Routes 257 through 264
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 Note that ISTEA repealed the previous Federal-Aid System, effective in 1992, and established the functional classification system for all public roads.
257 · 258 · 259 · 260 · 261 · 262 · 263 · 264
Scott Parker on AARoads noted: There was neither any adopted nor existing
alignment for unbuilt Route 257; its general E-W section was well south of the
5th street extension that runs along the Metrolink tracks as part of Route 34.
From the draft maps of the time, Route 257 terminated at the then-future Route
34 alignment a couple of miles north of Route 1 north of Point Mugu, crossing
Route 1's alignment near where the through route currently veers north onto
Rice Avenue, continuing WNW from there to Port Hueneme before turning to
parallel the coast before terminating at US 101 east of central Ventura between
the Route 126 and Route 33 interchanges. Clearly Route 257 was a
"developmental" road, intended to serve the housing developments south of
Camarillo as well as the coastal recreational area between Hueneme and Ventura.
The likelihood of that road ever being built are very, very slim and none.
(Source: Scott Parker on AARoads, "Re: CA 34", 11/9/2019)
This route was not defined in the state highway system before 1963.
This routing is unconstructed. This routing was planned as freeway; it was never upgraded. The traversable route is 5th Street and Harbor Blvd west of Route 1. It is a circuitous route around Plaza Park in Oxnard. Caltrans has no plans to adopt this route.
[SHC 253.1] Entire route. Added to the Freeway and Expressway system in 1965.
Overall statistics for Route 257:
In 1965, Chapter 1372 defined Route 258 as “Route 405 near Torrance to Route 101 near Hollywood.”
This route was not a pre-1963 LRN.
Some maps show the
Route 258 freeway connecting to the Whitnall Freeway from the valley. This is
due to the confusion between the proposal for the Whitnall Freeway
(which was Route 64), and an earlier, 1927 proposal for a Whitnall
Parkway that remained on planning maps until the 1960s. The figure to the
right shows the Whitnall Parkway approach; a 2014 LA Times article used words
that made this appear to be the freeway proposal from the 1960s (it clearly
isn't, as the Route 64 freeway ran across Chase and Malibu Canyon, and the
Route 258 freeway ran along Normandie). This approach connects to Route 258,
along what is now "Whitnall Highway" in Burbank (which could be the source of
the naming of this route). It does not appear substantiated in the route
definitions, so this doesn't appear to be a highway at the state level. Gordon
Whitnall was involved in city planning around 1916. Whitnall's vision for Los
Angeles was both practical and idealistic. He believed that Los Angeles'
geographical location made it predestined to be the most important city in the
West. He also saw that Los Angeles was not just L.A. proper, but the numerous
other satellite cities that surrounded it. These contiguous cities suffered
from poor transportation and scattered administrative centers. Quickly promoted
to Director of City and County Planning, he envisioned a sprawling metropolis
made up of numerous organic civic districts, linked together by a series of
arterial highways, and unified by a centrally located administrative and
government center downtown near the historic Plaza, where it would be
"accessible to all." Whitnall and the planning committee also envisioned four
"highways" that would radiate from the valley into arteries leading to the
city. These parkway/highways were more modest in design from the modern
freeway, and often featured a landscaped center strip separating opposing lanes
of traffic. They were Balboa Boulevard, San Fernando Boulevard, Remsen
Boulevard (seemingly never built), and most ambitious of all -- Whitnall
Highway. Whitnall Highway would stretch diagonally southeast by northwest from
Newhall (now part of Santa Clarita) through the San Fernando Valley, and meet
up with the entrance of a two-mile tunnel originating off Riverside Drive
(which was being expanded into a major artery linking the valley to downtown)
that would run under Griffith Park into Hollywood, via Bronson Avenue. Had this
tunnel been built it would be the longest highway tunnel in California, and
even today would rank as the third longest highway tunnel in the USA. On June
5, 1927, the first section of Whitnall Highway opened to a crowd of 300 at the
intersection of Whitnall and Cahuenga Boulevard. Gordon, the guest of honor,
christened the highway at the ceremony, which also celebrated the opening of
400 residential tracts owned by the Hugh Evans Corporation. Homeowners in the
projected path of the highway began to protest the city's attempt to enforce
its right of way through their property. The road was extended, despite further
protests, to Oxnard Boulevard in 1931. Yet, after 1934, both plans for the
highway and the tunnel abruptly disappeared from the news, though variations
continued to appear on maps of proposed transit routes. Over the years, Burbank
and North Hollywood tried to figure out what to do with the quirky wide road,
and all the free public space below the giant transmission towers which loomed
overhead. Portions of the land were used as makeshift playgrounds, parks, and
bike trails, but by 1973 the city of Burbank was at a loss. The community
seemed to have little interest in pushing for landscaping, or the creation of
public parks, and the city had a hard time commercially leasing the land, since
nothing permanent could be built under the structures. In 1989 a group of
mentally challenged people created a garden on 21 miles under the power lines.
In the '90s Burbank finally commissioned the Whitnall Highway Parks North and
(Source: LA Times, 10/28/2014; KCET Lost Landmarks, 6/28/2013; Jayne Vidheecharoen/Slideshare, 4/18/2011) Earlier maps show it skirting the Western edge of Griffith Park, connecting with Whitnall Highway in Burbank, and eventually connecting with Route 64, the Whitnall Freeway. According to Caltrans, the traversable route is Western Avenue, with Caltrans having no plans to assume maintenance. The freeway routing was never determined. The route concept report recommends that the alignment be moved 3.5 mi westerly, and the definition be from Route 405 near LAX to Route 101 near Hollywood.
(Map Source: LA Times, 10/28/2014. Note that this shows a different routing of Route 64 than some other maps, which have it terminating at the I-5/Route 64 junction. It could reflect different planning options over different times.)
Maps based on the 1956 freeway plan identify this route as a portion of the "Whitnall" freeway (Route 64). It appears to have continued N from US 101 to loop up near Olive and Alameda in Burbank to join up with the remainder of the Whitnall Freeway near Chase.
The Whitnall Freeway was named for Gordon Whitnall, the former Los
Angeles city director of planning. Part of the reason for the naming could be
that the route ran along Whitnall Highway, an unusual divided street
that was laid out in 1927 to be part of a parkway network envisioned to dissect
the Valley. In 1913, Gordon Whitnall founded the Los Angeles City Planning
Association, and in 1920, he established the Los Angeles City Planning
Department. From 1920-1930, he was Director of Planning for Los Angeles, and
from 1929-1930 was president of the League of California Cities. From 1932-1935
he was the coordinator of the Committee on Government Simplification for Los
Angeles County. In 1941, Gordon and Brysis Whitnall established a planning and
government consulting firm in Los Angeles. Gordon Whitnall was an instructor in
Planning at the University of Southern California, and a member of the American
Society of Planning Officials, the American Institute of Planners, the American
Society of Consulting Planners, and the International Fraternity of Lambda
Alpha, Los Angeles Chapter.
[Some information from http://rmc.library.cornell.edu/EAD/htmldocs/RMM02880.html]
This routing is currently unsigned.
[SHC 253.1] Entire route. Added to the Freeway and Expressway system in 1965.
Overall statistics for Route 258:
In 1959, Chapter 1062 defined LRN 258 as:
This route was signed as follows:
This was part of LRN 43, defined in 1933. This was part of pre-1964 Route 18.
This routing was signed, at one point, as access to Route 30 East and I-215 South. However, the callboxes and some maps identify it as Route 259, and the new exit numbers will make this even clearer. It serves as a ramp to Route 210 E (former Route 30 E) when traveling NB on I-215, and as a ramp to I-215 S when travelling WB on Route 210 (former Route 30). It also serves Highland Avenue and E Street (which is accessed from I-215 NB only). According to some observers, by Febraury 2008, the Route 30 references had been changed to reference Route 210. Some portions were signed as Business Route 30.
The following segments are designated as Classified Landscaped Freeway:
|County||Route||Starting PM||Ending PM|
[SHC 253.1] Entire route. Added to the Freeway and Expressway system in 1959.
Overall statistics for Route 259:
(b) The relinquished former portion of Route 260 within the City of Alameda between Central Avenue and Atlantic Avenue is not a state highway and is not eligible for adoption under Section 81. For this relinquished former portion of Route 260, the City of Alameda shall maintain within its jurisdiction signs directing motorists to the continuation of Route 260.
In 1965, Chapter 1372 created Route 260 via a transfer from Route 61. The definition was: “Route 61 in Alameda to Route 17 in Oakland near Seventh and Harrison Streets”. That same year, Chapter 1371 reiterated the conditions that had accumulated for the previous legislative version of the route, LRN 226:
“361.1 Upon the completion of the additional subterranean tube between the Cities of Oakland and Alameda, in the vicinity of Webster Street, to be used in connection with the Posey Tube, both of which tubes are included in the description of Route 61, the department may by executive order, rule, or regulation, designate both of said tubes, and the approaches leading to or from the nearest state highway or city street, as one-way highways, and thereafter restrict said tubes and approaches to one-way traffic, proceeding in opposite directions as to each other. Upon the placing of signs notifying the public of such restrictions, any person who wilfully fails to observe such sign is guilty of a misdemeanor.”
“361.2 Because of the statewide interest in navigation, the state will hold and save the United States of America free and harmless from liability for damages to the parallel tubes between the Cities of Oakland and Alameda included in the description of Route 61 due to the initial dredging work and subsequent maintenance dredging in an area within 50 feet of said tubes in connection with the deepening of the Oakland Estuary by the Corps of Engineerings of the United States Army and the Director of Finance shall execute an agreement so to do with the proper representatives of the United States of America.”
In 1968, Chapter 282 renumbered sections 361.1 and 361.2 from Route 61 (§361) to Route 260 (§560), and updated the sections to refer to Route 260.
On August 30, 2004, AB 2027 was signed. This authorized the California Transportation Commission to relinquish to the City of Alameda the portion of Route 260 that is located within the Alameda city limits that is between Atlantic Avenue and Central Avenue, upon the terms and conditions the commission finds to be in the best interests of the state, if the commission and the city enter into an agreement providing for that relinquishment. The relinquishment becomes effective immediately following the recordation by the county recorder of the relinquishment resolution containing the commission's approval of the terms and conditions of the relinquishment. At that point, the relinquished portion of Route 260 shall cease to be a state highway, and cannot be considered for readoption. Furthermore, the City of Alameda is required to maintain within its jurisdiction signs directing motorists to the continuation of Route 260.
Based on the new bill, in December 2004 the CTC considered relinquishment of a portion of Route 260 right of way in the City of Alameda, between Atlantic Avenue and Central Avenue, under terms and conditions as stated in the cooperative agreement dated May 21, 2004, determined to be in the best interest of the State. Authorized by Chapter 325, Statutes of 2004, which amended Section 560 of the Streets and Highways Code. This appears to have been the work of the West Alameda Business Association (WABA), as reported in San Francisco Bay Crossings. This article talks about the changes to the street now that the highway designation has been dropped:
As a highway, the street had to be as wide as possible and well lit, leaving darkened narrow sidewalks. Sidewalks are being widened, and sidewalk furniture will be installed along with much-anticipated Acorn Street Lights. The old trees have been removed, and they will soon be replaced by a variety of flowering trees. Putting utilities underground will also improve the look of the street, making it a lovely street for strolling. Buses run regularly along the street, and the ferry is close by.
In 2010, Chapter 421, SB 1318, 9/29/10, changed the start of the route:
Route 61 Atlantic Avenue in Alameda to ..."
Tunnel 33-0106R, the tube between Alameda and Oakland that goes beneath the Oakland Estuary, is named the "Posey Tube". It is named for George A. Posey, the engineer who devised its construction. This construction required sinking precast concrete segments into a trench running along the floor of the Oakland Estuary, and includes a ventilation system (designed by Posey) that placed high-powered fans in the portals on either end of the tube. The tube runs beneath the floor of the estuary. Construction started in 1925 and was completed in 1928.
The other tunnel (33-0106L) is unofficially called the "Webster Street Tube". It was built in 1963.
The following segments are designated as Classified Landscaped Freeway:
|County||Route||Starting PM||Ending PM|
Overall statistics for Route 260:
From Walnut Avenue in the City of Irvine to Route 241.
In 1965, Chapter 1372 defined Route 261 as “Route 101 near Longvale to Route 5 near Willows via the vicinity of Covelo and Mendocino Pass.” This same definition was also added by 1965 Chapter 1397; this duplicate definition was removed in 1967 by Chapter 235.
In 1972, Chapter 1216 repealed the route definition and transferred the routing to Route 162.
In 1996, Chapter 1154 changed the origin from “Route 5 near the border of the Cities of Tustin and Irvine” to “Walnut Avenue in the City of Irvine” (Walnut Avenue and Jamboree). It also changed the terminus to reflect the renumbering of Route 231 to Route 241: “Walnut Avenue in the City of Irvine to Route 241.” This is part of the "Eastern Toll Road", a toll road that is part of the Orange County Transportation Corridors.
According to Robert Cruickshank, the original road (Jamboree) was built as a joint project between the County of Orange and the City of Irvine, around 1989/90, to close a gap in Jamboree between Edinger and Barranca through the Tustin Marine Corps Air Station. The grade-separated interchange at Warner was constructed because as part of the agreement to build through the Marine base (now closed) the road had to have high sound walls and barbed wire atop those walls. The military may not have wanted a place where traffic would have been held up on their land, so that may have dictated the Warner interchange. In any event, since no state funds went into the construction of the road or maintenance of it, and since Jamboree was never a state route, the little freeway stub never got a state number. In the late 1990s, when the Route 261 toll road was being constructed, its builders decided to maximize travel speeds and times by constructing an interchange at Edinger, and another at Walnut (whereas before, there were simply stoplights). The result was that there was a freeway from Barranca northward, although Jamboree Road moves off of the freeway at the Walnut interchange. This was all part of a broader plan to improve road circulation between the new (in the early 1990s) developments in the Tustin Ranch area and the industrial parks in Irvine. There have always been plans to extend Tustin Ranch Road south from Walnut, through the old base, and connect with Von Karman Road at Barranca. This was to involve a grade-separated interchange at Edinger, like the one now at Jamboree, in large part because of the rail corridor that parallels Edinger near the old base.
The Final EIR for the Eastern Transportation Corridor is online at Caltrans. It makes for interesting reading.
The 1965-1972 routing (now Route 162) was not a state route before 1964. The route runs (signed as Route 162) along Covelo Road into Covelo. It then runs E along Mendocino Pass Road (unsigned, but marked FH-7) through the Mendocino National Forest. Mendocino Pass Road becomes Alder Springs Road in Glenn County. Signage of the road resumes naer Elk Creek when Route 162 exits the National Forest. The route enters Willows along Wood Steet.
The post-1991 routing was not a defined part of the state highway system before 1991.
Route 261 is the west leg of the Eastern Transportation Corridor, a toll road in Orange County. The leg connects Route 241 (the Foothill Corridor) with Jamboree Road, just south of I-5 in Irvine. The Eastern Transportation Corridor was constructed in three segments:
The following segments are designated as Classified Landscaped Freeway:
|County||Route||Starting PM||Ending PM|
[SHC 253.1] Entire route.
Overall statistics for Route 261 (before consolidation with Route 231):
Note: For information on the reference to Route 237, see Route 237.
In 1965, Chapter 1371 defined Route 262 as “Route 17 to Route 680 near Warm Springs. Route 262 shall cease to be a state highway when Route 237 is constructed between Route 17 and Route 680.” This routing was once planned as part of Route 17. For a short time Route 17 was placed on what is known as Oakland Road, which runs just east of the present-day I-880 between San Jose and Milpitas. It became Main Street in Milpitas and then met present-day Route 262 in Fremont at Warm Springs Blvd and Mission Blvd. Today's I-880 freeway was just signed as I-680 then. Later on, after the new I-680 alignment was finalized, Oakland Road and Main Street were signed as Route 238, since that portion of Mission Blvd south of the present terminus of Route 238 was signed as Route 238 to Warm Springs. Today's I-880 freeway was signed as Route 17 and Temporary I-680 north of US 101 to the junction of Route 262 and Route 17 and Temporary I-280 south of US 101 to the junction of US 280. Note that Mission Blvd crosses I-680 twice. At the first (northern) crossing it is signed as Route 238 and this is the present terminus of Route 238. At the second (southern) crossing it is signed as a connection to I-880; this is the eastern terminus of (unsigned) Route 262. Also, the city of Milpitas built a new alignment for Main Street, so present-day maps do not show how Oakland Road connected with Mission Blvd in Warm Springs via Main Street. Route 262 is the 1 mile Mission Boulevard connect in Fremont.
In July 2016, Sparker at AAroads provided some additional clarification:
One of the major obstacles to constructing a freeway-to-freeway connector along the present Route 262/Mission facility is the fact that the surface portion of the route from Warm Springs Road to I-680 is lined with dense retail development, complete with multiple driveways. For better or worse, the Route 262/I-880 interchange was rebuilt a few years ago, including high-speed ramps and flyovers directing traffic onto Route 262 east, ducking under twin UP tracks plus the new BART extension bridge; it's in a trench at that point. But as soon as it emerges from the BART overpass, it rises to the surface right at Warm Springs and then slogs through the commercial zone until it hits I-680 about 3/4-mile east. It appears that the only way to convert this segment to freeway would be to continue the trench eastward under Warm Springs (likely in a narrow 2+2 box-sided facility), with frontage roads on either side; access to the commercial establishments would be via Warm Springs Rd. and Warren Ave, which more or less parallels Route 262 a couple of blocks to the south.
As currently configured, the newly-installed high capacity/high speed ramps from I-880 to east Route 262 deposit traffic into the trench under the RR tracks and the new BART extension. Immediately after the BART bridge the facility rises to ground level to intersect Warm Springs Blvd. Deploying an elevated facility here would require a substantial gradient to take traffic to and from the trench to the elevated section -- the gradient would likely exceed the 6-8% normally considered maximum for freeway mainlines. The area is too densely developed to realign a full-length elevated facility north or south of existing Route 262; and having recently spent millions on the I-880/Route 262 upgraded interchange, it's unlikely Caltrans or Alameda CTC would consider such a facility in the foreseeable future. The issue, of course, is the fact that when the Route 237 freeway alignment that veered north of its current route, crossing I-880 near Dixon Landing and terminating at I-680 near Scotts Creek (ghost ramps are still visible), was still an active proposal any ROW preservation along Route 262 was dropped, leaving the situation as it sits today.
It's not any particular fondness for these
businesses that has prevented a direct freeway connection, it's the generalized
opposition to any new freeway facilities in the region that has hampered any
efficient connection here rather than any specific opposition to a project at
this location. Slapping down a partial cloverleaf at the I-680/Route 262
interchange effectively shuts out the possibility of a full freeway
cross-connection between I-880 and I-680 for the near term. This is a repeat of
the north Route 84/I-880 situation at Decoto Road several miles north; while
both facilities are full freeway; there still -- after about 20 years -- is no
freeway-to-freeway connection there. The local COG's are calling the shots;
undertaking any project that even looks like it expedites intraregional
automotive commuter traffic is a non-starter (and the ones that do make it
under the wire are, these days, generally tolled!).
(Source: Sparker at AAroads, 7/17/2016; 7/18/2016; 7/26/2016)
This used to be short connecting segment of LRN 69 ((a), "including a connection to [Route] 5 near Warm Springs"), added to the state highway system in 1933.
East of Warm Springs Boulevard, Route 262 to I-680 exists on a former
segment of LRN 5 on Mission Boulevard. This particular segment of Route
262/Mission Boulevard was once part of US 48 between 1926 through 1929. Route
262/Mission Boulevard east of Warm Springs Boulevard became part of US 101E
from 1929 likely to 1935. By 1940, Route 21 had a terminus at Warm Springs
Boulevard/Mission Boulevard on current Route 262. By 1948,Route 9 was extended
to Hayward over the entirety of what is now Route 262 on Mission Boulevard. By
the 1964 State Highway renumbering the current route of Route 262 became part
of LRN 680.
(Source: Gribblenation Blog, California State Route 262, 2/16/2019)
According to an observer, although the route is signed at the exit from I-680 south, there are NO reassurance shields along the route. Westbound Route 262 is signed as 'TO I-880' and Eastbound Route 262 is signed as 'TO I-680'. Intersecting city streets have trailblazers pointing motorists to either Route 680 or Route 880. The route is constructed to freeway standards from I-880 to 0.7 miles east of I-880 at Warm Springs Blvd. This short freeway section has it's own exit and interchange, at Warren Avenue. At the east terminus of Route 262 (I-680) bridge markings call this the 'Route 680-238 separation'.
In 2002, Caltrans conducted a study about building out Route 262 as a freeway, in order to relieve traffic congestion. Note that this is not the upgrading of Route 237 mentioned in the legislative definition. According to an article in the Mercury News, there are six possible routes, from Auto Mall Parkway in the north to Montague Expressway in the south. Most plans entail road improvements, such as street widenings or making bridges over city intersections. According to this article, the Fremont connector will be selected from four alternatives: (1) The Fremont and Grimmer alternative; (2) Auto Mall Parkway, which could be widened to six lanes with a bridge over Osgood Road; (3) Mission Boulevard, which could burrow underneath Warm Springs Boulevard; and (4) Scott Creek Road, Milmont Drive and Dixon Landing Road, which could each be widened. The Milpitas connector will be selected from two alternatives: (1) Calaveras Boulevard, which could be widened to six lanes with a bridge over Abel Street; and (2) an eight-lane Montague Expressway, which would have a bridge over Great Mall Parkway. This study is actually TCRP Project #6, and would run from I-680 to I-880. It was requested by the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority. However, it looks like this will not happen, as it is reported in 2004 that it would cost about $750 million to close the gap, presumably with a six-lane freeway, interchange at Warm Springs, and freeway interchange at I-680.
The Santa Clara Valley Transit Authority (VTA) is presently building an elevated light-rail right-of-way in the median strip of Great Mall Parkway, which becomes Capitol Avenue at Montague Expressway, which goes over Montague. This implies that the "Milpitas Connector" option (2) most likely won't happen, since that would require Montague to go over not only Great Mall Parkway, but also over the new elevated light-rail tracks. [Thanks to Larry Silvey for this information.]
Warren Ave Interchange (~ ALA R0.072)
There is also a project that is building a new 3-way freeway interchange (semi-directional T) and a functionally separate 4-ramp interchange with Warren Ave, which will be extended over the freeway. The road was severed in the 1950s when Route 17 was built there. There is some good info and aerial rendition of finished interchange at http://www.dot.ca.gov/dist4/880_mission/scope.htm.
As of July 2008, the construction progresses at the I-880/Mission (Route 262)/Warren interchange. In late June 2008, the permanent exit signs for Mission Blvd started going up on I-880. None of these new signs reference Route 262--all are simply marked "To I-680". So it remains, the only signs that make a reference to Route 262 is that pair of signs on SB I-680 with the "Route 262 to I-880" markings.
Kato Road Interchange / Railroad OP Replacement (~ ALA R0.361)
The SAFETEA-LU act, enacted in August 2005 as the reauthorization of TEA-21, provided the following expenditures on or near this route:
In March 2012, the CTC approved for future consideration of funding a project in Alameda County that will replace the Union Pacific Railroad bridges over Route 262, widen Route 262 between Kato Road and Warm Springs Boulevard, and construct ramps to Kato Road in Fremont, as the final phase of the overall Route 262/Warren Avenue/I-880 Interchange Reconstruction and I-880 Widening Project. This is a State Route 84 Local Alternative Transportation Improvement Project (LATIP) approved by the California Transportation Commission at the January 2010 meeting. The project is fully funded with federal and local funds. The project is concurrently requesting advanced funding at the March meeting. The request is consistent with Assembly Bill 1462, which allows a local agency to advance projects in the LATIP with local funds, to be repaid with revenues from excess lands when funds become available. The total estimated project cost is $52,800,000 for capital and support. Construction is estimated to begin in Fiscal Year 2011-12.
In October 2016, the CTC authorized relinquishment of right of way in the city of Fremont along Route 262 on East Warren Avenue and Kato Road (04-Ala-262-PM R0.1/R0.4), consisting of collateral facilities. The City, by letter dated August 24, 2016, agreed to waive the 90-day notice requirement and accept title upon relinquishment by the State.
Overall statistics for Route 262:
In 1968, Chapter 282 swapped a portion of the route with Route 96: “Route 96
near the confluence of the Shasta and Klamath Rivers
northeasterly southwesterly to Route 5 near
Klamath River Bridge the north city limits of
Klamath River Bridge (02-SIS-263, PM 56.7/57.2)
July 2016, it was reported that a historic but deteriorating 85 year old bridge
crossing the Klamath River on Route 263 is proposed for demolition and
replacement in the near future, according to Caltrans documents. A Caltrans
historic bridge survey determined that the Klamath River Bridge meets criteria
to be listed in the National Register of Historic Places. As such, Caltrans
must do some form of mitigation, but it could be as little as an informational
plaque. The northernmost of a set of five bridges built in the 1930s on former
US 99 through the Shasta River canyon, this piece of road was at that time
“the most thickly bridged section” of any state highway in
California. An alternate plan to blast tunnels through the rock formations was
rejected. The bridge has an unusual 600 foot radius curve built into it,
negating what would be sharp right angle turns on the north side. It is of
“T-beam” construction, a less common variety of girder design
associated with the 1930s. The original “window railings” were
replaced with solid barriers in the late 1970s. The new bridge’s design
and exact location is yet to be revealed but its construction is set to take
out an old residence on the north bank of the river, the former Kamp Klamath
(later called Richie’s Store and Gas Station) that served early day
(Source: Siskiyou Daily News, 7/15/2016)
In January 2017, the CTC approved for future consideration of funding a project in Siskiyou County that will replace the Klamath River Bridge on Route 263 near the city of Yreka (near the intersection of Route 96, making the scope 02-SIS-96, PM 103.00/103.6, 02-SIS-263, PM 56.7/57.2). The project is programmed in the 2016 State Highway Operation and Protection Program. The total programmed amount is $22,940,000 for capital and support. Construction is estimated to begin in Fiscal Year 2018-19. The scope, as described for the preferred alternative, is consistent with the project scope programmed by the Commission in the 2016 State Highway Operation and Protection Program.
In August 2018, it was reported that the CTC
approved $18.6 million for a project that will replace the Klamath River Bridge
on Route 263 from north of the Shasta River Bridge to Route 96 near the city of
Yreka, and Route 96 east of State Route 263 in Siskiyou County.
(Source: Action News Now, 8/20/2018)
In December 2018, the CTC approved the California Department of Transportation’s (Department) request for an additional $4,600,000 for the State Highway Operation Protection Program (SHOPP) Bridge Replacement project (PPNO 3424) on Route 263 and Route 96 in Siskiyou County, to award the construction contract. This is an increase of 30% over the construction capital amount. This project is located at the intersection of Route 263 and Route 96 near the city of Yreka, in Siskiyou County. The project will replace the existing Klamath River Bridge, which is over 85 years old and has deteriorated extensively. The new bridge will be wider than the existing bridge to accommodate wider shoulders to meet current standards. The contract award status is pending approval of this request for supplemental funds. Construction would begin in Spring of 2019, would take 350 working days, and be completed in November 2021.
The Engineer's Estimate (EE) for this project was
updated in May 2018 which included consideration of the project’s remote
location. In addition, the Department requested an increase to the original
programmed amount, to account for both the higher bidding environment and
higher construction costs throughout the region. The Department discussed the
bid results and compared bid prices with the contractors, including those who
opted out of the bidding process. Although 15 contractors, sub-contractors and
material suppliers obtained contract plans for the project, only two
contractors submitted bids for this project. The contractors stated that this
project includes many difficult, specialty contract items which only a few
contractors can perform. Some of the difficult items on this contract include
constructing the bridge foundation in a rocky, river environment and support
falsework for an arch structure over a flowing river. The difficulty to
construct this bridge, the bridge’s remote location and environmental
constraints due to the proximity of the Klamath River, present added challenges
and higher risks to the contractor. All these challenges and risks resulted in
a limited number of bidders and higher contract bids. The EE was developed
appropriate for the project including the challenging location of the existing
bridge. However, the EE was still undervalued as the current trends were beyond
expectations. While there are only two bidders on the project, the existing
bridge is in an extensively deteriorated condition, and urgently needs to be
replaced to ensure the safety of the traveling public. The Department has
reviewed the bid results for possible mathematical or material unbalancing in
accordance with 23CFR 635.102, and 23CFR 635.114. The bids appear to be
mathematically balanced and there is no evidence of material unbalancing of the
(Source: December 2018 CTC Minutes, Agenda Item 2.5e.(4))
Overall statistics for Route 263:
This number is not assigned to a post-1964 route.
Return to State Highway Routes