Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[mrsman]

Thing is the motoring public doesn’t care if Caltrans maintains Rice or not.  A couple CA 1 shields would be more than sufficient on Rice or even the old alignment on Oxnard, who cares who maintains the actual road surface outside of us in the road world?  It is bizarre to me why out here this is such an alien concept when it’s common in other states (especially out east).

I think most of us on this forum would like to see the signage on the roads - it is Caltrans and other goverment groups (city, county) that will not do so adequately.

[Max Rockatansky]

Thing is the motoring public doesn’t care if Caltrans maintains Rice or not.  A couple CA 1 shields would be more than sufficient on Rice or even the old alignment on Oxnard, who cares who maintains the actual road surface outside of us in the road world?  It is bizarre to me why out here this is such an alien concept when it’s common in other states (especially out east).

I think most of us on this forum would like to see the signage on the roads - it is Caltrans and other goverment groups (city, county) that will not do so adequately.

Heh, I should do my own variation of an Auto Club (this is total sarcasm) and see if these agencies will pay me post signage like the old days when the DOH didn’t want to do it.  I’ll even throw in continuity for CA 34 and CA 232.

[Alps]

Thing is the motoring public doesn’t care if Caltrans maintains Rice or not.  A couple CA 1 shields would be more than sufficient on Rice or even the old alignment on Oxnard, who cares who maintains the actual road surface outside of us in the road world?  It is bizarre to me why out here this is such an alien concept when it’s common in other states (especially out east).

They should not have removed 1 trailblazers along Oxnard until Rice was fully adopted.

[Max Rockatansky]

Thing is the motoring public doesn’t care if Caltrans maintains Rice or not.  A couple CA 1 shields would be more than sufficient on Rice or even the old alignment on Oxnard, who cares who maintains the actual road surface outside of us in the road world?  It is bizarre to me why out here this is such an alien concept when it’s common in other states (especially out east).

They should not have removed 1 trailblazers along Oxnard until Rice was fully adopted.

Amusingly it shows up as Route 1 in the Postmile Tool.   

[RZF]

I bet that nothing will get done as far as signage goes until the Rice Ave/CA-34 interchange becomes a bridge/freeway-style exit over the train tracks.

[Plutonic Panda]

I wish it would get upgraded to a freeway to the 101.

[sparker]

I wish it would get upgraded to a freeway to the 101.

Doubtful -- Ventura County's part of D7, and after CA 71 is finished through Pomona, don't expect to see a single inch of new freeway in that district except for out in the desert (and even that's a crapshoot!).  They'll do the RR separation w/ramps at CA 34, but it'll remain a 4-or-5-lane arterial for quite some time to come. 

[Occidental Tourist]

Yep.  Too many driveways.  It couldn’t be realistically upgraded to even an expressway without massive and expensive eminent domain.

[sparker]

Yep.  Too many driveways.  It couldn’t be realistically upgraded to even an expressway without massive and expensive eminent domain.

The only potential alternative would be a new-terrain freeway -- but my comments about D7 stand; that won't be happening in the foreseeable future.  Besides, the area traversed is either high-ticket agriculture (mostly fruits and vegetables in that part of the county) or current/future housing.  Besides, a freeway emptying out onto the 2/3-lane PCH is a tad gratuitous; the existing freeway section along the original CA 1 alignment dates from Alternate US 101 days, with deployment preceding the introduction of the California Freeway & Expressway System by a year or two.  At that time Oxnard was a sleepy little agricultural town of about 25K; IIRC a bypass around the eastern side of town was planned (the usual DOH/Caltrans "circular lines" indicating a general but unadopted alignment) but obviously never saw any follow-through.  And even a casual observer or visitor to the coastline to the southeast would quickly realize that the Malibu/Point Dume section of CA 1 will never, ever see freeway development (onshore or off!).

[TheStranger]

  At that time Oxnard was a sleepy little agricultural town of about 25K; IIRC a bypass around the eastern side of town was planned (the usual DOH/Caltrans "circular lines" indicating a general but unadopted alignment) but obviously never saw any follow-through.

Isn't Rice Avenue essentially that eastern bypass, much in the same way Cosumnes River Boulevard going towards Freeport is an adaptation of the Route 148 corridor (in Sacramento) and Richmond Parkway is functionally an adaptation of the planned Route 93?

IIRC something similar occurred with the planned Route 126 connector between I-5 and Route 14, built out as a unnumbered boulevard. 

[mrsman]

  At that time Oxnard was a sleepy little agricultural town of about 25K; IIRC a bypass around the eastern side of town was planned (the usual DOH/Caltrans "circular lines" indicating a general but unadopted alignment) but obviously never saw any follow-through.

Isn't Rice Avenue essentially that eastern bypass, much in the same way Cosumnes River Boulevard going towards Freeport is an adaptation of the Route 148 corridor (in Sacramento) and Richmond Parkway is functionally an adaptation of the planned Route 93?

IIRC something similar occurred with the planned Route 126 connector between I-5 and Route 14, built out as a unnumbered boulevard.

It kind of is, but part of the problem is that Rice is a surface street.  Yes, about half of it abuts farmland, south of CA-34, but if the authorities aren't on top of things, that road could become another suburban arterial filled with development and it can slow traffic down.  Probably need to purchase some of that land to prevent development from encroaching on the future highway.

[sparker]

  At that time Oxnard was a sleepy little agricultural town of about 25K; IIRC a bypass around the eastern side of town was planned (the usual DOH/Caltrans "circular lines" indicating a general but unadopted alignment) but obviously never saw any follow-through.

Isn't Rice Avenue essentially that eastern bypass, much in the same way Cosumnes River Boulevard going towards Freeport is an adaptation of the Route 148 corridor (in Sacramento) and Richmond Parkway is functionally an adaptation of the planned Route 93?

IIRC something similar occurred with the planned Route 126 connector between I-5 and Route 14, built out as a unnumbered boulevard.

It kind of is, but part of the problem is that Rice is a surface street.  Yes, about half of it abuts farmland, south of CA-34, but if the authorities aren't on top of things, that road could become another suburban arterial filled with development and it can slow traffic down.  Probably need to purchase some of that land to prevent development from encroaching on the future highway.

The substitute for the rescinded CA 126 connector in Santa Clarita isn't one continuous roadway but a series of arterials winding through Santa Clarita.  The original CA 126 surface alignment, now relinquished, didn't actually efficiently work as a shunt between EB 126 and NB 14, since it turned south at Saugus along San Fernando Blvd. through Newhall, intersecting CA 14 southeast of town and not terribly far from the 5/14 interchange.  The proposed (and at one time actually adopted) alignment resolved that issue; it was intended to be part of a continuous CA 126 freeway across the north side of Santa Clarita, intersecting CA 14 at the present Via Princessa set of ramps just south of 14's Santa Clara River crossing.  But that alignment was severed during the 1994 round of rescindments, coincidentally a couple of years after the Metrolink Palmdale line through the area was initiated; it was widely opined that the desire to focus on transit rather than throughput roadway connectors such as the CA 126 extension doomed the freeway project -- that rationale basically continuing with the CA 1 situation.  Although it's likely that Rice Ave. will eventually see formal Caltrans adoption and signage -- if for no other reason than to efficiently feed traffic to and from PCH to the southeast, D7 probably won't be in any particular hurry to do so within the present sociopolitical climate that tends to see highly visible road connectors like this to be "enabling" the driving public to continue present patterns rather than curtail automotive use.   Agencies such as Caltrans, with a longstanding connection to road network expansion tread lightly these days, especially within urban/suburban/exurban zones like the built-up areas of Ventura County.

[TheStranger]

BREAKING NEWS

As of today (January 24, 2023), the first ever Route 1 sign has FINALLY been placed on a BGS on southbound US 101 in Oxnard, over a decade after interchange work at Rice and 101 was completed, and over 13 years since the Ventura County Star had stated that the redesignation would occur in 2009.

Via Freeways of Los Angeles facebook page:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/FreewaysLA/posts/2614122915401837/?__cft__[0]=AZXZyOeoAwuxLqmacyQ7OH2rY5XK1KzOKvytcMZljrlkrtyDrkTYnyCCTwNCWa_BgVZ47hSws8CEs5HTVSuvKn136CPvccrpMyr0m27zowIO00glQqdcEL07MykaONxErfrTiyF36dOI0OjpMxxVZkOo61wQFcyJmhwCsIuDr38bRPuX5caO3NIFKWRL9lPQM7Y&__tn__=%2CO%2CP-R

Image courtesy Dontae Duncan:

Rice Avenue Route 1 sign on 101 south - 1-24-23 by Chris Sampang, on Flickr

[Max Rockatansky]

About damn time.

[RZF]

Finally. Now pave Rice between CA-34 and US-101, create the overpass by the train tracks, and we have ourselves a bonafide state route.

[relaxok]

That sign has certainly seen better days..

[pderocco]

Naturally, they botched the sign. The 1 shield is too big, and looks like a Mr Magoo put it in place.

Is that the only BGS that has been modified so far? Have they put up any reassurance signs along Rice?

[TheStranger]

Is that the only BGS that has been modified so far? Have they put up any reassurance signs along Rice?

Per a commenter in that Freeways of Los Angeles group post:

Ben Collins
There was no new signage on southbound Rice as of yesterday. So far the southbound 101 has two signs with CA-1 decals, this and another sign closer to the exit

[ClassicHasClass]

That sign has certainly seen better days..

Caltrans' retroreflective crap is crap. It doesn't stand up to sun and delaminates like anything. Meanwhile the remaining enamel on steel signs just stay impervious.

[Max Rockatansky]

That sign has certainly seen better days..

Caltrans' retroreflective crap is crap. It doesn't stand up to sun and delaminates like anything. Meanwhile the remaining enamel on steel signs just stay impervious.

Wasn’t there an issue with the top layers of the anti-vandalism sheeting delaminating too quickly in the sun? 

Regarding the older enamel signs, I believe they were designed with a 30 year service life.  As much as modern MUTCD adherents complain about enamel signs it is hard to argue the DOH and Caltrans didn’t get their money’s worth.

[jdbx]

I think I liked the "line the post with razor wire" method of anti-vandalism better than these sheetings.

[Max Rockatansky]

I think I liked the "line the post with razor wire" method of anti-vandalism better than these sheetings.

Wasn’t that only deployed in D7?

[jdbx]

I think I liked the "line the post with razor wire" method of anti-vandalism better than these sheetings.

Wasn’t that only deployed in D7?

Yeah, I never saw it in my D4 neck-of-the-woods.  Then again, I don't think we ever had nearly the vandalism problem that they did down there. It may be perception, but it seems like graffiti was a much bigger problem back in the 90's than it is today. I guess if you want to make a name for yourself today, you can do it on TikTok without having to hang off the railing of an overpass.

[ClassicHasClass]

I think I liked the "line the post with razor wire" method of anti-vandalism better than these sheetings.

Wasn’t that only deployed in D7?

I think there was some out in D8 too.

[M3100]

Is that the only BGS that has been modified so far? Have they put up any reassurance signs along Rice?

Per a commenter in that Freeways of Los Angeles group post:

Ben Collins
There was no new signage on southbound Rice as of yesterday. So far the southbound 101 has two signs with CA-1 decals, this and another sign closer to the exit

I just noticed saw the two referenced CA-1 signs yesterday (3/12/23). The other sign also has a too-large '1' sign, also crammed up against the street name.  Other interchange sequence signs that include Rice Ave. do not yet have an CA-1 route sign on them.