unless they finally convert CA 905 into Interstate 905).

If this ridiculous idea ever came to fruition, I'd prefer I-7, reserving I-9 for the US-395 corridor in the very distant future.

[pderocco]

Also worth noting that there is a fair amount of local attachment to the number 99 given it has been around for a century.  I would imagine it wouldn't be too hard to spin business owners and random people up enough to form a bit of resistant to a change.  Me personally I would throw my hat in with trying to obtain I-99 and give the CA 99 corridor the I-238 treatment.  That of course depends if hypothetically CA 99 is ever rebuilt fully to Interstate design standards. 

Sure. There's already a precedent for numbering some random road I-99, and precedent for having two unrelated roads with the same 2di number.

[Max Rockatansky]

Also worth noting that there is a fair amount of local attachment to the number 99 given it has been around for a century.  I would imagine it wouldn't be too hard to spin business owners and random people up enough to form a bit of resistant to a change.  Me personally I would throw my hat in with trying to obtain I-99 and give the CA 99 corridor the I-238 treatment.  That of course depends if hypothetically CA 99 is ever rebuilt fully to Interstate design standards. 

Sure. There's already a precedent for numbering some random road I-99, and precedent for having two unrelated roads with the same 2di number.

Indeed.  The way I see it if we as a hobby are going to push for this we might as go in for something memorable.  Besides, it would the only corridor to carry a US Route, State Route and Interstate of the same number. 

[rschen7754]

California just doesn't seem to care. There's also 905, 210, 15 that the state could pursue, and for whatever reason, is not.

[Max Rockatansky]

CA 15 at the very least has one very substandard interchange that would need to be replaced.  The FHWA and AASHTO did approve that be part of I-15 once it is replaced though. 

[Henry]

For those who want I-9 designated over CA 99, the biggest hangup is that CA 9 is a well-known route, and protests would erupt if Caltrans wanted to change it. CA 7 just doesn't seem to be in the same place for too long, having been bounced around here and there, most notably in SoCal, when it was routed along what is now I-710. The current iteration is hardly a blip on the radar, so no one would miss it if it was gone. And for that reason, I-7 has a far better chance of getting signed than I-9 ever will be.

[freebrickproductions]

Maybe the interstate designation should be Alt. I-5 cosigned with CA 99?

[roadfro]

There hasn't been any relevant threads about the idea of CA-99 being a potential I-7 or I-9 between Bakersfield and Stockton if not Sacramento

So I may as well make one

That's because such discussion rightly belongs in the fictional highways board. So unless we have news of Caltrans actually proposing such a thing, let's not create similar threads again.

With that said, some meaningful discussion about improvements to CA 99 is happening here, so I won't lock/move this thread. But let's stay out of the realm of discussing hypothetical Interstate designations going forward.

[mgk920]

There hasn't been any relevant threads about the idea of CA-99 being a potential I-7 or I-9 between Bakersfield and Stockton if not Sacramento

So I may as well make one

That's because such discussion rightly belongs in the fictional highways board. So unless we have news of Caltrans actually proposing such a thing, let's not create similar threads again.

With that said, some meaningful discussion about improvements to CA 99 is happening here, so I won't lock/move this thread. But let's stay out of the realm of discussing hypothetical Interstate designations going forward.

This was a big item of discussion a couple of decades ago back in the M.T.R. days, but I also agree, it is a dead horse now.

Mike

[Rothman]

I'd say move to fictional.

[english si]

FHWA / Congress view it as not fictional even if California itself is uninterested in pushing for it.

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/Planning/national_highway_system/high_priority_corridors/hbcfilg.cfm

[splashflash]

I'd say move to fictional.

This topic has been discussed in this forum, and everything is just repeated again.  Searches just become more tedious with multiple threads repeating themselves.

 https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=29735.0
 Best moved to fictional as was done in 2021.

[cahwyguy]

FHWA / Congress view it as not fictional even if California itself is uninterested in pushing for it.

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/Planning/national_highway_system/high_priority_corridors/hbcfilg.cfm

Note the date on that document: December 10, 2015. That's almost 10 years ago, so it unclear if the Feds are still interested in pursuing it.

[english si]

Note the date on that document: December 10, 2015. That's almost 10 years ago, so it unclear if the Feds are still interested in pursuing it.

Still marked as a future interstate in November 2021
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/Planning/national_highway_system/high_priority_corridors/hpcfi.pdf

[vdeane]

Note the date on that document: December 10, 2015. That's almost 10 years ago, so it unclear if the Feds are still interested in pursuing it.

Still marked as a future interstate in November 2021
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/Planning/national_highway_system/high_priority_corridors/hpcfi.pdf

That map is interesting.  Looks like I-73 and I-74 got deleted in Ohio and Michigan.  Also, corridors 18 and 20 do not line up with the actual interstate designations TxDOT is pursuing, so I guess "Congress made us do it" is a lie with the suffixes.  Finally, why are completed corridors (like I-41) still on the map as "future"?

[Max Rockatansky]

What is the green colored line intended to represent?  The map legend only describes what blue means.