California Highways
www.cahighways.org

California Highways

Routes 73 through 80

 
powered by FreeFind

California Highways Home Page
State Highway Routes
Numbered County Highways
State Highway Types
Interstate Types and History
Highway Numbering Conventions
State Highway Renumberings
State Highway Chronology
Maps Trails and Roads Related WWW Links Site Change Log Sources and Credits

Click here for a key to the symbols used. "LRN" refers to the Pre-1964 Legislative Route Number. "US" refers to a US Shield signed route. "I" refers to an Eisenhower Interstate signed route. "Route" usually indicates a state shield signed route, but said route may be signed as US or I. Previous Federal Aid (pre-1992) categories: Federal Aid Interstate (FAI); Federal Aid Primary (FAP); Federal Aid Urban (FAU); and Federal Aid Secondary (FAS). Current Functional Classifications (used for aid purposes): Principal Arterial (PA); Minor Arterial (MA); Collector (Col); Rural Minor Collector/Local Road (RMC/LR). Note that ISTEA repealed the previous Federal-Aid System, effective in 1992, and established the functional classification system for all public roads.


Quickindex

73 · 74 · 75 · 76 · 77 · 78 · 79 · 80


State Shield

State Route 73



Routing

From Route 5 near San Juan Capistrano to Route 405 via the San Joaquin Hills.

 

Post 1964 Signage History

In 1963, this route was defined as running “(a) Route 1 near Corona Del Mar to Route 405. (b) Route 405 to Route 5 in Santa Ana via Main Street.”

In 1965, Chapter 1372 deleted segment (b), thus terminating the route at I-405.

Until 1983, this route ran from Route 1 to MacArthur Blvd, and then along MacArthur Boulevard from Route 1 near Corona del Mar to San Diego Creek in Irvine.

In 1983, Chapter 849 changed the origin of the route and modified the routing to be "Route 5 near San Juan Capistrano to Route 405 via the San Joaquin Hills." It also noted that "MacArthur Boulevard from Route 1 near Corona del Mar to San Diego Creek in Irvine shall cease to be a state highway when the Route 73 freeway as described above is completed." This reflected the planned construction of the San Joaquin Hills Toll Road. A 1986 map does show the proposed tollway.

In 2003, Chapter 525 removed the text about the former portion of the route.

 

Pre 1964 Signage History

Much of the present routing was defined post-1964. The portion of the current routing from near UC Irvine to I-405 was LRN 184, defined in 1933 (as was the remainder of the since deleted 1963 routing)

Route 73 was not defined as part of the initial state signage of routes in 1934. It is unclear what (if any) route was signed as Route 73 between 1934 and 1964.

 

Status

In July 2005, the CTC considered relinquishment of right of way in the City of Newport Beach, along Bristol Street and North Bristol Street, from Jamboree Road to Irwin Avenue/Campus Drive, consisting of frontage roads. It also considered relinquishment of right of way in the County of Orange, along Bristol Street and North Bristol Street, consisting of frontage roads.

In August 2005, the CTC considered relinquishment of right of way in the City of Irvine, at University Drive South, consisting of reconstructed and relocated city streets.

In July 2007, the CTC relinquished right of way in the city of Costa Mesa, from the South City Limit to 0.4 mile North of Red Hill Avenue, consisting of reconstructed and relocated city streets. The City, by relinquishment cooperative agreement dated June 4, 2007, waived the 90-day notice requirement and agreed to accept title upon relinquishment by the State.

 

Naming

The portion of this freeway between MacArthur Blvd and Route 405 was named by the "Corona Del Mar" freeway by the local Caltrans District. The first freeway segment opened in 1977; the last segment in 1996. The named segment traverses the community of Corona Del Mar.

The pre-1983 routing (from Route 1 to Route 405 along MacArthur Blvd) was named the "Veterans Memorial Freeway". It was named by Senate Concurrent Resolution 2 in 1967. This segment is no longer in the state highway system.

Transportation Corridor The portion of this freeway between MacArthur Blvd and I-5 is named the "San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor". It is named because it traverse the San Jaoquin Hills. San Joaquin is the Spanish pronunciation of Saint Joachim - the Father of the Virgin Mary.

 

exitinfo.gif

 

Other WWW Links

 

Freeway

[SHC 253.1] Entire route. Added to the Freeway and Expressway system in 1959.

State Shield This highway is freeway (no toll) between MacArthur Blvd and I-405.

Toll Road This highway is a toll road between MacArthur Blvd and I-5. The first segment of the tollway, running from Greenfield Drive in Laguna Niguel to Laguna Canyon road, opened on 24 July 1996. The reminder of the tollway (between Jamboree Road and Laguna Canyon Road (Route 133) and between Greenfield Drive and I-5, opened on 21 November 1996. There are plans to merge the operation of this route with the Foothill Toll Roads such as Route 241.

 


Overall statistics for Route 73:

  • Total Length (2000): 21 miles
  • Average Daily Traffic (1992): 34,000 to 100,000
  • Milage Classification: Urbanized: 21.
  • Previous Federal Aid Milage: FAP: 18 mi, but this includes the original non-toll routing from Jamboree to Route 1. It is unknown how much of the toll road construction received federal aid, if any.
  • Functional Classification: Prin. Arterial: 21 mi.
  • Counties Traversed: Orange.

 

Pre-1964 Legislative Route

The route that would become LRN 72 was first defined in 1931 by Chapter 82 as the route from Alturas to Oregon State Line near New Pine Creek. In 1933, it was extended from [LRN 28] at Alturas to [LRN 29]. In 1935, it was codified into the highway code as the following route:

“[LRN 29] to the Oregon State Line near New Pine Creek via Alturas”

This definition remained unchanged until the 1963 renumbering. The route was (and is) signed as US 395.


State Shield

State Route 74



Routing
  1. From Route 5 near San Juan Capistrano to Route 15 near Lake Elsinore.

    (1) The commission may relinquish to the City of Lake Elsinore the portion of Route 74 located within the city limits of that city, upon terms and conditions the commission finds to be in the best interests of the state. (2) Any relinquishment agreement shall require that the City of Lake Elsinore administer the operation and maintenance of the highway in a manner consistent with professional traffic engineering standards. (3) Any relinquishment agreement shall require the City of Lake Elsinore to ensure that appropriate traffic studies or analyses will be performed to substantiate any decisions affecting the highway. (4) Any relinquishment agreement shall also require the City of Lake Elsinore to provide for public notice and the consideration of public input on the proximate effects of any proposed decision on traffic flow, residences, or businesses, other than a decision on routine maintenance. (5) Notwithstanding any of its other terms, any relinquishment agreement shall require the City of Lake Elsinore to indemnify and hold the department harmless from any liability for any claims made or damages suffered by any person, including a public entity, as a result of any decision made or action taken by the City of Lake Elsinore, its officers, employees, contractors, or agents, with respect to the design, maintenance, construction, or operation of that portion of Route 74 that is to be relinquished to the city. (6) A relinquishment under this subdivision shall become effective immediately after the county recorder records the relinquishment resolution that contains the commission's approval of the terms and conditions of the relinquishment. (7) On and after the effective date of the relinquishment, both of the following shall occur: (A) The portion of Route 74 relinquished shall cease to be a state highway. (B) The portion of Route 74 relinquished may not be considered for future adoption under Section 81. (8) The City of Lake Elsinore shall ensure the continuity of traffic flow on the relinquished portion of Route 74, including any traffic signal progression. (9) For relinquished portions of Route 74, the City of Lake Elsinore shall maintain signs directing motorists to the continuation of Route 74.

    The right of way in the city of Perris was relinquished in August 2009.


    Post 1964 Signage History

    In 1963, this segment was defined as the route from “Route 5 near San Juan Capistrano to Route 71.”

    This segment was originally planned as freeway in 1965.

    In 1976, Chapter 1354, changed "Route 71" to "Route 15", reflecting the establishment of the route of the real I-15, and the renumbering of the old I-15 as I-15E (Route 194)

    In 1986, Chapter 928 clarified the terminus of this segment to be “Route 15 near Lake Elsinore.”

    In 2008, Chapter 635 (AB 1915, 9/30/2008) authorized the relinquishement of the portion within the City of Lake Elsinore with the usual language:

    (1) The commission may relinquish to the City of Lake Elsinore the portion of Route 74 located within the city limits of that city, upon terms and conditions the commission finds to be in the best interests of the state.

    (2) Any relinquishment agreement shall require that the City of Lake Elsinore administer the operation and maintenance of the highway in a manner consistent with professional traffic engineering standards.

    (3) Any relinquishment agreement shall require the City of Lake Elsinore to ensure that appropriate traffic studies or analyses will be performed to substantiate any decisions affecting the highway.

    (4) Any relinquishment agreement shall also require the City of Lake Elsinore to provide for public notice and the consideration of public input on the proximate effects of any proposed decision on traffic flow, residences, or businesses, other than a decision on routine maintenance.

    (5) Notwithstanding any of its other terms, any relinquishment agreement shall require the City of Lake Elsinore to indemnify and hold the department harmless from any liability for any claims made or damages suffered by any person, including a public entity, as a result of any decision made or action taken by the City of Lake Elsinore, its officers, employees, contractors, or agents, with respect to the design, maintenance, construction, or operation of that portion of Route 74 that is to be relinquished to the city.

    (6) A relinquishment under this subdivision shall become effective immediately after the county recorder records the relinquishment resolution that contains the commission's approval of the terms and conditions of the relinquishment.

    (7) On and after the effective date of the relinquishment, both of the following shall occur: (A) The portion of Route 74 relinquished shall cease to be a state highway. (B) The portion of Route 74 relinquished may not be considered for future adoption under Section 81.

    (8) The City of Lake Elsinore shall ensure the continuity of traffic flow on the relinquished portion of Route 74, including any traffic signal progression.

    (9) For relinquished portions of Route 74, the City of Lake Elsinore shall maintain signs directing motorists to the continuation of Route 74.

     

    Pre 1964 Signage History

    This has been signed as Route 74 since the initial signage of state routes in 1934. It was LRN 64, and was defined in 1933.

     

    Status

    There are regional transportation improvement plans to widen the portion of Route 74 in Orange County. There are also rumors that a tunnel might be constructed to replace Route 74 (or supplement it) to improve transportation in the Orange-Riverside County corridor. Current discussions propose a triple tunnel, dug for 10 to 14 miles beneath the Santa Ana Mountains - and the Cleveland National Forest - north of Camp Pendleton. The estimated cost would be $3.6 Billion. See Route 91 for more information.

    In December 2005, the OCTA, using Measure M money, authorized widening the I-5/Route 74 interchange and widening at San Antonio Parkway. However, they eliminated from consideration plans to widen Route 55, into which Route 91 feeds, and to widen Ortega Highway (Route 74) in South County.

    Caltrans also has plans to widen lower Ortega Hwy (Route 74). The existing alignment consists of four through lanes from I-5 to approximately 330 feet (ft.) east of Calle Entradero where it transitions to two through lanes. The proposed project would widen Route 74 from two lanes to four through lanes from Calle Entradero (PM 1.0) in the City of San Juan Capistrano to the City/County line at PM 1.9. Route 74 was constructed circa 1930/32 from plans prepared for Joint Highway District 15. The road was originally designed to be two lanes; each lane being 31 ft. (6.7 m) wide with a maximum grade of 6%, for vehicle speeds of 25 miles per hour (mph) to 40 mph. In 1959, this route was included within the State Freeway and Expressway System. The project would involve some alignment shifts, construction of retaining walls, and clear soundwalls. Detail can be found in the EIR. Construction for this project would be expected to start in mid-2009 and be completed in the winter of 2011. The basic widening would occur primarily on the north side of Route 74 to minimize removal of mature trees and the existing sidewalk on the south side. Currently, there are two 12-ft. lanes in each direction and no median throughout the project area. The construction would provide one additional 12-ft. wide lane in each direction, as well as a 12-ft. wide painted median. A 5-ft.-wide paved shoulder would be provided on each side of the roadway to accommodate striped on-road bicycle facilities, except from Avenida Siega to the City/County limits where it would transition to an 8-ft.-wide shoulder to merge with the County portion of the project. The edge of the pavement would have concrete curbs on each side of the roadway.

    In August and September 2008, the CTC considered splitting the widening in San Juan Capestrano into two projects. As noted above, the project proposes to widen Route 74, in and near San Juan Capistrano, by adding one lane in each direction. This will eliminate traffic bottlenecks between Calle Entradero and the San Juan Capistrano city limits and will improve the general traffic flow within the project limits. The limits of the project extend approximately one mile inside and one mile outside the city limits of San Juan Capistrano. The segment outside the city limits (the Orange County segment) has obtained environmental clearance and is ready for construction as of August 2008. Environmental clearance for the segment within the city limits has been delayed due to the need for additional environmental studies. Orange County would like to proceed with construction of the segment outside the city limits. Therefore, it is proposed to split the project into two segments, a city segment and a county segment, as follows:

    • PPNO 4110 (city segment) – In Orange County, in the city of San Juan Capistrano from Calle Entradero to the San Juan Capistrano city limit – widen from two to four lanes.

    • PPNO 4110A (county segment) – In Orange County, near San Juan Capistrano, from the San Juan Capistrano city limit to Antonio Parkway/La Pata Avenue – widen from two to four lanes.

    In 2007, work was begun on the Caltrans Ortega Highway Safety Improvement Project, which involves a three-mile section from San Juan Hot Springs and the Orange County line. This stretch of road has a section of narrow lanes, limited turn-out areas and high accident rates. The project will add 4-foot shoulders to each side of the highway, add safety enhancements to reduce road closures due to rock slides, place rumble strips in the median, improve sight distances by removing protruding rock walls, widen the existing 10-foot lanes to standard 12-foot lanes, improve drainage facilities into San Juan Creek, and improve turnouts and add two new turnouts, one in each direction. This project was completed in 2008.

    In 2005, about 8,900 cars a day used the route, with traffic expected to swell to 28,700 cars a day by 2025, according to Caltrans.

    In August 2009, the CTC approved relinquishment of right of way in the city of Perris on Route 74, under terms and conditions as stated in the relinquishment cooperative agreement dated July 9, 2009, determined to be in the best interest of the State. Authorized by Chapter 635, Statutes of 2008, which amended Section 374 of the Streets and Highways Code.

     

    Double Fine Zones

    Between Route 5 and the Riverside-Orange County Line. Authorized by Senate Bill 155, Chapter 169, on July 23, 1999.

     

    Naming

    This segment has been historically named the "Ortega Highway".

    The segment is also named the "California Wildland Firefighters Memorial Highway". On August 8, 1959, the Decker Canyon fire was ignited on when a car drove off a Route 74 embankment, crashing through brush to the canyon floor, some 200 feet below. The vehicle burst into flames, and winds whipped the flames into a firestorm racing uphill toward firefighters battling the blaze from above. Six firefighters made the ultimate sacrifice while protecting and serving the people of California by battling the Decker Canyon fire; twenty-seven other firefighters were injured in the fire. California experiences hundreds of wildland fires every year, and thousands of firefighters from local, state, and federal agencies fight these fires to protect lives and property. These men and women of the wildland firefighting services are dedicated in their efforts to save lives and property from destruction, and nearly every year wildland firefighters are injured and killed fighting wildland fires across the State of California. Named by Senate Concurrent Resolution 71, Chapter 22, Chaptered March 26, 2002.


  2. From Route 15 near Lake Elsinore to Route 215 near Perris.

    (1) The commission may relinquish to the City of Perris the portion of Route 74 located within the city limits of that city between Seventh Street and Redlands Avenue, upon terms and conditions the commission finds to be in the best interests of the state. (2) Any relinquishment agreement shall require that the City of Perris administer the operation and maintenance of the highway in a manner consistent with professional traffic engineering standards. (3) Any relinquishment agreement shall require the City of Perris to ensure that appropriate traffic studies or analyses will be performed to substantiate any decisions affecting the highway. (4) Any relinquishment agreement shall also require the City of Perris to provide for public notice and the consideration of public input on the proximate effects of any proposed decision on traffic flow, residences, or businesses, other than a decision on routine maintenance. (5) Notwithstanding any of its other terms, any relinquishment agreement shall require the City of Perris to indemnify and hold the department harmless from any liability for any claims made or damages suffered by any person, including a public entity, as a result of any decision made or action taken by the City of Perris, its officers, employees, contractors, or agents, with respect to the design, maintenance, construction, or operation of that portion of Route 74 that is to be relinquished to the city. (6) A relinquishment under this subdivision shall become effective immediately after the county recorder records the relinquishment resolution that contains the commission's approval of the terms and conditions of the relinquishment. (7) On and after the effective date of the relinquishment, both of the following shall occur: (A) The portion of Route 74 relinquished shall cease to be a state highway. (B) The portion of Route 74 relinquished may not be considered for future adoption under Section 81. (8) The City of Perris shall ensure the continuity of traffic flow on the relinquished portion of Route 74, including any traffic signal progression. (9) For relinquished portions of Route 74, the City of Perris shall maintain signs directing motorists to the continuation of Route 74.


    Post 1964 Signage History

    In 1963, this segment was defined as “Route 71 to Route 395 near Perris”

    In 1969, Chapter 294 changed "Route 395" to "Route 15", reflecting the renumbering of US 395 as I-15.

    In 1976, Chapter 1354, changed "Route 71" to "Route 15", and "Route 15" to "Route 194", reflecting the establishment of the route of the real I-15, and the renumbering of the old I-15 as I-15E (Route 194)

    In 1982, Chapter 681 changed "Route 194" to "Route 215", reflecting the approval of former US 395 (a/k/a I-15E, Route 194) as non-chargable I-215.

    In 1986, Chapter 928 clarified the origin of the segment to be “Route 15 near Lake Elsinore”.

    In 2008, Chapter 635 (AB 1915, 9/30/2008) authorized the relinquishement of the portion within the City of Perris with the usual language:

    (1) The commission may relinquish to the City of Perris the portion of Route 74 located within the city limits of that city between Seventh Street and Redlands Avenue, upon terms and conditions the commission finds to be in the best interests of the state.

    (2) Any relinquishment agreement shall require that the City of Perris administer the operation and maintenance of the highway in a manner consistent with professional traffic engineering standards.

    (3) Any relinquishment agreement shall require the City of Perris to ensure that appropriate traffic studies or analyses will be performed to substantiate any decisions affecting the highway.

    (4) Any relinquishment agreement shall also require the City of Perris to provide for public notice and the consideration of public input on the proximate effects of any proposed decision on traffic flow, residences, or businesses, other than a decision on routine maintenance.

    (5) Notwithstanding any of its other terms, any relinquishment agreement shall require the City of Perris to indemnify and hold the department harmless from any liability for any claims made or damages suffered by any person, including a public entity, as a result of any decision made or action taken by the City of Perris, its officers, employees, contractors, or agents, with respect to the design, maintenance, construction, or operation of that portion of Route 74 that is to be relinquished to the city.

    (6) A relinquishment under this subdivision shall become effective immediately after the county recorder records the relinquishment resolution that contains the commission's approval of the terms and conditions of the relinquishment.

    (7) On and after the effective date of the relinquishment, both of the following shall occur: (A) The portion of Route 74 relinquished shall cease to be a state highway. (B) The portion of Route 74 relinquished may not be considered for future adoption under Section 81.

    (8) The City of Perris shall ensure the continuity of traffic flow on the relinquished portion of Route 74, including any traffic signal progression.

    (9) For relinquished portions of Route 74, the City of Perris shall maintain signs directing motorists to the continuation of Route 74.

     

    Pre 1964 Signage History

    This has been signed as Route 74 since the initial signage of state routes in 1934. This segment was established in 1931 as LRN 78, and was renumbered as part of LRN 64 in 1951 by Chapter 1562. Until 1950, this was also signed as US 395.

     

    Status

    The SAFETEA-LU act, enacted in August 2005 as the reauthorization of TEA-21, provided the following expenditures on or near this route:

    • High Priority Project #3209: Route 74/I-215 Interchange Project. $800,000.

    There are plans to relinquish this route in Lake Elsinore and Perris to give the city more control over the roadway. In June 2008, the state Senate Transportation and Housing Committee unanimously approved AB 1915, a bill sponsored by Assemblyman Kevin Jeffries, R-Lake Elsinore. The vote sends the relinquishment bill to the Senate Appropriations Committee, after which it will be voted on by the full Senate and then Gov. Schwarzenegger. Lake Elsinore has sought to control a portion of Route 74 from just east of I-15 to Grand Avenue since 2006, after Caltrans denied the city's request to put a traffic signal at a corner where a 9-year-old girl died in 2004. By acquiring the roadway, which runs along portions of Central Avenue, Collier Avenue and Riverside Drive, the city would be able to complete about $8 million in road improvements. Perris wants to control a portion of the highway between Redlands Avenue and Seventh Street to make similar improvements. (source)

    There are plans to improve the interchange of Route 74 and I-215 in Perris. In August 2009, it was reported that the non-shovel-ready status of a project to revamp Van Buren Boulevard's connection with Route 91 in Riverside meant that the $16 million in federal ARRA funds of that project could be reallocated to the next regional priority: the crossing of westbound Route 74 and I-215. The almost $40 million project at westbound Route 74 would also widen a freeway overcrossing to four lanes instead of two, as well as widen freeway on- and off-ramps.

    Mid-County Parkway

    Plans are underway for a major rerouting of this segment (or perhaps a new segment) to improve regional transportation. Information can be found at http://www.rctc.org/, which is the agenda for the Riverside County Transportation Commission. More information can also be found at the Riverside County Improvement Project pages, www.rcip.org. In short, the State Route 74 Realignment project is a Measure "A" project from Dexter Avenue in the City of Lake Elsinore to 7th Street in the City of Perris. The project will be constructed in two segments. Segment 1 is from Dexter Avenue in Lake Elsinore to approximately 1640 feet east of Wasson Canyon Road. Segment 2 is from approximately 1640 feet east of Wasson Canyon Road to 7th Street in Perris.

    According to a recent article in the Los Angeles Times, this proposal may have been the subject of some rerouting. Although Route 74 was not mentioned by number, the article discussed how the push for a new thoroughfare between Corona and Hemet has created trouble in Lake Elsinore, where there was an earlier proposal (i.e., the Route 74 propsoal) which would make the Lake Elsinore the western terminus of the route. Evidently, the RTCT originally supported a route north of Lake Mathews, but that ran into pricy homes and strong opposition from residents. The alternative would send the 40-mile, $700-million road south of the lake, through an endangered-species reserve, which naturally creates problems for environmentalists. The route now favored would expand the existing two-lane Cajalco Road through the nature preserve south of the lake. However, in Lake Elsinore, they are upset because the originally plan was a 22-mile route that would connect I-15 near Lake Elsinore to Route 79 near Diamond Valley Lake. However, because of the possibility of someday linking the route near Lake Mathews to a new thoroughfare running into Orange County, support for the Lake Elsinore-Diamond Valley Lake roadway declined.

    One alternative is the Mid-County Parkway. An option favored by the city to build a stretch of the proposed Mid County Parkway next to Perris Dam is considered to be is unsafe because of seismic dangers. Officials hope the future freeway will help relieve east-west traffic congestion in the rapidly growing corridor between San Jacinto and Corona. The project is expected to cost $2 billion and would extend 32 miles from Corona to San Jacinto. The six- to eight-lane parkway would serve as an alternate east-west freeway to State Routes 60 and 91. Construction is scheduled to start in 2011. State officials say routing the parkway via the dam ("North Perris Option") is out of the question, because of the risk of earthquakes and liquefaction of soils beneath the dam's eastern foundation. The RCTC would like the City of Perris to instead pick one of three remaining parkway routing options: via Placentia Avenue, via Rider Street, or via the city's storm drain canal. The storm drain route, however, would be the most expensive of the four options, for the drain passes through an area of town prone to flooding and the parkway would thus have to be elevated there to protect motorists from rising waters. The problem with the Rider Street option is it could require the construction of a road connecting Rider to Cajalco Road or Placentia Avenue on the west side of I-215 -- depending on if the parkway goes up along Cajalco or Placentia. The fourth option of routing the parkway through Perris along Placentia Avenue east of I-215 would be the cheapest and straightest through the city, but would require moving a state-of-art fire station out of the way, which city officials only dedicated in early 2007.

     

     

    Double Fine Zones

    Between Route 15 and 7th Street in Perris. Authorized by Senate Bill 1526, Chapter 446, September 14, 2000.

     

    Other WWW Links

    While in Perris, you really should visit the Orange Empire Railway Museum, on "A" Street. It is the west's largest operating railroad museum; you can see the trollycars that use to run in Los Angeles.


  3. From Route 215 near Perris to Route 10 near Thousand Palms via Hemet and Palm Desert.

    The commission may relinquish to the City of Palm Desert the portion of Route 74 that is located within the city limits of that city, upon terms and conditions the commission finds to be in the best interests of the state, if the department and the city enter into an agreement providing for that relinquishment. A relinquishment under this subdivision shall become effective immediately following the county recorder's recordation of the relinquishment resolution containing the commission's approval of the terms and conditions of the relinquishment. On and after the effective date of the relinquishment, the relinquished portion of Route 74 shall cease to be a state highway. The portion of Route 74 relinquished under this subdivision shall be ineligible for future adoption under Section 81. For the portion of Route 74 that is relinquished under this subdivision, the City of Palm Desert shall maintain within its jurisdiction signs directing motorists to the continuation of Route 74. [SB 186, 10/6/2005, Chapter 594]. The Palm Desert segment was relinquished in February 2008.


    Post 1964 Signage History

    As defined in 1963, this segment ran from “Route 395 near Perris to Route 111.”

    Unconstructed In 1965, Chapter 1372 extended this segment to terminate at “Route 10 near Indio.” Note that the portion from Route 111 to Route 10 remains unconstructed.

    In 1969, Chapter 294 changed "Route 395" to "Route 15", reflecting the renumbering of US 395 as I-15.

    In 1976, Chapter 1354 changed "Route 15" to "Route 194", reflecting the establishment of the route of the real I-15, and the renumbering of the old I-15 as I-15E (Route 194)

    In 1982, Chapter 681 changed "Route 194" to "Route 215", reflecting the approval of former US 395 (a/k/a I-15E, Route 194) as non-chargable I-215.

    In 1986, Chapter 928 clarified the terminus of the segment to be “Route 10 near Thousand Palms via Hemet and Palm Desert”. Under this current routing, Monterey Avenue may be Route 74 between Route 111 and I-10.

    In 2005, Chapter 594 authorized relinquishment of the portion in Palm Desert. This segment was relinquished in February 2008.

     

    Pre 1964 Signage History

    This segment was originally signed as Route 740 in the initial state signage of routes in 1934. This was later changed (sometime between 1939 and 1956) to Route 74. It was LRN 64, and was defined in 1933.

     

    Status

    As of August 2009, work is underway to transform the I-215/Route 74 EB interchange. Freshly raked dirt and still-bundled palm trees are the first signs of a $1 million facelift for the highway crossroads. The upgrade will bring reclaimed water lines to feed the new landscaping -- a drought-tolerant mix of palm, plum, pear trees, deer grass, and rocks that should be in place by November 2009. Although they look new with fronds still tied, the palm trees are the original trees from the property, which were pruned and moved. The property's old eucalyptus trees and shrubbery are long gone. The landscaping overhaul is the first of three phases for the Romoland Beautification Project, which has been seven years in the making and would, if completed, cost a total $3 million in redevelopment funds. The next two phases would improve an almost 2-mile stretch on eastbound Route 74 between Trumble and Palomar roads, adding sidewalks, trees, curbs and gutters to the highway's north side. New stoplights would be installed at the highway's intersection with Sherman and Antelope roads, where traffic has injured and killed pedestrians trying to cross.
    [Based on an article in the Riverside Press Enterprise, "Work started to create interchange oasis", 2009-08-19]

     

    Naming

    In Hemet, this is "Florida" Avenue in Hemet, and is "Idyllwild National Forest" Highway between Hemet and Route 243.

    Historically, the entire segment (from Perris to Route 111) has been named the "Pines to Palms Highway".

Status

There is currently work underway to explore some realignments of this route, in particular, the portion from Hemet to Corona/Lake Elsinore.

 

Freeway

[SHC 253.1] Entire route. Added to the Freeway and Expressway system in 1959.

 

National Trails

De Anza Auto Route This route is part of the De Anza National Historic Trail.

 

Other WWW Links

 


Overall statistics for Route 74:

  • Total Length (1995): 112 miles traversable; 5 miles unconstructed
  • Average Daily Traffic (1992): 2,300 to 30,000
  • Milage Classification: Rural: 85; Sm. Urban 8; Urbanized: 24.
  • Previous Federal Aid Milage: FAP: 112 mi.
  • Functional Classification: Prin. Arterial: 33 mi; Minor Arterial: 79 mi.
  • Counties Traversed: Orange, Riverside.

 

Scenic Highway

[SHC 263.1] Entire route.

 

Interregional Route

[SHC 164.14] Entire route.

 

Pre-1964 Legislative Route

The route that was to become LRN 74 was first defined in 1931 by Chapter 82 as the route from Vallejo to [LRN 8]. In 1935, it was codified into the highway code as “Vallejo to [LRN 8]”, but was quickly amended by Chapter 274 to be the following:

“A point on [LRN 8] near the Napa Y to Cordelia via Vallejo and Benecia”

In 1947 during the 1st executive session, Chapter 13 added a branch to the ferry in Benicia: “including a connection from Vallejo to [LRN 7] near the Carquinez Bridge.”

In 1953, Chapter 1737 made the clause about the Benecia Ferry contingent on the acquisition by the Department of Public Works of the ferry system operated across the Carquinez Straights between the cities of Benecia and Martinez. This was done because the city of Martinez was about to close down the ferry system across the straights, and it was necessary to keep the ferry in operation to serve numerous refineries, chemical plants, steel companies, and other industries necessary for national defense, workers commuting both to and from such industries, and the extremely important Benecia Arsenal.

In 1959, Chapter 1062 extended the route to begin at [LRN 6] near Napa, and removed the contingency.

This route was signed as Route 29 between Vallejo and Napa, and was defined in 1931.

The segment between Benicia and Vallejo was originally signed as Route 29, and is present-day I-780.


State Shield

State Route 75



Routing

From Route 5 to Route 5 via the Silver Strand and the San Diego-Coronado Toll Bridge.

 

Post 1964 Signage History

As defined in 1963, this route was defined as two segments “(a) Route 125 east of Brown Field to Route 5 near the south end of San Diego Bay. (b) Route 5 to the San Diego-Coronado Ferry in Coronado via Silver Strand.” However, later that year Chapter 1698 changed the origin of segment (a) to “Route 125 near Brown Field”.

In 1967, Chapter 1483 split segment (b) and added the bridge, giving “(b) Route 5 to Fourth Street in Coronado via Silver Strand. (c) Orange Avenue in Coronado to Route 5 in San Diego via the San Diego-Coronado Toll Bridge. Subdivision (c) of this section shall not become operative until the San Diego-Coronado Toll Bridge and approaches are completed and open for traffic.” It also added segment (d) as a temporary measure until the bridge was completed: “(d) Fourth Street to the San Diego-Coronado Ferry via Orange Avenue in Coronado. The portion of this route described in subdivision (d) shall cease to be a state highway when the portion of this route described in subdivision (c) is completed and open for traffic.”

In 1968, Chapter 1139 combined segments (b) and (c) and removed (d): “(b) Route 5 to Route 5 via the Silver Strand and the San Diego-Coronado Toll Bridge.”

In 1976, Chapter 1354 deleted segment (a) and transferred it to Route 117, renumbered in 1985 to Route 905 (non-chargable interstate). This part of the route was LRN 281.

 

Pre 1964 Signage History

This route was not part of the original state signage of routes in 1934, although it was signed as Route 75 as least since the early 1940s. The route was LRN 199, and was defined in 1933. It ran along Orange, Silver Strand Blvd, and Palm Avenue.

 

Status

Constructed as freeway from Route 282 to Route 5 in San Diego. The San Diego-Coronado Bridge was originally a toll bridge, but the toll was removed on June 27, 2002. SANDAG is currently considering reinstating the tolls. The tolls would raise money for a proposed tunnel and other projects aimed at easing traffic congestion. San Diego released an analysis in April 2009 that found that tolls could raise an initial $140 million with a rate of $1.50 each way during the four- year construction of the tunnel from 2014 to 2018. The most expensive of two proposed tunnel designs is projected to cost $590 million. If new, higher rates are in place by 2019, tolls could generate up to an additional $460 million over a 40-year period, the study says. That figure is based on rates that could range from $1.50 per crossing during off-peak traffic hours to $5 per trip in peak traffic. That means drivers would pay $10 round trip to cross the bridge during peak traffic hours.

There have been reports that there is a study regarding constructing a double tunnel that would run for a mile beneath Coronado, connecting the western side of the Coronado Bridge to the North Island Naval Air Station. Currently, surface streets between the bridge and the Navy base carry as many as 96,000 vehicles a day - far above the capacity they were designed for and more traffic than any other arterial road in San Diego County.

The SAFETEA-LU act, enacted in August 2005 as the reauthorization of TEA-21, provided the following expenditures on or near this route:

  • High Priority Project #866: Planning, design, engineering and construction of the Naval Air Station, North Island access tunnel on the Route 75/Route 282 corridor, San Diego. Additional funding provided by HPP #3789. $4,000,000.

  • High Priority Project #3789: Planning, design, engineering and construction of the Naval Air Station, North Island access tunnel on the Route 75/Route 282 corridor, San Diego. This seems to be additional funding for construction. $5,000,000.

 

 

Named Structures

Bridge 57-857, over the Coronado Bay in San Diego, is named the "San Diego-Coronado Bridge". It was built in 1969, and named by Assembly Concurrent Resolution 85, Chapter 150, in 1989.

 

exitinfo.gif

 

Other WWW Links

 

Scenic Highway

[SHC 263.1] Entire route.

 


Overall statistics for Route 75:

  • Total Length (1995): 13 miles
  • Average Daily Traffic (1993): 20,100 to 68,000
  • Milage Classification: Urbanized: 13.
  • Previous Federal Aid Milage: FAU: 13 mi.
  • Functional Classification: Prin. Arterial: 13 mi.
  • Counties Traversed: San Diego.

 

Commuter Lanes

An HOV exclusive lane exists on the Toll Plaza at the Coronado Bridge. It requires two or more occupants, and is open 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.

 

Pre-1964 Legislative Route

The route that became LRN 75 was first defined in 1931 by Chapter 82 as the route from Walnut Creek to Oakland. It was extended in 1933 with two segments: one from [LRN 75] near Walnut Creek to [LRN 5] near Stockton via Antioch, and one from [LRN 4] near Stockton to [LRN 65] near Altaville. In 1935, the route was defined in the highway code as:

  1. Oakland to [LRN 5] near Stockton via Walnut Creek and Antioch
  2. [LRN 4] near Stockton via Copperopolis to [LRN 65] near Altaville

In 1949, Chapter 1467 added a branch to Martinez as segment (b): “Route (a) above, north of Walnut Creek to Martinez”

In 1951, Chapter 1562 changed “[LRN 5] near Stockton” to “[LRN 4] near Stockton”.

In 1953, Chapter 1737 reworded segment (b) [2] to be “Route (a) above, north of Walnut Creek to a connection with [LRN 74] in Benecia”. This change was contingent on the acquisition by the Department of Public Works of the ferry system operated across the Carquinez Straights between the cities of Benecia and Martinez. This was done because the city of Martinez was about to close down the ferry system across the straights, and it was necessary to keep the ferry in operation to serve numerous refineries, chemical plants, steel companies, and other industries necessary for national defense, workers commuting both to and from such industries, and the extremely important Benecia Arsenal. The chapter also mistakenly deleted (c), from [LRN 4] near Stockton to [LRN 65].

In 1954, Chapter 8 from the Extraordinary Session corrected the deletion of (c)

In 1957, Chapter 1911 changed "[LRN 74] at Benecia" to "near Benecia".

In 1959, Chapter 1698 would have changed the definition further, deleting the Benecia branch (segment (b)), and changing (c) to be "[LRN 4] near Stockton to [LRN 249] near Farmington", but that was overtaken by the 1963 renumbering.

Signage on this route was as follows:

  1. From Oakland to LRN 4 near Stockton via Walnut Creek and Antioch.

    This was signed as Route 24, later Route 4 between US 50 (present-day I-580) in Oakland and Walnut Creek. A brief portion in Stockton appears to be a duplicate with LRN 5 (specifically, Route 4 between El Dorado St and Mariposa St.). From Stockton proper, it ran S along Mariposa St to LRN 4 (US 99).

    LRN 75 was cosigned as Route 21/Route 24 between Walnut Creek and the vicinity of Pleasant Hill; this is present-day I-680.

    LRN 75 was signed as Route 24 between the vicinity of Pleasant Hill and Concord. The stretch from I-680 N of Concord to Route 4 is signed Route 242, but was previously signed as Route 24.

    LRN 75 was cosigned as Route 4/Route 24 between Concord and 4 mi E of Antioch. It was signed as Route 4 from 4 mi E of Antioch to Stockton.

  2. From segment 1 N of Walnut Creek to a connection with LRN 74 near Benicia.

    This segment was signed as Route 21 between Walnut Creek and Benicia.

  3. LRN 4 (US 99) near Stockton via Copperopolis to LRN 65 (Route 49) near Altaville.

    This was signed as Route 4. This left US 99 along Farmington Road.


State Shield

State Route 76



Routing

From Route 5 near Oceanside to Route 79 near Lake Henshaw.

 

Post 1964 Signage History

This segment remains as defined in 1963.

 

Pre 1964 Signage History

Route 76 was not defined in the initial 1934 state signage of routes. Portions of this route (US 395 (now I-15) to Route 79) were signed as Route 76 in the mid 1950s. The entire route was signed as Route 76 by 1963. The route was LRN 195, defined in 1933.

 

Status

Route 76 ImprovementsThere are plans to widen this route. The goal is to widen Route 76 from two to four lanes between Melrose Drive in Oceanside and I-15. The goal is to complete the 2½-mile stretch between Melrose and East Vista Way in 2007. This length of time is due to bridge work and a number of culverts that will be constructed for stormwater runoff and to serve as wildlife corridors between the river and nearby upland areas. The widening from East Vista Way to South Mission Road in Bonsall, which connects that community with Fallbrook, won't begin before 2008, due to the length of time it takes to determine the route and acquire property.

As for the stretch between between South Mission and I-15—that 5 1/2-mile stretch could possibly see work started by 2009, with completion in 2011. There are four alternatives being considered in the EIR:

  • Existing Alternative: This alternative includes widening the roadway from a two-lane highway to a four-lane facility with improvements to the Route 15 interchange on and off ramps. The project would limit access to Route 76 from businesses and home driveways to frontage roads with signalized intersections. Additional improvements under this alternative would include soft-bottom culverts over creeks to allow drainage and to support wildlife movements between the San Luis Rey River and upland habitats.

  • Southern Alternative: This alternative includes constructing a four-lane facility south of the San Luis Rey River with two bridge structures. Additional improvements under this alternative would include soft-bottom culverts over creeks to allow drainage and to support wildlife movements between the San Luis Rey River and upland habitats.

  • No-Build Alternative. This alternative does not address the existing and future traffic demands.

There was originally a Split-Facility Alignment, which would build three westbound lanes along the existing alignment and three eastbound lanes on the proposed Southern Alignment, but that seems to have gone away. In Decmeber 2008, the CTC had no comments on the notice of preparation of the EIR for this project. The proposed project would construct roadway improvements consisting of lane additions and interchange ramp improvements along portions of Route 76 and Route 15 through the unincorporated communities of Bonsall and Fallbrook in San Diego County. Upon completion of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR), a proposed route adoption will be presented to the Commission. The project is fully funded and utilizes local tax ordinance, TransNet and TransNet Extension funding through the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG). Construction is expected to begin in Fiscal Year 2012.

[Bonsall]In March 2009, the CTC approved for future consideration of funding a project to widen Route 76 from two to four lanes and construct roadway improvements from Melrose Drive and South Mission Road near the community of Bonsall. The project includes local Transnet and federal Demonstration funds. The total estimated cost is $230,908,000, capital and support. The Department and San Diego Association of Governments may consider pursuing federal stimulus dollars in lieu of local or other federal funds. Construction is estimated to begin in Fiscal Year 2009-10.

In January 2010, Caltrans broke ground on a $182 million expansion that will add one lane in each direction, from Melrose Drive in Oceanside to South Mission Road in Bonsall. About 30,000 vehicles travel the five-mile stretch daily — a figure that’s expected to double by 2030 due to development. More than $75 million of the project cost will be covered by the federal government’s economic stimulus program, with an additional $17 million in federal contributions and $14 million in state transportation funds. About $76 million will come from TransNet, a half-cent, voter-approved sales tax in San Diego County. Completion is expected by the end of 2012.

There is also work to expand the route east of I-15. In April 2008, blasting commenced related to improvements to Route 76 east of I-15 to straighten and widen Route 76 to 4 lanes with a center turn lane for about 2 miles. Later work will continue over to Valley Center Road that will make Route 76 two lanes with a center turn lane and full shoulders.The work is funded by impact fees assesed as part of expansions of 2 casinos, a quarry and a landfill to be built nearby.

A short, privately funded improvement is nearly complete on Route 76, for about 2 miles east of I-15 towards Pala. The new road is a striped 4 lane with left turn pockets where needed using modern geometry, there will be freeway style lighting at the intersections that have yet to be activated. Route 76 was a very narrow 2 lane road, that has had explosive traffic growth due to four major Indian casinos within 7 to 15 miles east of the interstate, three of which now have 10-15 floor hotel towers as part of the resorts. This project was totally funded by a soon to open quarry and the two casinos closest to the interstate, it eliminates some 90° bends that occur immediately east or the interstate. This project was a phase one, the next phase will extend the work to east of Couser Canyon road and will elimanate a sharp curve there by building the raod on a sweeping new alignment. Both phases were designed by Caltrans.

The SAFETEA-LU act, enacted in August 2005 as the reauthorization of TEA-21, provided the following expenditures on or near this route:

  • High Priority Project #2719: Route 76 Road Widening, Melrose Drive to I-15. $4,000,000.

 

 

Naming

The portion of Route 76 between Route 5 and Route 15 is named the "San Luis Rey Mission Expressway". Mission San Luis Rey, founded in 1798, was the 18th of 21 missions established in California. It is situated between the existing missions at San Diego and San Juan Capistrano. Named by Assembly Concurrent Resolution No. 6, Chapter 54, in 1995.

The portion of Route 76 between the North Coast Highway and Douglas Drive in the City of Oceanside is named the "Oceanside Police Officer Tony Zeppetella Memorial Highway". It was named in memory of Oceanside Police Officer Tony Zeppetella, who was shot and killed in the line of duty on June 13, 2003, during the course of a traffic stop. Tony Zeppetella was born on October 2, 1975, in Whittier, California. He was raised in Paso Robles, California where he attended and graduated from Paso Robles High School. Prior to beginning his career with the Oceanside Police Department, Tony Zeppetella served in the United States Navy for six years and attended Central Texas College and the University of Phoenix. He joined the Oceanside Police Department on May 13, 2002. After successfully completing his academy training in October, 2002, he reported to the Oceanside Police Department, where he made significant contributions to traffic safety and to the motoring public while assigned to the Oceanside Police Department. Named by Assembly Concurrent Resolution 133, August 11, 2004, Chapter 137

 

Business Routes

The former surface routing of Route 76 is a business routing. It has been relinquished or vacated by Caltrans. This could relate to the relinquishments on the February 2003 CTC agenda: Relinquishment of the segment at PM 37.5 in the City of Oceanside, and vacation of the segment PM 6.7/7.4 in the City of Oceanside.

 

Other WWW Links

 

Freeway

[SHC 253.4] From Route 5 near Oceanside to Route 15. Added to the Freeway and Expressway system in 1959.

 

Interstate Submissions

In November 1957, the designation I-76 was proposed for what is now I-80, in order to not conflict with US 80. This was rejected by AASHTO.

 

Scenic Highway

[SHC 263.1] Entire route.

 


Overall statistics for Route 76:

  • Total Length (1995): 53 miles
  • Average Daily Traffic (1992): 1,500 to 48,000
  • Milage Classification: Rural: 41; Urbanized: 12.
  • Previous Federal Aid Milage: FAP: 35 mi; FAU: 13 mi; FAS: 5 mi.
  • Functional Classification: Prin. Arterial: 12 mi; Minor Arterial: 40 mi; Rural Minor Collector/Local Road: 0.5 mi.
  • Counties Traversed: San Diego.

 

Pre-1964 Legislative Route

The route that would become LRN 76 was first defined in 1931 by Chapter 82 as the route from Bishop to California-Nevada State line (Montgomery Pass). In 1933, the route was extended with two segments: Fresno-Yosemite Road at Shaw Avenue to Huntington Lake, and [LRN 23] to Camp Sabrina. In 1935, the route was codified in the highway code as follows:

  1. [LRN 23] near Bishop to Nevada State Line near Montgomery Pass
  2. [LRN 23] to Camp Sabrina
  3. [LRN 125] at Shaw Avenue to Huntington Lake

In 1959, Chapter 1841 changed segment (c) [3] to be “[LRN 125] near Fresno”.

In 1961, Chapter 1146 amended the definition, but didn't appear to make any changes.

The route was signed as follows:

  1. From LRN 23 near Bishop to the Nevada state line near Montgomery Pass.

    This was/is present-day US 6. Before the signage as US 6, this segment was signed as part of Route 168.

  2. From LRN 23 (US 395) to Camp Sabrina.

    This segment was signed as Route 168.

  3. From LRN 125 (Route 41) near Fresno to Huntington Lake.

    This segment was signed as Route 168.


State Shield

State Route 77



Routing
  1. From Route 880 near 42nd Avenue to a connection with Route 580 near High Street in Oakland.


    Post 1964 Signage History

    As defined in 1963, this segment was defined to be “Route 17 near 42nd Avenue to a connection with Route 580 near High Street in Oakland.”

    In 1984, Chapter 409 changed “Route 17” to “Route 880”.

     

    Pre 1964 Signage History

    Route 77 was not allocated as part of the original signage of state highways in 1934. This segment was a proposed route in 1963, and was LRN 235, defined in 1953.

     

    Status

    For a period before 2008, Route 77 between I-880 and post mile 0.45was signed as Route 185. As of 2008, that segment has been resigned as Route 77.

    The route is unconstructed between Route 185 and Route 580. This was originally signed as Route 185 from Route 185 to I-880 via 42nd Avenue in Oakland; however, as of August 2008, it was signed as Route 77. Note that this signage is of the form of signs on the structures; it appears there are no reassurance markers. It follows the High Street corridor (including the portion that is Route 185) between I-880 and I-580. The constructed portion may be to freeway standards.

    As of 2008, some work has (re)started on the Isabel Avenue ramp to I-580

    Note: 25th Ave does not go far enough north to meet I-580. 35th Ave, however, is the next exit up on I-580 from High St (segment 1) and turns into Redwood Rd (segment 2) at Jordan Rd. So there might be a typo in the route definition.


  2. From Route 580 in Oakland to Route 24 near Lafayette.


    Post 1964 Signage History

    In 1963, this segment was defined to be “Route 580 in Oakland to Route 242 near Concord passing near Lafayette.”

    In 1973, Chapter 447 changed the terminus of the segment to be “Route 24 near Lafayette.”

    Until 1973, segment (2) ended at Route 242. In 1973, the portion from Route 24 to Route 242 was deleted. At Taylor Boulevard and Pleasant Hill Road in Walnut Creek, there is a Y interchange. As Taylor Boulevard corresponds to the (pre-1973) extension of Route 77 to Route 242, this interchange might have been built in anticipation of the never-built extension. The deleted portion includes Taylor Boulevard (and its interchange with Pleasant Hill Road), Sunvalley Boulevard (between former Route 21 and I-680 at the Sun Valley Mall), and Willow Pass Road to Route 242.

    According to The Highway That Never Was (Mark Roberts), the route would have run through Shepherd Canyon. Originally, the Sacramento Northern Railroad ran an electrified route through the hills, with a tunnel at Gunn Drive. After the tunnel was sealed off in 1957, Caltrans then proposed a route through the area. Caltrans projected a daily traffic count of 100,000 vehicles per day by 1990. After extensive opposition, the plan was withdrawn in 1972.

     

    Pre 1964 Signage History

    Route 77 was not allocated as part of the original signage of state highways in 1934. This segment was a proposed route in 1963, and was LRN 235, defined in 1953.

     

    Status

    Unconstructed This routing is unconstructed from Route 580 to Route 24. The route is approximately 25th Avenue, Redwood Road, Pinehurst Road, and Canyon Road to Moraga; St. Mary's Road north to Lafayette.

Freeway

Unconstructed [SHC 253.4] From Route 93 westerly of Moraga to Route 24 near Lafayette. Part (1) is unconstructed from Route 185 to Route 580, and all of part (2) is unconstructed. Added to the Freeway and Expressway system in 1959. Note that the portion deleted in 1973 is explicitly not part of the freeway and expressway system.

 

Other WWW Links

 


Overall statistics for Route 77:

  • Total Length (1995): 0.4 miles traversable; 13.4 miles unconstructed.
  • Average Daily Traffic (1992): 15,000 to 17,100
  • Milage Classification: Rural: 3; Sm. Urban 0; Urbanized: 11.
  • Functional Classification: Prin. Arterial: 0.4 mi.
  • Counties Traversed: Alameda, Contra Costa.

 

Pre-1964 Legislative Route

The route that would become LRN 77 was first defined in 1931 by Chapter 82. It was part of segment (i) of that act (“[LRN 26] near Colton via Pomona to Los Angeles”), as well as being part of segment (l) (“Riverside to San Diego (Inland Route)”) and segment (m) (“Pomona to Temecula”). In 1935, it was codified into the state highway code as:

“Pomona to San Diego via Temecula”

Note that at this time LRN 77 appears to have run into Vista, not Escondido, by some unknown routing. This is made clear by the definition of [LRN 196] as being "to [LRN 77] near Vista". LRN 197 started at "[LRN 77] near Escondido", so it appears that as of 1933, the route between Vista and Escondido appears to have been part of LRN 77.

That same year (1935), Chapter 626 added the following as Section 603 with no route number:

“603. There is hereby added to the state highway system a new route or portion of route from the east city limits of Los Angeles on Valley Boulevard to [LRN 26] near El Monte via Valley Boulevard and Pomona Boulevard”

In 1937, Chapter 841 repealed Section 603, and added the segment to [LRN 77] as segment (a) instead, numbering the 1935 segment as (b).

In 1951, Chapter 1562 extended LRN 196 to terminate at [LRN 77] near Escondido. This implied that by 1951, the portion from Vista to Escondido was no longer LRN 77, and LRN 77 had been rerouted (presumably to the US 395 routing). However, in 1947 Chapter 1233 changed LRN 196 to terminate at Vista, so the rerouting could have been as early as 1947.

In 1953, Chapter 237 changed the definition of (a) to drop the specific routings on Valley Boulevard and Pomona Boulevard.

This route was signed as follows:

  1. From the E city limit of Los Angeles to LRN 26 near El Monte.

    This route began at the proposed LRN 167 (eventual I-710) intersection with Valley Blvd (the present I-710 terminus). It ran E along Valley Blvd (old surface US 60/US 70, so it was likely signed as Business US 60/US 70) to cosigned US 60/US 70/US 99 near El Monte.

  2. From Pomona to San Diego via Temecula.

    Between Pomona and Corona, this was and is signed as Route 71.

    Between Corona and Temecula, it was originally signed as Route 71; after 1964, it was signed as I-15.

    Between Temecula and San Diego, it was originally signed as Route 71, then as US 395, and is present-day I-15.


State Shield

State Route 78



Routing
  1. From Route 5 near Oceanside to Route 15 near Escondido.


    Post 1964 Signage History

    In 1963, this segment was defined as the route from “Route 5 near Oceanside to Route 395 near Escondido.”

    In 1969, Chapter 294 changed “Route 395” to “Route 15”.

     

    Pre 1964 Signage History

    This was once routed along Vista Way, Santa Fe, and Mission Road to Escondido. It was signed as Route 78 in the initial state signage of routes in 1934. It was LRN 196, which was originally defined to run from LRN 2 (US 101) to LRN 77 in Vista. LRN 197 was defined to run from LRN 77 in Escondido, so it appears as if the portion between Vista and Escondido was part of the LRN 77 routing. However, in 1947 the definition of LRN 196 was changed to terminate simply at Vista, and in 1951 it was changed to terminate at LRN 77 near Escondido (US 395), making it likely that in 1951, the route between Vista and Escondido was transferred (with no change to LRN 77) from LRN 77 to LRN 196.

     

    Status

    There are plans to construct an eastbound auxiliary lane in Oceanside from the El Camino Real Overcross to east of El Camino Real Overcross. July 2005 CTC Agenda.

    In January 2007, the CTC considered relinquishment of right of way in the City of Vista, at Melrose Drive, consisting of reconstructed and relocated city streets. The City, by freeway agreement dated February 13, 1996, agreed to accept title upon relinquishment by the State.

    The SAFETEA-LU act, enacted in August 2005 as the reauthorization of TEA-21, provided the following expenditures on or near this route:

    • High Priority Project #3206: I-5 and Route 78 Interchange Improvements. $4,000,000.

     

     

    Naming

    This segment has often been called the "Anza" Freeway.

    It is officially named the "Ronald Packard Parkway". Ronald C. Packard was congressman from the 48th Congressional District beginning in 1982, serving as the chairperson of the North County Transit District in San Diego County. Ronald Packard was instrumental in obtaining funding for the San Diego Trolley and Coaster Rail systems and receiving needed supplemental funding for numerous highway interchanges throughout San Diego County. He was the primary person responsible for the improvements made to the State Highway Routes 76 and 78. Named by Assembly Concurrent Resolution 165, Chapter 124, September 5, 2000.

     

    Named Structures

    The Twin Oaks Valley Road Bridge in the City of San Marcos, San Diego County is officially named the "Vicente "Vince" Andrade Memorial Bridge". Vicente "Vince" Andrade, originally from Winslow, Arizona was a powerful force both in the City of San Marcos and as a voice for North San Diego County's Latino community. In May 1998, he received the Making A Difference Award, lauding Mr. Andrade's leadership in founding El Grupo Sin Nombre, an umbrella organization aimed at giving 37 Latino groups a unified voice on political and social issues in North San Diego County. He served as Chairperson of the Board of Directors for North County Health Services, President of the Hispanic Advisory Council at California State University, San Marcos, and Chairperson of the Latino Coalition for Education. In 1996, after a three-year term on the planning commission, Vince Andrade was elected to the San Marcos City Council where he served with distinction and represented the city as a SANDAG board member and was instrumental in securing additional funds for construction of the Twin Oaks Valley Road interchange improvements. This outstanding community leader died on January 23, 1999 after a five year courageous battle against recurring cancer. Named by Senate Concurrent Resolution 9, Chaptered April 30, 2001, Resolution Chapter 46.


  2. From Route 15 near Escondido to Route 86 passing near Ramona, Santa Ysabel, and Julian.


    Post 1964 Signage History

    As defined in 1963, this segment was the route from “Route 395 near Escondido to Route 86 near Kane Springs passing near Romona and Santa Ysabel and via Julian.”

    In 1963, Chapter 1698 appears to have corrected a spelling error, changing "Romona" to "Ramona"

    In 1969, Chapter 294 changed “Route 395” to “Route 15”.

    In 1972, Chapter 1216 simplified the routing to be “Route 15 near Escondido to Route 86 near Kane Springs passing near Ramona, and Santa Ysabel, and via Julian.”

     

    Pre 1964 Signage History

    This was signed as Route 78 as part of the initial state signage of routes in 1934. It was LRN 197 between Escondido and Ramona (junction Route 67). It was LRN 198 between Ramona and near Kane Springs and the junction with US 99 (LRN 26; now Route 86). Both LRN 197 and LRN 198 were defined in 1933.

     

    Naming

    The segment between Third Street and Route 67 is officially named the "Ramon Ojeda Memorial Highway". It was named in memory of Army Specialist Ramon Ojeda, who was killed in action in Baghdad, Iraq on May 1, 2004, at the age of 22, when his convoy was attacked by terrorists. Specialist Ojeda attended school in Ramona, California, and was survived by his wife, Lesliee, who was serving in the United States Army in Iraq, and by his 14-month-old son, Angel. He wrestled at Ramona High School and had a "can do" spirit, and a remarkable ability to disarm and cheer up others with his levity. Specialist Ojeda joined the United States Army and was assigned to the Army's 25th Infantry Division, and was the first Ramona resident killed in action in Iraq. Named by Assembly Concurrent Resolution (ACR) 47, Resolution Chapter 100, on 8/16/2006.

     

    Scenic Highway

    [SHC 263.5] From Route 79 near Santa Ysabel to Route 86 passing near Julian.


  3. From Route 86 near Brawley to Route 10 near Blythe.


    Post 1964 Signage History

    As defined in 1963, this segment was:

    Route 86 near Brawley to Route 10 near Blythe.

    Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 89 of Chapter 1062, Statutes of 1959, the department shall proceed with the construction of the unconstructed portion of said route described in subdivision (c) between the easterly junction of Route 115 and the Imperial-Riverside county line with the lowest practical cost for a hard surfaced road and as an interim project pending the later construction of the route to proper limited access standards; provided, that prior thereto the County of Imperial enters into a co-operative agreement with the department wherein the county agrees to maintain the road between the easterly junction of Route 115 and the Imperial-Riverside county line until a limited access highway is constructed by the department between said points. Upon the completion of construction of said interim road, and pursuant to said agreement, the county shall assume jurisdiction and all responsibilities of maintenance for the period above provided. The road shall be known and designated as the "Ben Hulse Highway."

    In 1965, Chapter 1371 seems to have just changed "co-operative" to "cooperative".

    In 1968, Chapter 281 removed the following text about county maintenance: "; provided, that prior thereto the County of Imperial enters into a co-operative agreement with the department wherein the county agrees to maintain the road between the easterly junction of Route 115 and the Imperial-Riverside county line until a limited access highway is constructed by the department between said points. Upon the completion of construction of said interim road, and pursuant to said agreement, the county shall assume jurisdiction and all responsibilities of maintenance for the period above provided."

    In 1976, Chapter 1354 removed all conditions.

     

    Pre 1964 Signage History

    The small portion of this route within Brawley (from Route 86 to Route 115) was part of LRN 187, defined in 1933.

    The remainder of this segment was not part of the 1934 definition of signed Route 78. It was LRN 146, and was a proposed route between Brawley and Palo Verde, and constructed between Palo Verde and Blythe. It was unsigned until Palo Verde. From Palo Verde to Blythe, it was signed as Route 195 until the signage of Route 195 N from Blythe as US 95. It was defined from the Riverside County line to I-10 in 1933; the remainder was defined in 1959. A 1967 map shows the routing between Midway Well and Route 115 as County Route S78, with Route 78 signed with Route 115 between the Brawley area and US 80.

     

    Status

    It appears there are plans to convert at least part of this to freeway. The April 2003 CTC had on its agenda the route adoption of a Freeway location for Route 78, northwest of the City of Brawley, to Route 111, southwest of the City of Brawley, in Imperial County. [11-Imp-78 KP R14.6/R24.8 (PM R09.1/R15.4) and 11-Imp-111 KP R33.0/R39.7 (PM R20.5/R24.7)]. There was also an item related to a negative environment impact for the project.

    In his 2006 Strategic Growth Plan, Governor Schwartzenegger proposed completing stages 2 and 3 of the Brawley Bypass. In November 2007, bids went out for construction of a 4-lane divided expressway and interchange on Route 78 near Brawley from 0.6 Km East of Hovley Road to 0.4 Km North of the Route 78/Route 111 Junction

    In February 2009, the CTC was noticed that Caltrans and the Imperial Valley Association of Governments (IVAG) recommended that Brawley Bypass projects programmed in the 2008 State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) be reprogrammed as a corridor, with funding levels to be based on the state funds previously allocated by the California Transportation Commission (Commission) and available local and federal funds: (a) Route 78 Brawley Bypass – Stage 2 project (PPNO 0021F) (b) Route 78 Brawley Bypass – Route 86 to Route 111 project (PPNO 0021).

    2007 CMIA. The Brawley Bypass on Route 78 was submitted to the Corridor Mobility Improvement Account for funding ($46.1 million). It was not recommended for funding.

    The SAFETEA-LU act, enacted in August 2005 as the reauthorization of TEA-21, provided the following expenditures on or near this route:

    • High Priority Project #926: Construct highway connecting Route 78/Route 86 and Route 111, Brawley. This is likely the route being explored by the CTC back in April 2003. $7,600,000.

     

     

    Naming

    The portion of this part of the route between the junction of Route 78 and Route 111 (formerly Route 86, changed by Senate Concurrent Resolution 70, July 16, 2004, Chapter 121) upon its construction near Brawley and Route 10 near Blythe is officially designated the "Ben Hulse Highway." It was named by Assembly Bill 2499, Chapter 1387 in 1961 (for LRN 146); the name was transferred to Route 78 in 1963. California State Senator Ben Hulse served the people of Imperial County from 1933 to 1958.

    The portion of Route 78 "Brawley Bypass" from Route 86 near Brawley to the Highline Canal east of Brawley, in the County of Imperial is named the Victor V. Veysey Expressway. It was named in honor of Victor Vincent Veysey, who was born in Los Angeles in 1915, and earned degrees at the California Institute of Technology and Harvard University. After 11 years of teaching at the California Institute of Technology and Stanford University, he moved to the County of Imperial to begin a career in farming. In 1955 he was elected to the Brawley School District Board of Directors, and later in 1960 was elected to the Imperial Valley College Board where he served until 1962. From 1963 to 1971 he served in the California Assembly, as the last resident of the County of Imperial to serve in the Legislature. He was a Congressman in the United States House of Representatives from 1971 to 1975, representing the 38th and 43rd Districts of California. He then went on to serve in President Ford's administration as the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works until 1977, where he played a major role in the negotiations that eventually led to the agreement on the Panama Canal. Governor Deukmejian appointed Mr. Veysey to serve as the California Secretary for Industrial Relations in 1983; and he went on to serve as Director of the Industrial Relations Center and Lecturer in Business Economics, at the California Institute of Technology. He passed away on February 13, 2001, in Hemet, California. Named by Senate Concurrent Resolution 70, July 16, 2004, Chapter 121.

exitinfo.gif

 

Other WWW Links

 

Freeway

[SHC 253.1] Entire route. Part (1) and the portion of part (2) from Route 15 to Escondido are constructed to freeway standards. Added to the Freeway and Expressway system in 1959.

 

National Trails

De Anza Auto Route This route is part of the De Anza National Historic Trail.

 

Interregional Route

[SHC 164.14] Entire route.

 


Overall statistics for Route 78:

  • Total Length (1995): 194 miles
  • Average Daily Traffic (1992): 680 to 115,000
  • Milage Classification: Rural: 166; Sm. Urban 5; Urbanized: 23.
  • Previous Federal Aid Milage: FAP: 194 mi.
  • Functional Classification: Prin. Arterial: 29 mi; Minor Arterial: 165 mi.
  • Counties Traversed: San Diego, Imperial, Riverside.

 

Pre-1964 Legislative Route

The route that was to become LRN 78 was first defined in 1931 by Chapter 82 as part of “(l) Riverside to San Diego (Inland Route)”. In 1933, it was extended with a segment from [LRN 12] near Descanso to [LRN 77] near Temecula. In 1935, it was codified into the highway code as:

  1. Riverside to [LRN 77] near Temecula
  2. [LRN 12] near Descanso to [LRN 77] near Temecula

This definition remained until the 1963 renumbering. It was signed as follows:

  1. From Riverside to LRN 77 near Temecula.

    This was originally signed as US 395, and is present-day I-215 (for a short while, this was I-15E).

  2. From LRN 12 (US 80; present-day I-8) near Descanso to LRN 77 (US 395; present-day I-215 and I-15) near Temecula.

    This was/is signed as Route 79 between Descanso (US 80; present-day I-8) and Aguanga (present-day Route 79/Route 371 junction). Between Aguanga and Temecula, it was originally signed as Route 79, then resigned as Route 71 until 1974; it is present-day Route 79.


State Shield

State Route 79



Routing
  1. From Route 8 near Descanso to Route 78 near Julian.


    Post 1964 Signage History

    As defined in 1963, this segment ran from (a) Route 8 near Descanso to Route 78.

    In 1981, Chapter 292 changed the terminus of this segment to be "Route 78 near Julian".

     

    Pre 1964 Signage History

    State Shield Pre-1964 State Shield This route was signed as Route 79 as part of the initial state signage of routes in 1934. It was LRN 78, defined in 1933.

     

    Naming

    The portion of Route 79 from the intersection with Route 78 in Santa Ysabel to the intersection with Engineers Road in Cuyamaca in San Diego County is named the Firefighter Steven Rucker Memorial Highway. It was named in memory of Firefighter Steven Rucker of Novato, California. In late October 2003, Southern California experienced several devastating wildfires that exceeded the devastation of any fires in the past century. In San Diego County alone 400,000 acres burned, 2,600 homes where destroyed, and 17 lives were lost. Dedicated firefighters from across California and nationwide responded to the urgent call for assistance and put their lives and personal safety at risk to save the lives and property of the residents of San Diego County. Additionally, members of the Armed Forces courageously met their country's call to duty, providing valuable firefighting assets and assistance to California's emergency response efforts in keeping with the finest traditions of United States military service. Firefighters displayed courage and uncommon bravery in working the fire lines for long hours and with little rest, often while their own homes and families were in jeopardy elsewhere, and many of these firefighters lost their own homes to the fires while defending the lives and property of others. Through the tireless and heroic efforts of California's firefighters, volunteers, and members of the community, the historic town of Julian was ultimately saved from destruction by the wildfires. One of these firefighters, Steven Rucker of Novato, California gave the ultimate sacrifice and lost his life in San Diego County on October 29th, 2003 fighting the advancing fire line as it threatened the town of Julian and neighboring mountain communities. Named by Senate Concurrent Resolution 53, July 8, 2004, Chapter 114.

     

    Scenic Highway

    [SHC 263.5] Entire portion.

     

    Freeway

    [SHC 253.5] Entire portion. Added to the Freeway and Expressway system in 1959.


  2. Route 78 near Santa Ysabel to the Temecula city limits east of Butterfield Stage Road


    Post 1964 Signage History

    In 1963, this segment was defined as the route from "Route 78 to Route 71."

    Note: in 1965, Chapter 1372 changed (c) to start at "Route 395" instead of "Route 71", but did not change (b) to end at Route 395. This is an odd change, perhaps an error. In 1969, Chapter 294 changed (c) again to start at "Route 15" instead of "Route 395"... again, failing to change (b) to terminate at Route 15. Again, possibly an error.

    In 1974, Chapter 537 changed "Route 71" to "Route 15 near Temecula." This reflected the transfer of the portion of Route 71 from I-15 to Aguanga (present-day Route 79/Route 371 junction) from Route 71.

    In 1981, Chapter 292 changed the origin of this segment to be "Route 78 near Santa Ysabel"

    In 2004, SB 87, Chapter 386, September 8, 2004, relinquished the portion surrounding I-15 within the Temecula City Limits. The actual segment was up for relinquishment in January 2005. This changed the terminus to "the Temecula city limits east of Butterfield Stage Road".

     

    Pre 1964 Signage History

    State Shield Pre-1964 State Shield The portion of this route between Route 78 to Aguanga has always (since 1934) been signed as Route 79.

    The portion between Aguanga and Route 15 has a much more colorful signage history. Originally, this portion was also signed as Route 79. In 1939, US 395 was signed, and this portion became part of a longer Route 71 that ran to Route 74 E of Anza. At that time, Route 79 was rerouted up to US 60 near Beaumont using present-day Riverside County Route R3 and present-day Route 79 between Hemet and Beaumont, creating a short segment (between Aguanga and County Route R3) that was cosigned as Route 71/Route 79, and as Route 71 between County Route R3 and Temecula. In 1964, the segment between County Route R3 and Temecula was cosigned Route 79 (although the route was officially Route 71), and County Route R3 was signed. That segement was resigned as Route 79 in 1974 when Route 71 was renumbered. This was part of LRN 78, defined in 1933.

     

    Status

    The intersection of Route 371 and Route 79 has demonstrated itself to be a high source of accidents, with four deaths occuring in the period from July 2001 to July 2002. As a result, the intersection is being redesigned. Two-lane Route 79 is the main link between Temecula and the Warner Springs and Santa Ysabel areas of San Diego County. Two-lane Route 371 is a well-traveled back road between Southwest County and Palm Springs. Currently, the two roads converge in Aguanga where an oddly configured intersection contributes greatly to the accident count. Westbound traffic on Route 79 must stop at the intersection, while eastbound traffic on Route 79 and traffic coming down a steep curvy grade from Anza on Route 371 proceed without stopping. Beginning in Summer 2003, the intersection will be reconfigured to force drivers heading toward Temecula to stop and turn either left of right at a "T" intersection with Route 371. Turning left would take them quickly back to Route 79. Long-term improvements will include a merger lane from Route 371 to Route 79.

    Note: Although SB 87 (9/8/2004) changed the legislative definition to eliminate the portion in the City of Temecula, the bill also noted that the portion within Temecula may (not is, so they wrote the bill wrong) be relinquished. The relinquishment agreement must require that the operations and maintenance of the highways will be administered consistent with professional traffic engineering standards, that appropriate traffic studies or analysis will be performed to substantiate decisions affecting the highways, and that there be allowances for public notice and the consideration of public input on the proximate effects of any proposed decision on traffic flow, residences, or businesses, other than a decision on routine maintenance.

    The SAFETEA-LU act, enacted in August 2005 as the reauthorization of TEA-21, provided the following expenditures on or near this route:

    • High Priority Project #1590: I-15 and Route 79 South Freeway Interchange and Ramp Improvement Project. $1,600,000.

     

     

    Scenic Highway

    [SHC 263.5] Entire portion.

     

    Freeway

    [SHC 253.5] From Route 371 near Aguanga to Route 15 near Temecula. Added to the Freeway and Expressway system in 1959.


  3. Temecula city limits south of Murrieta Hot Springs Road to Route 74 near Hemet

    (b) (1) Notwithstanding subdivision (a), the commission may relinquish to the City of Temecula the portion of Route 79 located within Temecula's city limits, upon terms and conditions the commission finds to be in the best interest of the state. (2) Any relinquishment agreement shall require that the City of Temecula administer the operation and maintenance of the highways in a manner consistent with professional traffic engineering standards. (3) Any relinquishment agreement shall require the City of Temecula to ensure that appropriate traffic studies or analysis will be performed to substantiate any decisions affecting the highways. (4) Any relinquishment agreement shall also require the City of Temecula to provide for public notice and the consideration of public input on the proximate effects of any proposed decision on traffic flow, residences, or businesses, other than a decision on routine maintenance. (5) Notwithstanding any of its other terms, any relinquishment agreement shall require the City of Temecula to indemnify and hold the department harmless from any liability for any claims made or damages suffered by any person, including a public entity, as a result of any decision made or damages suffered by any person, including a public entity, as a result of any decision made or action taken by the City of Temecula, its officers, employees, contractors, or agent, with respect to the design, maintenance, construction, or operation of that portion of Route 79 that is to be relinquished to the city. (6) Any relinquishment shall become effective immediately after the county recorder records the relinquishment resolution that contains the commission's approval of the terms and conditions of the relinquishment. (7) On and after the effective date of the relinquishment, both of the following shall occur: (A) The portion of Route 79 relinquished shall cease to be a state highway. (B) The portion of Route 79 relinquished may not be considered for future adoption under Section 81. (8) The City of Temecula shall ensure the continuity of traffic flow on the relinquished portion of Route 79, including any traffic signal progression. (9) For relinquished portions of Route 79, the City of Temecula shall maintain signs directing motorists to the continuation of Route 79.
    (Added by SB 87, September 8, 2004)


    Post 1964 Signage History

    As defined in 1963, this segment ran from "Route 71 east of Temecula to Route 74 near Hemet." This routing began 4 mi NW of Aguanga on Route 71 (at that time, Route 71 ran from Temecula to 5 mi E of Anza along present-day Route 79 and Route 371), and ran into Hemet via Sage.

    In 1965, Chapter 1372 changed this segment to start at "Route 395 near Temecula" instead of "Route 71 E of Temecula"

    In 1969, Chapter 294 changed (c) again to start at "Route 15" instead of "Route 395".

    In 2004, SB 87, Chapter 386, September 8, 2004, relinquished the portion surrounding I-15 within the Temecula City Limits. The actual segment was up for relinquishment in January 2005. This changed the origin to "Temecula city limits south of Murrieta Hot Springs Road"

     

    Pre 1964 Signage History

    The original routing of Route 79 in this area (from Aguanga to Hemet via Sage) was LRN 194, defined in 1933. This route is now Riverside County Route R3. Route 79 was later changed to a more direct route from I-15 to Route 74 in Hemet; this route never had an LRN. Only the portion between Aguanga and Route 15 was signed as Route 79 in 1934; this was later Route 71.

     

    Status

    According to Don Hagstron in May 2003, there are discussions about a future southward extension of the Route 79 expressway that will bypass Downtown Hemet and San Jacinto and run towards Temecula. The project is delayed, perhaps due to the fact that Riverside County wants to run the expressway all the way up to the existing 6-lane highway portion of Winchester Road (Route 79) that takes you into Temecula and I-15. Don notes that any future Route 79 Freeway that would completely run east of I-215 and south of Hemet appears to be dead due to the protests of Menifee Valley residents who do not want a north-south freeway running through their unincorporated area. Andy Field has a diagram on his Route 125 page that show this proposal, it would be a new north-south freeway corridor that would lead from the current planned northern terminus of Route 125 in Poway north to I-10 in Riverside County, roughly paralleling Interstates 15 and 215 past Escondido, Temecula, and Perris.

     

    Other WWW Links

     

    Freeway

    [SHC 253.5] Entire portion. Added to the Freeway and Expressway system in 1959.


  4. From Route 74 near Hemet to Route 10 near Beaumont.

    (c) (1) Notwithstanding subdivision (a), the commission may relinquish to the City of San Jacinto any portion of Route 79 that is located within the city limits of that city, upon terms and conditions the commission finds to be in the best interests of the state, if the department and the city enter into an agreement providing for that relinquishment. (2) A relinquishment under this subdivision shall become effective immediately following the county recorder's recordation of the relinquishment resolution containing the commission's approval of the terms and conditions of the relinquishment. (3) On and after the effective date of the relinquishment, the relinquished portion of Route 79 shall cease to be a state highway. (4) The portion of Route 79 relinquished under this subdivision shall be ineligible for future adoption under Section 81. (5) For the portion of Route 79 that is relinquished under this subdivision, the City of San Jacinto shall maintain within its jurisdiction signs directing motorists to the continuation of Route 79. Added by AB 1938, Chaptered September 18, 2006. Chapter 318.

    In July 2007, the CTC relinquished right of way in the city of San Jacinto, under terms and conditions as stated in the cooperative agreement, dated June 4, 2007, determined to be in the best interest of the State. Authorized by Chapter 318, Statutes of 2006, which amended Section 379 of the Streets and Highways Code.

    (d) (1) Notwithstanding subdivision (a), the commission may relinquish to the City of Hemet the portion of Route 79 that is located within the city limits of that city, upon terms and conditions the commission finds to be in the best interests of the state, if the department and the city enter into an agreement providing for that relinquishment. (2) A relinquishment under this subdivision shall become effective immediately following the county recorder's recordation of the relinquishment resolution containing the commission's approval of the terms and conditions of the relinquishment. (3) On and after the effective date of the relinquishment, the relinquished portion of Route 79 shall cease to be a state highway. (4) The portion of Route 79 relinquished under this subdivision shall be ineligible for future adoption under Section 81. (5) For the portion of Route 79 that is relinquished under this subdivision, the City of Hemet shall maintain within its jurisdiction signs directing motorists to the continuation of Route 79. Added by Senate Bill 224, Chaptered October 14, 2007, Chapter 718.


    Post 1964 Signage History

    This segment remains unchanged from its 1963 definition.

     

    Pre 1964 Signage History

    This segment was not part of the original definition of Route 79 in 1934. It originally was a surface route between Route 74 and US 60, and was LRN 186. Later, a direct route between Hemet and Beaumont was constructed, and was assigned LRN 194. Until the construction of the route betwen San Jacinto and Beaumont, however, the original LRN 186 was LRN 194. Once LRN 194 was defined, the definition of LRN 186 was truncated to begin at the LRN 194/LRN 186 junction. LRN 186 was defined in 1933. It is likely the rerouting of LRN 194 to I-10 near Beaumont occured in 1959.

     

    Status

    Between the Ramona Expressway and Gilman Springs Road, the routing for Route 79 was changed in July 2002. The original routing ran along Gilman Spring Road and State Street between Ramona Expressway and the Gilman Spring Road/Sanderson Road junction. This was an aging conventional highway with predominantly non-standard shoulders, non-standard horizontal and vertical curves, and an accident rate more than double similar state freeways. In 2002, this routing was relinquished in lieu of a new routing along Ramona Expressway and Sanderson Avenue. This new highway portion has a grade separated interchange and has recently been widened. The claim is that the new routing, in addition to being a better road, allows the property owners on the original routing to preseve the rural character of their area, while reducing vehicle speeds. The background and proposal do not note the rumor that the original routing was a problem for the Church of Scientology, as the Gilman Springs routing runs through the Golden Era Studio operated by the Church. This rerouting was addressed by the CTC in July 2002, when it defined a new routing that ran from 08-Riv-79 PM 29.9/R33.9 in the City of San Jacinto, and PM 29.9 to PM 13.2 in the County of Riverside, and relinquished the segments from from PM 29.9 to 30.9, and from PM 30.5 to 33.4

    It appears the routing ran longer along Gilman Springs Road than that. One 1955 map shows Route 79 as continuing along Gilman Springs Road from Sanderson/Lamb Canyon to Route 60 in Moreno. In 1964, that routing was transferred to Route 177, and deleted in 1965. Note that Gilman Springs Road used to be called Foothill Road. At some point, it was rerouted along Lamb Canyon Road to Route 10 near Beaumont.

    The SAFETEA-LU act, enacted in August 2005 as the reauthorization of TEA-21, provided the following expenditures on or near this route:

    • High Priority Project #1421: Development and construction of improvements to Route 79 in the San Jacinto Valley. $2,400,000.

     

     

    Freeway

    [SHC 253.5] Entire portion. Added to the Freeway and Expressway system in 1959.

Other WWW Links

 


Overall statistics for Route 79:

  • Total Length (1995): 107 miles
  • Average Daily Traffic (1992): 1,500 to 23,300
  • Milage Classification: Rural: 95; Sm. Urban 7; Urbanized: 5.
  • Previous Federal Aid Milage: FAP: 90 mi; FAU: 17 mi.
  • Functional Classification: Prin. Arterial: 35 mi; Minor Arterial: 72 mi.
  • Counties Traversed: San Diego, Riverside.

 

National Trails

De Anza Auto Route This route is part of the De Anza National Historic Trail.

 

Interregional Route

[SHC 164.14] Between Route 8 and Route 10.

 

Pre-1964 Legislative Route

The route that would become LRN 79 was first defined in 1931 by Chapter 82 as part of “(r) [LRN 2] near Ventura to [LRN 4] at Castaic Junction”. In 1935, this was codified into the highway code as:

“[LRN 2] near Ventura to [LRN 4] at Castaic Junction”

In 1939, Chapter 473 extended the routing east along the former [LRN 4] routing to terminate at "[LRN 23] via Castaic Junction and Saugus".

In 1957, Chapter 1911 changed the definition to eliminate the specific routing, terminating it at "[LRN 23] near Solamint".

This was the route between US 101 near Ventura and Route 14 near Solamint. It was signed as Route 126.


Interstate Shield

Interstate 80



Routing
  1. Interstate Shield X-Ed Out From Route 101 near Division Street in San Francisco to Route 280 near First Street in San Francisco.


    Interstate Submissions

    Approved as chargeable Interstate on 7/7/1947; deleted as chargeable interstate in August 1965.

     

    Post 1964 Signage History

    As defined in 1963, Route 80 was defined to run from "Route 280 in San Francisco to the Nevada state line near Verdi, Nevada, passing near Division Street in San Francisco, passing near Oakland, via Albany, via Sacramento, passing near North Sacramento, passing near Roseville, via Auburn, via Emigrant Gap, via Truckee and via the Truckee River Canyon." Note that I-280 is present-day Route 1.

    In 1968, Chapter 282 transferred the portion from I-280 (present-day Route 1) to US 101 (LRN 223) to Route 241. This was originally part of a much longer route, and would have formed the handle of the "Panhandle" Freeway. Additional history on the planned freeways for the San Francisco Bay area can be found here. This ended up splitting the definition of Route 80, giving the current segment. Note that, technically, this segment is not part of the interstate system; it is unclear how it is signed.

    According to Sean Tongson, there is further evidence of the planned I-80 extension onto the Central Freeway into Golden Gate Park. The mileposts at the termination of I-80 at US-101 read '4.05'. This indicates that further extension definetely was in mind, with the additional 4 miles accounting for the unconstructed segment going into Golden Gate Park. The mileposts at the junction with former Route 480/I-280 read '5.09'.

    Before 1968, maps indicate that I-80 was routed on the Central Freeway, and was cosigned with US 101 up to Fell Street.

     

    Pre 1964 Signage History

    State Shield US Highway Shield This segment was originally cosigned as US 40/US 50, dating back to the signage of US highways. It was LRN 68, defined in 1923.

    This segment was part of the Lincoln Highway, which originally terminated in Lincoln Park, six miles west of the ferry landing at the foot of Market Street. The Lincoln Highway ended opposite the Palace of the Legion of Honor at a small monument marking the spot. The last few miles (of the highway) were California Street.

     

    Status

    Signage for I-80 starts as one heads northbound on US-101 just past Vermont St. where the road splits. There's a "Jct 80" sign on the right shoulder and just north/east of there is an I-80 reassurance shield in the center divider. This is about at the 9th St. exit.

    There appear to be some plans to make a portion of the originally planned freeway routing in San Francisco (which is mostly unbuilt) into an underground tollway. The San Francisco Chronicle published an article on 2/18/2001 where it indicated that transportation planners "said the city should look into building ``supercorridor'' roads under Van Ness Avenue, 19th Avenue, and Fell and Oak streets." The suggested 19th Avenue tunnel would run five miles, from Junipero Serra Boulevard through Golden Gate Park and up to Lake Street, with exits at Brotherhood Way, Ocean Avenue, Quintara Street, Lincoln Way and Geary Boulevard. The Van Ness tunnel would run almost two miles, from about Fell to Lombard Street, with exits at Broadway and Geary Boulevard. Along Oak and Fell, the planners suggest an underground road running more than half a mile from Laguna to Divisadero streets. However, the roads would would violate the long-standing general plan for San Francisco, which calls for no new highway capacity.

     

    Naming

    This segment of I-80 is named the "James Lick Skyway". James Lick (1796-1876) worked in his youth as an expert organ and piano maker, following this trade some twenty years in Argentina, Chile and Peru. He arrived in San Francisco just before the gold rush with about $30,000 and made investments in what was then outlying real estate. He built the famous hotel known as the Lick House and continued to purchase real estate which kept being absorbed by the city as it grew. He also built a large flour mill in San Jose. As a result of investments he was very wealthy at the time of his death and left several million dollars for scientific, charitable and educational purposes. He financed the observatory atop Mt. Hamilton. Named by Assembly Concurrent Resolution 37, Chapt. 122 in 1951.

    The entire route in California has been submitted to be part of the National Purple Heart Trail. The Military Order of the Purple Heart is working to establish a national commemorative trail for recipients of the Purple Heart medal, which honors veterans who were wounded in combat. All states in the union will designate highways for inclusion in the commemorative trail, and all of the designated highways will be interconnected to form the National Purple Heart Trail. Named by Senate Concurrent Resolution 14, Resolution Chapter 79, July 10, 2001.

     

    Other WWW Links
    • Freeways of San Francisco. Chris Sampang's site gives a lot of information about proposals for this route in the San Francisco area, including exit lists with hypothetical connections. This includes subpages on the James Lick, San Francisco Skyway, and Western freeways.


  2. Interstate Shield From Route 280 near First Street in San Francisco to the Nevada state line near Verdi, Nevada, passing near Oakland, via Albany, via Sacramento, passing near Roseville, via Auburn, via Emigrant Gap, via Truckee and via the Truckee River Canyon.


    Post 1964 Signage History

    As defined in 1963, Route 80 was defined to run from "Route 280 in San Francisco to the Nevada state line near Verdi, Nevada, passing near Division Street in San Francisco, passing near Oakland, via Albany, via Sacramento, passing near North Sacramento, passing near Roseville, via Auburn, via Emigrant Gap, via Truckee and via the Truckee River Canyon." Note that I-280 is present-day Route 1. Within Sacramento, the route ran along what had been LRN 6 and LRN 11, and also included all of LRN 98.

    In 1968, Chapter 282 transferred the portion from I-280 (present-day Route 1) to US 101 (LRN 223) to Route 241. This ended up splitting the definition of Route 80, giving the current segment.

    In Sacramento, this route (at times) was to have been Route 880. Here is the history related to that numbering. Note that none of this changed the actual legislative definition of Route 80, only the routing:

    • 1964. I-80 first appears in Sacramento, using the old US 40/US 99E joint section of freeway and a portion of the US 99E freeway (this latter portion is the former Elvas Freeway, a brief history of which is found under Route 51).

    • 1965. A plan is put forth to bypass the existing I-80 with a new alignment that would run in the median of I-880 in a dual freeway design from the I-80/I-880 split northeast of Sacarmento. The alignment would then separate onto the new alignment parallel to the Southern Pacific Railroad mainline to just south of the American River, where it would rejoin the existing I-80. A dual freeway design would have then been used to the north end of Downtown Sacramento. The realignment was needed because the existing I-80 alignment did not meet Interstate standards. A 1969 map shows this as under construction for I-880, with a portion parallel to I-80 (present Business Route 50) along Roseville Road, Auburn Blvd, and continuing across the American River. It appears a portion of this was constructed between Del Paso Park and near Catskill Way; it is unclear what this is today.

      At this time, there were a number of differences from the present-day interchanges, visible from the historic aerials site. The I-80/Riverside interchange had a left exit from the EB lanes. There were also shows ramps from EB lanes to Auburn Blvd via what is now Whyte Avenue, as well as ramps at what is now Cirby Way. At the I-80/Watt Ave South interchange, the EB offramp was aligned directly onto EB Auburn Blvd. For traffic on WB Auburn Blvd to continue WB, the right lane swung right and then back to the left to an intersection with the traffic exiting the EB freeway. I-80 NE corridor (current BR-80/CA 51) had old configurations for almost all interchanges. The only interchanges that remain the same in 2009 are the junction with Route 160, Marconi Ave, Howe Ave EB, and Auburn/Bell EB.

    • 1972. I-880 (present-day I-80) was completed; I-80 in the median was completed but was not opened to traffic, ending at a long viaduct to nowhere just south of where it left then I-880. Note: The I-880 numbering actually makes sense, and the route would have connected with Route 244 (never constructed) and then with Route 143, forming a loop back to US 50. It would have continued as Route 244, and continued to Route 65.

    • 1979. The Sacramento City Council voted to delete the new I-80 alignment and use the funding and right-of-way for rail transit. The portion of ROW that was constructed between Roseville Road at Catskill Way and the Split (244/51/80) is now used for three SacRT rail stations: the Roseville Road, Watt/I-80 West and Watt/I-80 stations. (Watt/I-80 is the easternmost SacRT light rail station, placed directly in the median of I-80 over Watt Avenue in what would've been the new I-80 lanes.)

    • 1980. The new alignment was withdrawn from the Interstate system. The need for route continuity for I-80 means that I-880 was redesignated I-80. The portion of I-80 from the end of the new alignment south of the American River to Highway 99 was classified as FAP (Federal Aid Primary) 51 (present-day Route 51). The portion of I-80 west of Route 99 to the former I-80/I-880 junction in West Sacramento is kept in the interstate system and classified as FAI (Federal-aid Interstate) 305 (briefly I-305, part of present-day US 50). No signage changes take place because the changes have not been made in the state highway system.

    • 1981. The 1980 FHWA action made no change to FAU (Federal-aid Urban) 6380 (the old I-80 alignment) other than reclassifying it as part of FAP 51. State Senate Bill 191 makes changes in the state highway system refelcting the FHWA actions. I-880 is deleted and I-80 is rerouted over it. The FAP 51 segment of the old I-80 alignment is officially numbered as Route 51. The FAI 305 segment was designated as an extension of US 50. All of the old I-80 alignment was signed as Business Loop 80. FAI 305 was never signed as I-305, but its interstate designation remains today.

    • 1982. Signage changes are completed.

    • 1983. Caltrans asks FHWA to renumber Route 17 from San Jose to Oakland as I-880. FHWA classifies the route as FAP 880. Other changes made include signing the freeway portion of Route 238 as I-238 and extending I-580 over I-880. No signage change takes place because the changes have not been made in the state highway system.

    • 1984. State Assembly Bill 2741 renumbers Route 17 from San Jose to Oakland as I-880, as well as extending I-580.

    • 1985. The new signage of the routes affected by AB 2471 is completed.

    • 1987. RT Metro light rail opens in Sacramento, using the completed portions of the attempted I-80 realignment, as well as much of its right-of-way.

    • 1996. Business Route 80 in Sacramento is officially named Capitol City Freeway, though no changes are made to state route numbers, federal classifications, or the Business Loop designation. The new name is posted at several locations.

    Nathan Edgars looked at traffic counts, and came up with the following:

    • 1964: Route 16: I Street Bridge, down 3rd-5th and over Broadway to Route 160, then a break until the split from US 50

      Route 80: Tower Bridge, over Capitol/N to 29th-30th, then a break to Broadway at 29th-30th and up 29th-30th

      Route 99: from the south to Broadway, then west on Broadway, then a break to the east end of the I Street Bridge and up Jibboom Street

    • By 1966: Another piece of Route 99 added along P and Q Streets between Route 160 and Route 16. The changes to Route 80 are unclear.

    • By 1968: Route 80 moved to the new route, with the west part becoming Route 275

      Route 16 cut back to I-5 at the east end of the I Street Bridge

      Route 99 removed from P and Q Streets and instead routed back west on Broadway, replacing Route 16, but only to Route 275, where it broke until Jibboom Street

    • By 1970: Route 99 removed from Jibboom Street etc.

    In Roseville, it appears that I-80 had an exit that no longer exists. According to an article in the Sacramento Bee, back in the 1960s, EB I-80 had an exit to NB Riverside Boulevard, that was a left exit that went through a tunnel under the westbound lanes and up to Riverside.

     

    Pre 1964 Signage History

    State Shield US Highway Shield This segment of the route was originally signed as follows:

    1. As cosigned US 40/US 50 between San Franciso and Emeryville (current I-80/I-880 junction). This was LRN 68. This was mostly defined in 1923; the Bay Bridge was added in 1929.

    2. As US 40/Route 17 between Oakland (I-80/I-880 junction) and Richmond (former Route 17/US 40 junction, near the present I-580/I-80 junction). This was LRN 14, defined in 1909. The surface routing is now Route 123. This was bypassed by LRN 69, in 1923.

    3. As US 40 from near El Cerrito and 2 mi SW of Davis (junction Alt US 40/US 99W; now Route 113). This was signed as US 40; it is present-day I-80. This was LRN 7, defined in 1909.

    4. As cosigned US 40/US 99W between Davis and Sacramento. This was LRN 6, defined in 1909.

    5. As cosigned US 40/US 50/US 99E between Sacramento and Roseville. This was LRN 3, defined in 1909.

    6. The freeway routing N of Sacramento did not exist before 1963, but was proposed LRN 242, defined in 1957.

    7. As US 40 between Sacramento and Auburn. This was LRN 17, defined in 1909.

    8. As US 40 between Auburn and Truckee. This was LRN 37, defined in 1919.

    9. As US 40 between Truckee and the Nevada state line. This was LRN 38, defined in 1923.

    The segment of US 40 (present-day I-80) between Reno and Sacramento was part of the Lincoln Highway.

    US Highway Shield There was also an Alternate US 40, also signed (apparently) in the mid-1930s. This ran N from 2 mi SW of Davis along present-day Route 113 to near Tudor (LRN 7 between US 40 and Route 16; LRN 87 between Route 16 and Tudor); then along present-day Route 70 between Marysville and US 395 (LRN 87 between Marysville and Oroville; LRN 21 between Oroville and US 395). It was cosigned with US 395 into Reno, NV.

     

    Status

    Oakland-Bay Bridge.

    There is work afoot on the Oakland-Bay Bridge. According to Tollroadnews, the new east span of the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge is already estimated to cost $3.4b with the price anticipated to rise with bids on the cable stayed or anchored suspension section. The East Span, a doubledecker of 5-lanes on top of 5-lanes was built by the California Toll Bridge Authority and opened in 1936. During the Loma Prieta earthquake of 1989, the bolts on the upper deck of one truss section sheered off and that deck section hinged down onto the lower deck closing the whole bridge for several weeks. Several of the main piers are weakened. Most are on wooden deep piles which are rotting. There was general agreement it was best to build a new span. But the agreement ended when it came to the design of the bridge. The cost has been going up, and there has been endless infighting on who will pay for what. It has gotten worse and worse. According to the Oakland Tribune, the most complete estimate as of January 2005 for the full cost to build, engineer and oversee construction of the new eastern span of the Bay Bridge: $5.9 billion. The skyway is costing $160,000 per foot. Extending it could cost $460,000 per foot. There are all sorts of accusations flying around about whether Caltrans hid the cost. For example, starting in August 2002, a consultant's mock bid placed the cost of the remaining tower at $934 million. By December 2003, Caltrans' own bridge cost specialist placed the bid at $1 billion and revised it to $1.3 billion in April. All the while, the agency stuck to its official figure of $780 million. The bid price May 26 was $1.4 billion. Currently, information on the Bay Bridge project may be found on the frontpage of the Caltrans Website. In July 2005, final agreement was reached. On July 18, 2005, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger signed legislation allowing construction to resume on a self-anchored suspension span to complete the new eastern portion of the bridge. The legislation calls for the state to contribute an additional $630 million to help cover the $3.6 billion in cost overruns on the new eastern span. Motorists will have to start paying a $1 extra in 2007 on all toll bridges in the Bay Area except for the Golden Gate to cover much of the rest of the cost of the $6.3 billion project. The increase will mean $4 bridge tolls.

    In late March 2006, it was reported that Caltrans received two bids to build the single-tower suspension span to complete the bridge, and the low offer was $1.43 billion, slightly less than estimated. The low bid comes from a joint venture between American Bridge Co. and Fluor Corp. of Coraopolis, Pa. Caltrans engineers had estimated the cost at $1.45 billion. The second bid, $1.68 billion, was from a joint venture between contractors Kiewit and Manson, two of the three companies in the consortium building the concrete skyway section of the bridge, and Koch and Skanska. Caltrans officials then began reviewing the bids, checking figures, examining lists of subcontractors and making sure the details match the agency's requirements. If all goes well, the contract would be offered to American Bridge/Fluor. If the low bid is determined to be flawed, Caltrans could either accept the higher offer or reject both bids and start over. Construction activity on the Bay Bridge probably won't be visible until mid-to-late 2007. The new eastern part of the Bay Bridge will be the world's largest self-anchored suspension span. The bridge is expected to open to westbound traffic in spring of 2012 with eastbound lanes opening about a year later. The state has two additional contracts to award on the bridge: one for the Oakland touchdown ramps, and a second to build connector lanes to Yerba Buena Island.

    In early 2009, it was reported that work on the Eastern span was delayed, due to problematic welds. Specifically, according to Caltrans records, inspectors hired by Caltrans to monitor the fabrication of steel girders that will support the tower's roadway reported finding cracked welds in 2008. Caltrans and others in charge of the bridge construction say the welds are safe and that fixes have been made - but also say the inspectors interpreted the welding standards too rigidly. Meanwhile, the inspection outfit that sounded the alarm has since been replaced. The welds in question are contained in 900 bridge panels that are being assembled into football field-size deck sections that will stretch across the 1,800-foot-long tower portion. The sections were supposed to have begun arriving from China in October 2008, but due to delays they weren't expected to arrive until at least April 2009. The panels are being made by the Zhenhua Port Machinery Co. of Shanghai, which is fabricating most of the steel for the $1.4 billion signature tower on behalf of the span's joint-venture builder, American Bridge-Fluor Enterprises. ZPMC, as the company is commonly known, is the same firm that built the mammoth cranes that tower over the Port of Oakland - indeed, it builds 80 percent of the container cranes used around the world. Soon after ZPMC started production in late 2007, however, the inspectors hired by Caltrans began finding problems - specifically, an unacceptably large number of welding flaws in the new panels. Specifically, as many as 65% of the more than 30 welded panel sections examined - either visually or using ultrasonic testing - failed to meet specifications. The memos also reveal that the inspectors questioned ZPMC's ability to handle the complex bridge construction job - and that they were frustrated by Caltrans officials' demands that the project proceed despite the allegedly substandard welds. Caltrans officials, working with ZPMC and MacTec inspectors, say they eventually worked out a program to tag and repair all the bad welds. But e-mails from inspectors show problems persisted. After consulting with a structural steel expert from Lehigh University in Pennsylvania, Caltrans officials concluded the decks will be safe, and that the earlier problems were the result of strict weld standards that essentially allowed for no cracks. In other words, a few minor cracks are OK.

    [Replacement of Roadway]The construction technique used is interesting. Portions of the replacement roadway are constructed to the side of the bridge. The bridge is then closed, the old roadway demolished, and the new roadway rolled into place. This is illustrated to the right. It was done over Labor Day Weekend 2007, when at 8 p.m. Aug. 31, after the last Friday commute stragglers passed, Caltrans took the unprecedented step of completely closing the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge for 3½ days and nights of major reconstruction. Crews then demolished a 100-yard bridge section just east of the Yerba Buena Island tunnel. Once the demolition was done and the rubble carted away, the new section was be rolled on seven rails into place, controlled by a computer. The 6,500-ton, five-lane section had already been constructed on the island adjacent to the bridge deck. The new piece was be jacked a few inches higher than the existing roadbed, and when it was in place, it was lowered onto new concrete supports. There was only 3 inches of clearance where the new deck met the existing deck. Unlike the old deck, the new one was designed with equal-length columns, sitting on top of pilings that are encased in an isolation base, surrounded by a few inches of open space in a concrete housing. This allows them to move side to side in an earthquake, hopefully without damage. The bridge reopened before 5:00am Tuesday for the return-to-work commute.

    By May 2008, work had begun on Yerba Buena Island on both a temporary bridge and a temporary bypass (see map on right; click on the image for the original from the SF Chronicle)). The temporary bypass is on the south side of the bridge; it will carry traffic in both directions for three years. In March 2008, crews installed the first piece of the bypass atop a pair of those columns. A double-deck steel span will take traffic on a curving 1,200-foot detour just south of the existing bridge. The bypass will extend from the end of the trestle section of the existing bridge to the tunnels. It will allow crews to demolish the current link to the island and build a connection for the new span. The bypass is being built on the ground, then will be hoisted into the air one piece at a time. The fifth and final piece will require a weekend bridge closure - possibly over Labor Day 2009 - as crews cut the existing span and slide it off its supports on a set of rails erected 150 feet in the sky. Then the new piece will be lifted onto another set of rails and rolled into place atop the bridge supports. To the north, a temporary bridge will be constructed. Workers are planting seven sets of temporary steel towers in the bay and the eastern end of the island. In June, steel girders arrived from Washington and were formed into a bridge reaching from near Yerba Buena Island to the already-completed skyway section of the new eastern span. This will look like a bridge, and will be a bridge, but won't ever carry traffic in this form. Instead, it will be used to assemble and support the 28 winglike steel pieces - 14 for eastbound lanes and 14 for westbound - that will make up the deck of the new Bay Bridge. Those sections will begin arriving from Shanghai, where the bridge is being manufactured, late 2008 along with the four steel sections of the tower. Once the 525-foot tower is assembled, a suspension cable will be hung and draped around the bridge deck. The temporary towers and girders will be removed, and the bridge will support itself.
    (Source: SF Chronicle, May 28, 2008)

    In August 2008, Caltrans released a bid to construct bridges, roadway and install electrical systems in the City and County of San Francisco from the Yerba Buena Tunnel to 0.6 km East of Yerba Buena Tunnel. This likely includes reconfiguration of the interchange and replacement of the original US 40/US 50 tunnel.

    On Yerba Buena Island, there are plans to remove the westbound on-ramp and the westbound off-ramp located on the eastern side of the island and replace them with a new westbound on-ramp and a new westbound off-ramp that would address design standards and traffic safety requirements. This project has been proposed to address the geometric and operational deficiencies of the existing westbound on-ramp and existing westbound off-ramp on the eastern side of Yerba Buena Island and their effects on the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge (I-80) mainline, without degrading the mainline operation as compared to the noaction alternative. An EIR was being prepared as of October 2008. The Yerba Buena Island Ramps Improvement Project is estimated to cost $113,000,000. Funding is anticipated through the Proposition 1B Local Bridge Seismic Retrofit Program, Federal Highway Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation Program and other local funding sources. Construction is scheduled to begin in fiscal year 2011/12. There are two alternatives being considered (in addition to no-build):

    (2B) Alternative 2B would include removal of the existing westbound on- and off-ramps on the east side of Yerba Buena Island, construction of a westbound off-ramp to Macalla Court on the east side of Yerba Buena Island, and construction of a westbound hook on-ramp from Macalla Court on the east side of Yerba Buena Island. The feasibility of incorporating improvements to the current eastbound off-ramp on the eastern side of Yerba Buena Island to Hillcrest Road will be studied.

    (4) Alternative 4 would include removal of the existing westbound on- and off-ramps on the east side of Yerba Buena Island, construction of a westbound on-ramp from Hillcrest Road, and construction of a westbound off-ramp from Macalla Court on the east side of Yerba Buena Island. The feasibility of incorporating improvements to the current eastbound off-ramp on the eastern side of Yerba Buena Island to Hillcrest Road will be studied.

    According to the San Jose Mercury News, there are plans in early 2009 to raise tolls on the Bay Bridge, likely $1, and likely to be applied to carpoolers as well. They may also add congestion pricing. This is being done to help support the cost of retrofitting the Dumbarton and Antioch spans for earthquake improvements

    In order to build the suspension bridge, a large amount of temporary construction is required. These include steel trusses starting to cross San Francisco Bay between Yerba Buena Island to the west and the new 1.2-mile-long precast concrete Skyway to the east, alongside the existing eastern steel truss span of the old Bay Bridge. The truss bridge muyt support the 28 steel-deck sections being fabricated in China. In addition to falsework for the SAS span, part of a $1.4-billion contract held by a joint venture of American Bridge Inc., Coroapolis, Pa., and Fluor Enterprises Inc., Aliso Viejo, Calif. Rancho Cordova, Calif.-based C.C. Myers Inc. will demolish and replace a 300-ft-long double-deck section of transition bridge over one weekend later this year. The 1.2-mile Skyway portion of the east span is just completed, and a $429-million seismic reconstruction of the west approach wrapped up in early 2009. Construction feats as of early 2009 include a 1,700-ton, 150-ft megapick of a steel-tub girder in 11 hours, a 2,100-ton steel foundation box for the 525-ft-tall single tower and a Labor Day lift-out of a 6,500-ton section of roadway. Later in the year, a custom-built crane from China will arrive with a 328-ft-long boom and the capacity to lift 1,700 metric tons. Even the barge had to be custom-built: it is 400 feet long, 100 feet wide and 22 feet deep.

    In May 2009, a group of about 70 architects pronounced the new east span of the Bay Bride "a beautiful landmark emerging from the morass of political and bureaucratic ugliness that has defined its creation." The architects used the terms "beautiful," "sleek" and "elegant" to describe the $6.3 billion new span, expected to open in 2013. Some of the highlights included the bicycle and pedestrian path, the steel structures on the underside of the new skyway to provide homes for cormorants, and the plans to illuminate the 525-foot tower and the cables supporting the new suspension span.
    (San Francisco Chronicle)

    In September 2009, the Bay Bridge closed to traffic to permit a complex construction maneuver 150 feet in the air. Specifically, over this weekend, workers cut a portion of the existing eastern span near Yerba Buena Island and slid it out. They rolled in a new section, rerouting traffic (via an S-curve) onto a temporary bypass for three to four years. Once the temporary bypass is completed, speeds will be limited to 40 mph, 10 mph below the current limit. Crews will demolish the existing tunnel approach and build a connection to the new bridge. This seems similar to what was done on the other end of the span. Note that during this construction some problems were found, necessistating closure of the Bay Bridge for a few days while they were repaired. This happened again in November 2009.

    [S-Curve]In October 2009, Caltrans begin installing more prominent warning signs near the Bay Bridge's recently opened S-curve to try to force drivers to slow down in the aftermath of a messy big-rig crash on the new stretch in early October that tied up westbound traffic for hours. State officials had already approved a plan to step up warnings to motorists that the speed limit on the S-curve is 40 mph, down from 50 mph on the rest of the span. One change will be radar-activated signs that alert drivers to their real-time speed along with the posted limit, to be in place by the end of October 2009. On the lower deck, Caltrans will install a large, yellow "40 mph" sign with a curved arrow, replacing the sign that had designated the now-closed Yerba Buena Island exit. If that doesn't do the trick, Caltrans may install reflective bumps on the pavement, known as "rumble strips," before the S-curve. Besides the warnings, Caltrans is planning to treat the metal panels at the beginning and the end of the curve with a mixture of epoxy and sand to improve traction. As of 11/9, there have been more than 42 accidents in the curved area since it opened Sept. 8 as part of the eastern span replacement project. On 11/9, the first fatal accident occurred when a big rig plunged 200 feet off the Bay Bridge, killing the driver and obliterating the truck. The truck was carrying a load of pears to San Francisco when the crash occurred about 3:30 a.m. that morning. The impact shattered the truck into pieces. Metal debris and boxes of pears littered the landing where the truck crashed. A mattress, presumably from the truck's cab, hung on a railing 200 feet above. The CHP said the truck driver lost control on the curve, possibly because he was traveling about 50 mph, about 10 mph above the posted speed limit.
    (11/2009 Information Source: SJMN 11/10/2009)

    Bay Bridge to Carquinez

    In May 2007, flames from an exploding gasoline tanker travelling S on the transition road from I-80 to SB I-880 melted the steel underbelly of the I-580 bridge that carried EB traffic from the Bay Bridge to I-580, I-980, and Route 24. The single-vehicle crash occurred on the lower roadway when the tanker, loaded with 8,600 gallons of unleaded gasoline and heading from a refinery in Benicia to a gas station on Hegenberger Road in Oakland, hit a guardrail. Amazingly, damage to the I-80 transition roadbed was minor, and Caltrans was able to reopen the span within two weeks.

    Note that there are some portions here that have interesting trailblazers: West I-80 and East I-580 (or East I-80 and West I-580). You can find a picture of this here.

    The California Transportion Commission, in September 2000, considered a Traffic Congestion Relief Program proposal to reconstruct the I-80/I-680/Route 12 interchange; it would be a 12-interchange complex constructed in seven stages. The proposal was $1 million for stage 1; the total estimated cost was $13 million. This is TCRP Project #25, requested by the Solano Transportation Authority.

    In June 2008, the CTC approved relinquishment of right of way in the city of Vacaville, on the southeast side of East Monte Vista Avenue, between Browns Valley Parkway and the west bound State Route 80 off ramp, consisting of collateral facilities.

    [Fairfield HOV lanes]In January 2009, the CTC approved for future funding a project to construct High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes in both directions between Red Top Road and Air Base Parkway on Route 80 in Fairfield. The project will construct HOV lanes in both directions in the existing median along an 8.7 mile section of Route 80 in Solano County. The project is programmed with CMIA funds, federal demonstration funds, and Regional Measure 2 funds. The total estimated project cost is $80,000,000. The project has been split into three segments. The construction of the final segment (8320C) is estimated to begin in FY 2009-10. The scope as described for the preferred alternative is consistent with the project scope set forth in the approved project baseline agreement.

    In his 2006 Strategic Growth Plan, Governor Schwartzenegger proposed constructing the I-80/I-680/Route 12 Interchange Complex, including HOV Connector Lanes. He also proposed constructing HOV lanes in Sacramento County.

    Carquinez Straights Bridge

    There were two projects to retrofit and replace portions of the Carquinez Straights Bridge. This is because the Carquinez Bridges do not meet current seismic design or traffic safety standards:

    1. The first project involves retrofitted the existing eastbound bridge built in 1958 for safety and seismic stability. This bridge was built as part of the route's upgrade to interstate status. As of October 2003, it carries 53,000 vehicles per day in four eastbound lanes. The total bridge width is 52 feet, including 12-foot lanes and two 2-foot shoulders. The cantilever steel truss spans a total of 3,300 feet in length at 140 feet above the channel. The elements of the project are to replace and strengthen the steel truss members in the bridge superstructure and towers, reinforce pile foundations at Pier No. 5 at the south end of the bridge, retrofit the abutment where the bridge touches down on the northern end, and strengthen the Crockett Interchange eastbound on and off ramps and approach structure. The cost of retrofitting the 1958 structure was $70 million. The contract for this project was awarded on Friday, June 19, 1998 to Balfour Beatty Construction, Inc. of Vallejo, CA. Balfour Beatty began preliminary work on Monday, June 22, 1998. Retrofit construction on the 1958 bridge finished in August 2001.

    2. The second project replaced the existing westbound 1927 bridge with a suspension style bridge that incorporates the latest construction technology with public amenities such as a pedestrian bike lane and two new vista points. The 1927 bridge was constructed as a private toll bridge, and provided three lanes of westbound (to San Francisco) traffic. This structure had exhibited deterioration of its metal components, and accessibility to and maintenance of the bridge's structural members was difficult, with major rehabilitation virtually impossible. Retrofit of the existing structure was rejected in favor of replacement. The replacement required State Historic Preservation Officer and Advisory Council on Historic Preservation approval because the existing 1927 westbound main span and westbound Crockett off-ramp are listed in the National Register of Historic Places. The replacement opened November 11, 2003, which allowed the committee to side-step the problem of which Governor to invite to the opening: Governor Davis or Governor Schwartzenegger. The last date to certify the election was November 15, 2003.

    In mid-March 2006, after nearly 79 years on the job, the 1927 span of the Carquinez Bridge was retired. This was the Bay Area's first modern steel bridge, and is the center bridge of the three that carry I-80 traffic over the Carquinez Strait. It opened May 21, 1927, and was rendered unnecessary with the opening of the westbound Al Zampa Bridge in 2003. The original span's age prompted transportation officials to replace it rather than strengthening it against earthquakes. Crews have begun removing the deck of the 1927 bridge, and in a couple of weeks will lower part of the span onto barges and ship it to a nearby yard for final dismantling. The rest of the span will be lowered later, and the towers and piers are expected to disappear by late 2007. The bridge cannot be quickly demolished because the new Al Zampa Memorial Bridge sits to the west of the old bridge, and a 1958 span carrying westbound I-80 traffic sits to the east, leaving only so much room for crews to maneuver. Furthermore, workers also must be careful not to drop anything into the waters below, which serve as a salmon run and natural habitat for delta smelt. Parts of the old span are listed on the National Register of Historic Places and will be saved. After the spans have been lowered and removed by barge, attention will turn to the three towers, with their attached roadways, and the approaches to the bridge. Crews will install temporary support towers on the Crockett side to support the bridge approach during the dismantling. Then, using cranes, they'll remove the three towers and, finally, the approaches. Work is scheduled to be finished in September 2007. The cost of taking apart the bridge -- essentially in reverse order of its construction, according to Haus -- will cost an estimated $18 million, $10 million more than it cost to build.

    Carquinez to Sacramento

    HOV LaneIn 2007, the CTC considered a number of requests for funding from the Corridor Mobility Improvement Account (CMIA). Two requests were funded: Integrated fwy/local road management near the Carquinez-Bay Bridge ($55.3M) and construction of HOV lanes from Fairfield (Route 80/I-680/Route 12 to Putah Creek) ($56.21M). In February 2008, the latter project was divided into three phases:

    1. Construction of 8.7 mi of HOV lanes in each direction.

    2. Addition of a new roadbed layer across all lanes.

    3. Addition of Ramp Metering.

    A request to reconstruct the Route 80/I-680/Route 12 interchange ($93.79M) was not recommended for funding. In the Sacramento area and points east, Phase 3A of the WB HOV and auxiliary lanes from Eureka to Route 65 ($31.3M) were recommended for funding. Not recommended for funding were HOV lanes from the Sacramento River to Longview Dr ($100M) and the Yolo bypass bicycle bridge ($25.3M). In July 2007, the CTC amended the program to fund the Placer Route 80 HOV and Aux lanes project.

    In December 2009, the CTC approved for future consideration of funding a project that will construct ramp metering facilities and roadway improvements at existing interchange entrance and connector ramps of I-80 from Red Top Road to Air Base Parkway in the city of Fairfield. The project is programmed in the Corridor Mobility Improvement Account and includes local funds. Total estimated project cost is $10,026,000, capital and support. This ramp metering project is a child project of the parent I-80 HOV Lanes Project (PPNO 8320B). There was no Notice of Determination filed for this project. Instead, an Addendum to the MND for the parent project was prepared. The scope as described for the preferred alternative is consistent with the project scope set forth in the approved project baseline agreement.

    Near I-80 in Vacaville (at the Weber Road interchange) is the former Vaca Valley Raceway, which is currently abandoned as the SF chapter of the Sports Car Club of America cannot afford to refurbish it (although they may do so someday). It existed in the early 1970s near the now-abandoned Vaca-Dixon Airport.

    In September 2003, the CTC considered relinquishment of right of way in the City of Vacaville (City), at Bella Vista Road, consisting of frontage road.

    Sacramento to Placerville

    Sacto WideningIn July 2007, the CTC received notice of a draft EIR having been prepared for roadway improvements in and near Sacramento. The alternative under consideration would connect to the existing bus/carpool lanes that extend east from Watt Avenue to Placer County. It would add a 12-foot bus/carpool lane in each direction from Watt Avenue to West El Camino Avenue, add 12-foot eastbound and westbound auxiliary lanes in two locations, from West El Camino Avenue to I-5 and between Northgate Boulevard and Norwood Avenue, and install ramp metering and bus/carpool bypass lane on-ramps at selected interchanges if feasible. However, the project is not fully funded. The project is currently funded for Project Approval and Environmental Document and Plans, Specifications and Estimates for $9 million in Congestion Mitigation Air Quality funding. The total estimated project cost is $200 million. Construction is estimated to begin in Fiscal Year (FY) 2009-10. These were up for future consideration of funding, the EIR having been completed, in April 2008.

    There are plans for freeway improvements in the area of Citrus Heights and Rocklin. Alternatives being discussed are in the CTC Background. The goal is to improve traffic flow between Auburn and Douglas Blvds in that area.

    In 2006, the CTC discussed the scope of work for the I-80 Capacity/Operational Improvements parent project (PPNO 0146D), which includes the construction of eastbound and westbound HOV and auxiliary lanes from the Sacramento/Placer County line (PM 0.0) to Route 65 (PM 5.1). The project scope also includes upgrading the traffic monitoring system through the use of traffic sensors, closed circuit cameras, and changeable message signs. The estimate for the total project is currently $193,200,000. In December 2008, funding was reallocated to redistribute construction contract award savings realized from a low construction bid. The construction contract award savings will be used to cover the final expenditure costs of the environmental clearance and design components on Phase 2.

    In May 2009, Caltrans advertised a project involving I-80 HOV lanes in Roseville and Rocklin ($35 million).

    In March 2008, right of way in Roseville, on Riverside Avenue between Cirby Way and I-80 was relinquished.

    Placerville to the Nevada State Line

    In Farad, there is a yellow warehouse building visible from I-80. This is the Farad Powerhouse, operated by Sierra Pacific Power Company. There was a dam on the Truckee River down at Floriston where water was diverted into a wooden flume that runs along the river between there and Farad. The dam was destroyed in a 1997 flood. There were plans to replace it.

    In November 2002, a new "Truckee Bypass" opened. According to Joe Rouse, the old Route 89/Route 267 interchange is now Exit 188A, an eastbound off/westbound on only, signed as "Truckee". The bypass is Exit 188B eastbound, Exit 188 westbound. The onramp to westbound I-80 from the bypass is the only unopened portion of the project. The old Route 89 and Route 267 into downtown Truckee are called Donner Pass Rd; old Route 267 from downtown Truckee south to the bypass is now called Brockway Road.

    Joe also reported in August 2002 that the huge West Boca-Boca-Floriston job east of Truckee is progressing slowly but surely. This project extends from the Truckee Bypass all the way to Floriston. It involves replacement of 12 bridges (6 pairs of bridges, 3 across the Truckee River and 3 across local roads) as well as a realignment of a small segment of I-80 east of the Donner Pass CHP Inspection Facility. The median portions of the replacement bridges were built first and those have all been completed and traffic has been switched onto them. The outside portions of the bridges are now being built. It appears that the eastbound lanes of the realignment have been paved.

    Photo of G61RI-80 is the only place to see California' first attempt at official mile marking, the G61R sign. There were two versions. The G61R-1 had white 6 inch whole numbers and a white 4 inch decimal on a green background and no other information. The G61R-2 was identical to the G61R-1 but it added a white 3 inch county abbreviation at the top, much like what we see on California postmile markers today. If the mileage had more than 3 digits, the county abbreviation was to be removed. The G61R-2 was not to be used on Interstate routes. An example of a G61R (see the picture to the right, courtesy of Jason Elliot of Oregon Roads and Reno Roads) may be seen along I-80 travelling east towards Reno from Truckee, at about 1–1½ miles from the California-Nevada border on the California side, there is one of the original mile marker signs. This sign has a dark-green background with darkened text and reads 2080. The numbers on the side are rotated the same direction and way as modern postmiles. There is/was another along I-80 eastbound in Placer County, between PM 36.0 and 37.0: it reads 1430. According to Eric Buchanan's Highway Photo Page, there is another one around mile 155 (probably around PM 48.0 Placer or so) as well as one on Business Route 80 "just past 99 south."

    In October 2006, the CTC considered a resolution to vacate right of way near I-80 in the town of Truckee, between Truckee Airport Road and the Truckee River, consisting of highway right of way easement no longer needed for State highway purposes.

    SAFETEA-LU

    The SAFETEA-LU act, enacted in August 2005 as the reauthorization of TEA-21, provided the following expenditures on or near this route:

    • High Priority Project #592: Reconstruct the interchange for south-bound traffic entering I-80 from Central Avenue in the City of Richmond. $3,120,000.

    • High Priority Project #806: Replace the I-880 overpass at Davis St. in San Leandro. $600,000.

    • High Priority Project #1744: Construct I-80 Gilman Street interchange improvements in Berkeley. $1,200,000.

    • High Priority Project #1812: Upgrade and reconstruct the I-80/I-680/Route 12 Interchange, Solano County. $17,480,000.

    • High Priority Project #2209: Construct I-80 HOV lanes and interchange in Vallejo. HPP #3796 seems to provide additional funds.$800,000.

    • High Priority Project #2399: Improve access to I-80 at Eureka Road Interchange. $1,600,000.

    • High Priority Project #3649: Increase capacity on I-80 between Sacramento/Placer Cty Line and Route 65. This is related to NCI #13, below.$21,600,000.

    • High Priority Project #3791: Construct interchange at Harbor Boulevard/I-80 in West Sacramento. $1,000,000.

    • High Priority Project #3796: Construct I-80 HOV lanes and interchange in Vallejo. This seems to be additional funding for HPP #2209. $2,000,000.

    • National Corridor Infrastructure (NCI) Improvement Program #13: Increase capacity on I-80 between Sacramento/Placer City Line and Route 65. This is related to HPP #3649. $50,000,000.

     

     

    Business Routes
    • Sacramento: The Capitol City Freeway, consisting of portions of US 50 and unsigned Route 51.
    • Truckee: Donner Pass Road (old US 40) and Route 267.

     

    Interstate Submissions

    Approved as chargeable Interstate on 7/7/1947, with a routing through Sacramento that followed what is now US 50 (the unsigned I-305 portion) to the Route 99/US 50 interchange, and then what is designated as Business 80 (Unsigned Route 51) north to the point where it rejoins I-80. The current routing of I-80 between the US 50/I-80 interchange and the Business Route 80 (Route 51)/I-80 interchange was originally designated at I-880 and was approved as chargeable interstate in July of 1958. I-305 was approved as chargeable interstate in May 1980; at the same time, the business route portion was removed from the interstate system. I-305 is currently signed as Business Route 80.

    In August 1957, this was tentatively approved as I-80; however, in November 1957 the California Department of Highways suggested that it be designated as I-76 to eliminate confusion with the existing US 80 in California. This was rejected by AASHTO, as was probably one of the factors leading to the "great renumbering".

     

    Naming

    The portion of part (2) of I-80 in San Francisco is named the "James Lick Skyway". James Lick (1796-1876) was a piano and organ maker from Pennsylvania who financed the observatory atop Mt. Hamilton. He moved to San Francisco in 1848 and made his fortune in real estate. Named by Assembly Concurrent Resolution 37, Chapt. 122 in 1951.

    The entire route in California has been submitted to be part of the National Purple Heart Trail. The Military Order of the Purple Heart is working to establish a national commemorative trail for recipients of the Purple Heart medal, which honors veterans who were wounded in combat. All states in the union will designate highways for inclusion in the commemorative trail, and all of the designated highways will be interconnected to form the National Purple Heart Trail. Named by Senate Concurrent Resolution 14, Resolution Chapter 79, July 10, 2001.

    The bicycle-pedestrian path on the proposed new span of the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge (I-80) is named the "Alexander Zuckermann Bicycle-Pedestrian Path". Named in honor of Alexander Zuckermann, a member of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission Advisory Council and a founder of the East Bay Bicycle Coalition and a leader of the Regional Bicycle Advocacy Coalition, who was a tireless and articulate advocate in the design process to replace the east span of the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge (collapsed by the 1989 Loma Priata Earthquake). The well-organized and persistent efforts of Alexander Zuckermann were key factors in the final decision to include a bicycle-pedestrian path on the southern edge of the eastbound deck of the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge between Yerba Buena Island and Oakland. Named by Assembly Concurrent Resolution 39, Chaptered 7/11/2003, Chapter 94.

    There is the possibility that the Bay Bridge will be named the Emperor Norton Bridge. Currently, this effort is at the county level, where the San Francisco City/County Board of Supervisors voted 8-2 in December 2004 to recommend the name change. The resolution, if approved by Mayor Gavin Newsom, next will travel to the Oakland City Council and on to the California Legislature. The drive to rename the bridge was publicized by Chronicle cartoonist Phil Frank in his strip "Farley". Norton, who occupied a 10-by-6-foot front room of a Sacramento Street lodging house, would have been a present-day constituent of Supervisor Aaron Peskin. And so it was Peskin who picked up Frank's idea, molded it into a resolution and brought it to the Board of Supervisors. The naming would be in memory of Joshua Abraham Norton—who hailed from Scotland, and was a businessman who came to San Francisco by way of South Africa in 1849 to try his luck in the Gold Rush. It is said that he lost his fortune—and his mental stability—after making a bum investment in the rice market a few years later. In 1859, he proclaimed himself Emperor of the United States and, shortly thereafter, the Protector of Mexico. For the next 20 years, he issued proclamations defending minorities and championing civil rights, which were reproduced in local newspapers. He roamed the city accompanied by his dogs, Bummer and Lazarus, and some eateries honored Norton's own specially printed paper money. In 1872, Norton ordered "a bridge be built from Oakland Point to Goat (Yerba Buena) Island and thence to Telegraph Hill." Though his proclamation received little notice at the time, such a bridge would open in 1936, described by President Herbert Hoover as "the greatest bridge ever erected by the human race." Another of Norton's noted proclamations decreed that "Whoever after due and proper warning shall be heard to utter the abominable word 'Frisco,' which has no linguistic or other warrant, shall be deemed guilty of a High Misdemeanor." The penalty: $25.
    [Information on Emperor Norton from SFGate.Com, you can find more information at The Virtual Museum of the City of San Francisco.]

    The portion of I-80 from the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge through Richmond is named the "East Shore" Freeway. This section of freeway was named by Senate Concurrent Resolution 99, Chapt. 229 in 1968. It was named because it runs along the east short of the bay. This was the original name before the Nimitz name came into use.

    The portion of I-80 from the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge through Alameda County to the Contra Costa County Line is named the "Kent D. Pursel Memorial Freeway". Mr. Pursel was a Berkeley druggist and councilman. He was a delegate to the Republican National Convention in 1948. He held a succession of elected offices until his death on August 15, 1967. This should not be confused with Charles Purcell who oversaw the construction of the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge. Named by Senate Concurrent Resolution 99, Chapter 229 in 1968.

    The eastbound I-80/Route 37 interchange is named the "Gary L. Hughes Memorial Interchange". Officer Hughes was a CHP officer killed in the line of duty by a drunk driver during a traffic stop near the bridge. Named by Assembly Concurrent Resolution 100, Chapter 124, in 1998.

    I-80 from Route 4 to the Carquinez Bridge in Contra Costa County is named the "Linus F. Claeys" Freeway. Linus F. Claeys, a 1932 graduate of St. Mary's College in Moraga, was a rancher, businessman, philanthropist and descendant of California pioneers whose land SR 80 traverses. Two residence halls at St. Mary's College bear his name. Named by Senate Concurrent Resolution 85, Chapter 80 in 1990.

    The portion of I-80 that passes through Vallejo, from the Carquinez Bridge to Columbus Parkway, is named the "Jeffrey Lynn Azuar Memorial Highway". Jeffrey Lynn Azuar was a Vallejo Police Officer who was killed in the line of duty on April 12, 2000. He was born and raised in Vallejo and served the community as an officer with the Vallejo Police Department for over 21 years, serving as a patrol officer, a narcotics officer, a member of the SWAT team, a member of the Honor Guard, and a K-9 officer. Named by Senate Concurrent Resolution 85, Chapter 155, on September 20, 2000.

    The portion of I-80 W of the intersection with Route 51 (signed as Business 80) in Sacramento is named the "West Sacramento" Freeway. It was named after the city of West Sacramento. This city originally known as "East Yolo" in the early parts of the 20th century, later developed into three or four seperate communities: Bryte and Broderick, accessed by former Route 16/Route 84; West Sacramento, on West Capitol Avenue, and Southport, which developed when the Port of Sacramento was built in the 1950s. These communities merged to form an independent city in 1987. Sacramento refers to the City of Sacramento CA, which is based off of the name of the main river in the city. The Spanish name, "Holy Sacrament," was applied to the Feather River in 1808; it was later assumed that the lower Sacramento was the same stream. In 1817 the two main rivers of the valley were recorded as Sacramento and San Joaquin rivers, but the course of the former was not identified with the name until the 1830s. The city was laid out in 1848-1849 and named after the river by John A. Sutter, Jr., and Sam Brannan. The county, one of the original 27, was named in 1850.

    The portion of this route from Sacramento to Route 65 was historically called the "Capitol Highway". Capitol refers to the fact that Sacramento is the Capital of California, and the Capitol is located there.

    The portion of I-80 between the Sacramento county line and the Nevada border is officially named the "Alan S. Hart" Freeway. During his 42 years of service as an engineer for Caltrans, Alan S. Hart accomplished the modernization of the Trans Sierra Highway (I-80 over Donner Summit) and the adoption of 50 miles of freeway on SR 101 through the redwoods of Humboldt County. Named by Senate Concurrent Resolution No. 102, Chapter 164, in 1986.

    The portion of this route between Route 113 in Davis and Route 65 in Roseville (i.e., the portions originally signed as part of US 99) are designated as part of "Historic US Highway 99" by Assembly Concurrent Resolution 19, Chapter 73, in 1993.

    The portion of this route that is former US 99 is, in local usage, called the "East Side Highway". This is because the US 99 routing ran along the east side of the valley.

    The portion of I-80 from Emigrant Gap to Donner Lake was originally named the "Dutch Flat-Donner Lake Wagon Road". This name was specified by Resolution Chapter 224 in 1909. It was named by location.

    The entire freeway between San Francisco and Nevada is named the "Dwight D. Eisenhower Highway". Dwight Eisenhower was the 34th President of the United States, and is believed to be the driving force behind the interstate system. He died in 1969. For more information, see President Eisenhower's official biography or visit the Eisenhower Library. Named by the Federal Highway Administration in 1973.

     

    Named Structures

    Bridge 34-003 over San Francisco Bay is called the "San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge", although it was never formally named. It was opened in 1936. The San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge is also unofficially named the "James "Sunny Jim" Rolph Bridge". James Rolph was mayor of San Francisco for 19 years from 1911 to 1931. He was elected Governor of California in 1931 and served until his death in 1934. The bridge wasn't dedicated to Rolph until 1986 because of a rivalry with Oakland Tribune publisher Joseph Knowland. Called "Sunny Jim" for his disposition, the former shipyard owner was known for his generosity and his success with projects such as building San Francisco's city hall in 1915 and promoting expansion of the Municipal Railway.

    Tunnel 34-004 under San Francisco Bay at the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge is called the "Yerba Buena Tunnel". It was built in 1936.

    The Carquinez Bridge was purchased in 1940. Tolls were eliminated in 1945. The parallel structure was opened in 1958. Tolls were reinstated at that time.

    The westbound span of the Carquinez Bridge is named the "Alfred Zampa Memorial Bridge" in honor and recognition of Alfred "Al" Zampa. Alfred "Al" Zampa was born on March 12, 1905, in Selby, California. After graduating from high school, Al Zampa went into business and became the owner of a meat market in Crockett, California until about 1924, when a customer asked him if he wanted to go to work for that customer on the bridge they were building from Crockett to Vallejo. Al Zampa decided to give it a try; and the first Carquinez Bridge opened in May of 1927, in part due to Al Zampa's efforts. That bridge was to be the first of many bridges Al Zampa would work on in his illustrious career as an iron worker. Al Zampa continued working with the company that built the Carquinez Bridge and worked on projects and bridges in Stockton, California and later in Arizona and Texas, returning to California in the early 1930's to work on the Oakland-San Francisco Bay Bridge and the Golden Gate Bridge. On October 20, 1936, this outstanding iron worker fell into the safety net while working on the Golden Gate Bridge and broke four vertebrae in his back. He later returned to iron work and worked on the second Carquinez Bridge in the 1950's with his two sons, Richard L. (Dick) and Gene. Al Zampa also worked on the Martinez Bridge and the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge and continued to work as a respected iron worker until he retired at the age of 65. In 1987, he was the subject of a stage play entitled "The Ace" that was performed at Fort Mason in San Francisco. Al Zampa was also interviewed for the History Channel on top of the building of the Golden Gate Bridge and more recently for a new show entitled "Suicide Missions: Skywalkers" which depicts the history of the Iron Worker Union. Al Zampa passed away on April 23, 2000, at the age of 95. Named by Senate Concurrent Resolution 97, Chapter 135, September 12, 2000.

    Bridge 23-0015 over the Carquinez Strait between Contra Costa and Solano counties is called the "Carquinez Bridge". It was built in 1927. On this bridge is the "Roger Van Den Broeke Memorial Plaque", named by Assembly Concurrent Resolution 105, Chapter 99, in 1994. Robert Van Den Broeke, Caltrans Equipment Operator, was killed by an errant motorist while removing a disabled vehicle from the Carquinez Bridge toll plaza in Vallejo on August 12, 1983.

    According to Joe Rouse, the new Carquinez Bridge will be called the Alfred Zampa Bridge, named after an ironworker who helped build the original Carquinez Bridge as well as the Bay and Golden Gate Bridges.

    The Yolo Causeway (including bridges 22-044 and 22-045) on Route 80 in the County of Yolo is officially designated the "Blecher-Freeman Memorial Causeway". Roy P. Blecher and W. Michael Freeman were veteran California Highway Patrol officers shot to death during an enforcement stop on Route 80 near the Yolo Causeway in the early morning hours of December 22, 1978 at the hands of an armed felon. It was built in 1962, and named by Assembly Concurrent Resolution No. 119, Chapter 147, in 1994.

    The Sacramento River Bridge and Overhead on I-80 in Sacramento and Yolo Counties, commonly known as the Bryte Bend Bridge, is officially named the "Caltrans Maintenance Worker Memorial Bridge", in honor of the deceased and injured workers of the Division of Maintenance of the Department of Transportation. The thousands of men and women who serve at all levels in the Division of Maintenance of the Department of Transportation are persons of knowledge, ability, and integrity. These employees are among those who must regularly work within the public right-of-way and in close proximity to traffic while performing their responsibilities, including the maintenance of streets, the maintenance and repair of water and sewer lines, the maintenance and replacement of traffic signs and signals, the application of pavement markings, and the maintenance and landscaping of street medians. They have paid a particularly harsh price for their dedicated service while working in conditions that have resulted in the highest death and accident rates in state service, with numerous deaths and injuries in the past 10 years. Accidents in highway work zones resulted in 1,093 deaths nationwide in 2000. This naming was done to promote the safety of Caltrans employees, and to encourage motorists traveling in and through the state to exercise caution and care when encountering a work zone. Named by Senate Concurrent Resolution 105, Chapter 161, September 11, 2002.

    The dedicated access enabling motorists to enter eastbound I-80 from Sunrise Boulevard, in the County of Placer, is officially named the "Harry Crabb Tunnel". The tunnel was named in honor of Former Roseville Mayor Harry Crabb, who retired in 2000 after 20 years of service as a city council member for the City of Roseville. He served on the Roseville City Council from 1980-1987, 1989-2000. During his 20 years on the Roseville City Council, Harry Crabb was a tireless supporter of the City of Roseville. Due to his experience working with the Department of Transportation, Harry Crabb also understood the importance of having well planned roads. The intersection of Douglas Boulevard and Sunrise Boulevard is Roseville's busiest intersection with more than 100,000 vehicles passing through it daily; Roseville began planning more than 15 years ago to improve circulation through the intersection. In anticipation of funding future road improvement projects, the Roseville City Council began collecting traffic mitigation fees from developers building in the City of Roseville; this fund, along with state and federal funds, provided funding for the construction of the $35 million Douglas Boulevard/I-80 project. This included an improvement plan that not only includes on and off ramps, but also provides a dedicated access for motorists trying to get to eastbound I-80 from Sunrise Boulevard. Named by Assembly Concurrent Resolution (ACR) 124, Resolution Chapter 87, on 07/11/2006.

    The "Elisha Stephens Historical Plaque" is located at the Donner Lake Overlook, in Nevada County, W of Truckee. It was named by Assembly Concurrent Resolution 24, Chapter 76, in 1993. Elisha Stephens was the first man to lead a wagon train across the Sierras in 1844. All 50 of the pioneers survived the trip, as well as two infants born during the journey.

    This route also has the following Safety Roadside Rest Areas:

    • Hunter Hill, in Solano County, 7 mi. E of Vallejo.

    • Gold Run, in Placer County, near the Sawmill and Gold Run overcrossing.

    • Donner Summit, in Nevada County on Donner Pass. The name "Donner" refers to the Donner Party, which attempted to cross the Sierras in this area. The Donner Party was the most famous tragedy in the history of the westward migration. Almost ninety wagon train emigrants were unable to cross the Sierra Nevada before winter, and almost one-half starved to death. A good summary of the history of the Donner Party may be found at http://members.aol.com/DanMRosen/donner/.

     

    National Trails

    De Anza Auto Route This route is part of the De Anza National Historic Trail.

    Interstate Shield Lincoln Highway Sign As US 40, the portion of this route between the Nevada border and Sacramento was part of the "Lincoln Highway (Alternate)" (which started in Reno).

    Interstate Shield Lincoln Highway Sign Additionally, the segment of US 40 between San Francisco and Oakland was part of the "Lincoln Highway", which originally terminated in Lincoln Park, six miles west of the ferry landing at the foot of Market Street. The Lincoln Highway ended opposite the Palace of the Legion of Honor at a small monument marking the spot. The last few miles (of the highway) were California Street.

     

    Commuter Lanes

    There are a number of segments of this route that have commuter lanes, or for which commuter lanes are planned:

    • In Solano County, commuter lanes exist on the Carquinez Bride. These require three or more occupants (two for two-seater vehicles), and are in operation between 3:00 PM and 7:00 PM on weekdays.

    • In Alameda County, commuter lanes exist on westbound I-80 between West Grand Avenue and the Maritime on-ramp. Lanes also exist on the San Francisco Oakland Bay Bridge. These opened in April 1970, require three or more people (two for two-seater vehicles), and are in operation weekdays between 5:00 AM and 10:00 AM, and between 3:00 PM and 6:00 PM. Other lane segments and dates of opening are:

      • Eastbound: Between Cutting Boulevard and Pinole Valley Road (February 1997)
      • Westbound: Between Pinole Valley Road and Cutting Blvd (March 1997)
      • Both directions between Cutting Blvd and Central Ave (May 1997)
      • Eastbound: Between Pinole Valley Road and Route 4 (August 1997)
      • Westbound: Route 4 to Pinole Valley Road (September 1997)
      • Westbound: Central Ave to Bay Bridge Toll Plaza (February 1998)
      • Eastbound: Gilman Street to Central Ave (July 1998)
      • Eastbound: Powell Street to Gilman Ave (November 1998)
    • In Contra Costa County, commuter lanes exist between San Pablo Dame Road and Pinole Valley Road. These opened in February 1997 (EB) and March 1997 (WB), require three or more people, and are in operation weekdays between 5:00 AM and 10:00 AM (westbound), and between 3:00 PM and 7:00 PM (eastbound). Additional lanes are from Pinole Valley Road to Route 4, Eastbound and from Pinole Valley Road to Route 4, Westbound.

    HOV lanes are planned or under construction as follows:

    • Longview Road overcrossing in Sacramento to the Placer County line. Construction will begin in October 2001. Sacramento County. In October 2003, a five-mile portion of these lanes opened.

    • Long range plans are to have HOV lanes on I-80 from the Placer County line to Route 65.

    • There are plans to construct an HOV lane near Crockett, in Contra Costa County, from PM 9.4 to PM 13.6 (just before the Carquinez Bridge).

    In June 2002, the CTC had on its agenda a proposal to widen Route 80 from five to six lanes to extend HOV lane eastbound from the San Francisco/Oakland Bay Bridge Toll Plaza to Powell St.

    In July 2005, the CTC considered adding additional lanes for HOV to link westbound HOV lane west of Route 4 with the westbound HOV lane included in the Carquinez Bridge from Route 4 to Carquinez Bridge.

    In September 2006, the CTC discussed the I-80 Capacity/Operational Improvements parent project (PPNO 0146D), which includes the construction of eastbound and westbound HOV and auxiliary lanes from the Sacramento/Placer County line (PM 0.0) to Route 65 (PM 5.1). The project scope also includes upgrading the traffic monitoring system through the use of traffic sensors, closed circuit cameras, and changeable message signs. The estimate for the total project is currently $193,200,000. The proposal was to split the parent project into two phases within available funding. Due to capital construction and right of way funding constraints, it is not feasible to fund the entire project within the time frame necessary to address the immediate needs. Phase I (PPNO 0146B), planned for construction this year, includes operational improvements and an eastbound auxiliary lane from the Sacramento/Placer County line Auburn Boulevard/Riverside onramp to the Douglas Boulevard northbound offramp. Phase II (PPNO 0146C) of the project, to start later (Spring 2008), includes eastbound and westbound HOV lanes, auxiliary lanes, and Traffic Operation System (TOS) elements from Auburn Boulevard/Riverside Avenue to just east of the Route 65 interchange west of Miner’s Ravine. The westbound direction other segment will be funded at a later date.

     

    Scenic Highway

    [SHC 263.5] From I-280 near First Street in San Francisco to Route 61 in Oakland; and from Route 20 near Emigrant Gap to the Nevada state line near Verdi, Nevada.

Blue Star Memorial Highway

The portion of this route from San Francisco to the Nevada state line (i.e., former US 40) was designated as the "East-West Blue Star Memorial Highway" by Senate Concurrent Resolution 33, Ch. 82 in 1947.

 

exitinfo.gif

 

Other WWW Links

 

Freeway

[SHC 253.1] Entire route. Added to the Freeway and Expressway system in 1959.

 

Interregional Route

[SHC 164.14] Entire route.

 


Overall statistics for I-80:

  • Total Length (1995): 204 miles
  • Average Daily Traffic (1992): 21,500 to 250,000
  • Milage Classification: Rural: 112; Sm. Urban 5; Urbanized: 87.
  • Previous Federal Aid Milage: FAI: 202 mi; FAP: 2 mi.
  • Functional Classification: Prin. Arterial: 204 mi.
  • Significant Summits: Donner Summit (7240 ft).
  • Counties Traversed: San Francisco, Alameda, Contra Costa, Napa, Solano, Yolo, Sacramento, Placer, Nevada, Sierra.

 

Pre 1964 Signage History

Pre-1964 State Shield US Highway Shield Before the 1964 signage/legislative route alignment, signed route 80 was US 80, which roughly followed the route of the current I-8. US 80 was first signed as a route in California in 1928. The routing for US 80 began in California near Winterhaven at the Arizona State line, and continued W through Midway Wellls, Holtville, El Centro, Seeley, Dixieland, Plaster City, Jacumba, Boulevard, Paposta, Pine Valley, Guatay, Descanso, El Cajon, and into San Diego. This was LRN 12 (defined in 1909) between San Diego and El Centro, and LRN 27 (defined in 1915) between El Centro and Winterhaven. In San Diego, US 80 followed El Cajon and University to 4th Street, then went south on 4th Street to San Diego and US 101.

County Route Shield Note that there is a County Route S80 near El Centro; this is likely a former routing of US 80.

There is a plank road just off of the old US 80 routing; this it appears to be actually associated with the earlier Southern National Highway, which created the first all-season southern route across the U.S, between Washington, D.C., and San Diego. The named highway had its origins in the early 1910s, and came into prominence in 1915, predating the Old Spanish Trail by more than eight years. To arouse interest in the Pan-Pacific Exposition of 1915, a cross-country caravan set out from San Diego along the Southern National Highway in November 2, 1915, and reached D.C. in 32 days. More information on the plank road, including photographs, can be found in the Auto Club article.

According to [LJ User] patgund, if you drive Historic US 80, stop at Desert View Tower. A little way down a slope is a fairly intact section of the old highway with the 1920's contractor stamps still in place. Also, heading east, (Eastbound I-8 is mostly Historic US 80), stop at Mountain Springs to see two very well preserved portions of the 1910's alignment, and the 1930's alignment. Also, along Historic US 80 between Ocotillo and Plaster City, you'll see a stretch of concrete between the road and the railroad tracks. That's also part of the 1910's alignment.

On US 80, just east of Viejas Indian reservation and east of Alpine, there was a structure called the Viejas Grade Tunnel. It was used through the early to mid 1960's before the section of I-8 was completed just below it.

In San Diego, US 80 covered multiple LRNs, in particular, LRN 12, LRN 26, and LRN 27. LRN 12 is west of El Centro and LRN 27 is east of El Centro, but US 80 traveled on LRN 26 through El Centro. The same is true for LRN 12 in San Diego. It is not continuous. It existed in Point Loma from Barnett Ave west to Cabrillo National Monument, and from Market St and 12th St (Park Blvd) north then east to El Centro. It did not exist between those two segements, as that was LRN 2, US 101. In 1934, while US 101 was still going along Market, US 80 terminated at Market and 12th. Later during the war (in 1943) LRN 2 (US 101) was aligned down Harbor Blvd. This was not the current Harbor Blvd, but went closer to the shoreline behind the current convention center. At this time evidently, US 80 was extended west along Market to terminate at Market and Pacific Highway. In 1930, according to the state highway inset map of San Diego, LRN 2 seems to have gone down Broadway and 16th, not Market and 12th. It is likely that for just a couple years, US 80 had a terminus at Broadway and 12th St. (current Park Blvd). Before that it went down 4th St to terminate town on Broadway (for a short time in the 1920s).

The bypass along El Cajon Blvd (now mostly I-8) north of La Mesa was not built until 1937 and 1939. Before that, the state highway followed the main street, La Mesa Blvd (formerly Lookout), right through downtown. There is now an historic US 80 sign in the center of downtown on La Mesa Blvd. The right of way maps show the route, and later notations indicate when the road was relinquished by law back to the City of La Mesa. Per Steve Varner, there is a possible error as far as the University Ave alignment. One right of way map he has shows Euclid being relinquished back to the city in 1928. Dozens of commercial maps sent to him show University as the main route until well into the 1930s. The 1934 route description and the 1934 state map showed west El Cajon Blvd as US 80. Information from Sacramento showed the same thing. The final word, accord to Steve, is that a war for business traffic was going on. The businesses on University that had enjoyed the auto trail traffic wanted US 80 on University. However, the people on El Cajon Blvd formed the El Cajon Business Association in 1926, and pushed for US 80 to be routed down El Cajon. They won. LRN 12 was aligned down west El Cajon with the inception of US 80. The road later was improved and widened in two major construction projects. Thus, it seems that US 80 as a numbered US highway never officially went down University.

Note that the route was not signed as US 80 until 1932.

 

Historical Route

ACR 123 (Resolution Chapter 104, 8/16/2006) designated segments of former U.S. Highway Route 80 in San Diego and Imperial Counties as Historic U.S. Highway Route 80, and requested the Department of Transportation to design and facilitate the posting of appropriate signs and take related actions in that regard. The resolution noted that US 80, largely parallel to current I-8, was a 180-mile highway spanning San Diego and Imperial Counties from San Diego Bay to the Colorado River, and played a major role in the development of this state during much of the 20th century. In 1909, California voters approved a statewide bond measure for road improvement purposes in the amount of $18 million, providing, among other things, funds to construct a road between San Diego and Imperial Counties, and their county seats of San Diego and El Centro. In 1915, a unique wood plank road was built over the Imperial Valley sand hills, resulting in a shorter route. In 1925, the federal government became involved in standardized highway route designations across the nation and even numbers were assigned to major highways running east and west, and odd numbers for highway running north and south. The numbering of highways proceeded in numerical order beginning in the north and east and continuing south and west, respectively, and, as a result, the routing along California's southern border was formally designated as US 80. This road, from San Diego to Tybee Island, Georgia, was adopted as US 80 on November 11, 1926. US 80 was the first ocean-to-ocean transcontinental highway to be completed, and portions of the route were known as the Bankhead, Broadway of America, Dixie, Lee, Old Spanish Trail, and Southern Transcontinental Highway.

 

National Trails

US Highway Shield Atlantic-Pacific Highway Sign US 80 was part of the "Atlantic-Pacific Highway".

US Highway Shield Old Spanish Trail Sign US 80 was part of the "Old Spanish Trail". This trail essentially followed the alignment of historic Spanish Colonial trails across Florida, Louisiana and Texas, and became the precursor to the present-day east-west route across the southern tier of the US. The early highway, which later became US 80 in California (now I-8), generally followed the Spanish Jornada de la Muerte across the state and terminated in downtown San Diego along Park Boulevard/12 Street, where it intersected with old US 101.

US Highway Shield Dixie Overland Highway Sign Lee Highway Sign Bankhead Highway Sign Lone Star Trail Sign US 80 appears to have been part of the "Bankhead Highway", the "Dixie Overland Highway", the "Lee Highway", and the "Lone Star Trail".

 

Other WWW Links

 

Pre-1964 Legislative Route

The route that would become LRN 80 was first defined in 1931 by Chapter 82 as “(v) Santa Barbara to [LRN 2] at Zaca via San Marco Pass”. In 1933, it was extended from [LRN 80] to [LRN 2] via Foothill Road, and from Santa Barbara to Rincon-Santa Paula Road near Ventura-Santa Barbara County Line. In 1935, it was codified into the highway code as:

  1. Santa Barbara to [LRN 2] at Zaca via San Marcos Pass
  2. That portion of [LRN 80] specified in [the first subdivision] to [LRN 2] via Foothill Road
  3. Santa Barbara to [LRN 151] near Ventura-Santa Barbara County Line

In 1959, Chapter 1841 changed the definition to be:

  1. Santa Barbara to [LRN 2] at near Zaca via San Marcos Pass
  2. That portion of [LRN 80] specified in [the first subdivision] to [LRN 2] [LRN 151] near Ventura-Santa Barbara County Linevia Foothill Road
  3. That portion of [LRN 80] specified in [the first subdivision] to [LRN 2] via Sycamore Canyon

This route was signed as follows:

  1. From LRN 2 (US 101) near Santa Barbara to LRN 2 (US 101 near Zaca) via San Marcos Pass.

    The portion between Zaca and Santa Ynez is present-day Route 154; it was not signed before 1964. The portion of the route between Santa Ynez and Santa Barbara was part of the original 1934 definition of Route 150; it is present-day Route 154.

  2. From segment 1 of LRN 80 to LRN 151 (Route 150) near the Ventura-Santa Barbara County line via Foothill Road.

    This also ran along Laurel Canyon Road, Stanwood Drive, Sycamore Canyon Road, and East Valley Road. This was originally signed as part of Route 150 in 1934; it is present-day Route 192.

  3. From segment 2 of LRN 80 to LRN 2 (US 101) via Sycamore Canyon.

    This is present-day Route 144. This ran along Milpas, Mason St, Salinas St., and Sycamore Canyon Road.



Back Arrow
Highways 65-72
State Highway Routes
Return to State Highway Routes
Forward Arrow
Highways 81-88
© 1996-2006 Daniel P. Faigin.
Maintained by: Daniel P. Faigin <webmaster@cahighways.org>.