Whew! In between everything else I’ve been doing, I’ve also been working on updates to the highway pages. The latest batch is done. Here’s the change log:
The original plan was for this update to cover March and April. It stretched mostly into May, due to a variety of factors: a number of backed up theatre reviews, an entire weekend lost to writing my detailed sample ballot analysis, and various caregiving and (of lately) non-COVID health issues. Alas, some of those are still ongoing. What did you say? I couldn’t hear you. Sigh.
One major delaying factor was the podcast. Yes, Tom Fearer and I have started a new podcast series that we’re calling “California Highways: Route by Route“. It will be a joint production of California Highways and Gribblenation. The eventual plan is to have one or more episodes for each numbered highway in the state (just like I do on this site), combining the information here such as legislative changes, highway history, naming history, and major projects with the extensive historical research Tom has done in the archives, and on his trips on the road. The first season will be background, going through the history of California Highways in a broad sense, explaining highway numbering and naming, and explaining the governance and regulatory processes and organizations that bring us highways. The second season will start with the highways proper, with multiple episodes devoted to long or significant route (for example, it looks like Season 2 will focus on Route 1 and Route 2, and there will be entire seasons on Route 99 and US 101. I expect this to be a retirement project for me—I’ve plotted out all the highways, and it looks like there will be at least 35 seasons (12 or so episodes a season, with initially an episode monthly)! Right now, a teaser episode is up and we’ll be putting up a full sample episode by early June, as I get more familiar with the audio editing tools. late June or July will bring the first real episode. So watch for “California Highways: Route by Route” on our anchor.fm site; at its forever home at the California Highways: Route by Route website, or in all the traditional podcast venues (and it better be, as I use the namesake device—an iPod Classic—to listen to my podcasts (no streaming here)).
Updates were made to the following highways, based on my reading of the (virtual) papers in March and April 2022 (which are posted to the roadgeeking category at the “Observations Along The Road” and to the California Highways Facebook group) as well as any backed up email changes. I also reviewed the the AAroads forum (Ꜳ). This resulted in changes on the following routes, with credit as indicated [my research(ℱ), contributions of information or leads (via direct mail or ꜲRoads) from ConcreteBob(2), Tom Fearer(3), Cameron Kaiser(4), kernals12(5), Plutonic Panda(6), rschen7754(7), Dale Sanderson(8): Route 1(ℱ), Route 4(ℱ), I-5(3), Route 7(3), I-10(6), Route 19(3), Route 20(ℱ), Route 25(ℱ), Route 26(ℱ,3), Route 33(3), Route 38(3), US 40(3), Route 41(ℱ), LRN 43(3), Route 46(ℱ), Route 47(ℱ,3), US 50(ℱ), Route 58(ℱ), Route 60(3,4), Route 67(ℱ), Route 70(3), Route 76(ℱ,3), Route 78(3,7), I-80(ℱ), Route 86(ℱ), Route 99(ℱ,3), US 101(ℱ), Route 103(ℱ,3), Route 107(3), I-110(ℱ,3), Route 111(ℱ), Route 126(5), Route 135(ℱ), Route 145(ℱ), Route 148 (Capitol Southeast Connector)(2), Route 152(ℱ), Route 164(3), Route 187(3), Route 188(3), Route 213(3), LRN 231(ℱ,3), Route 243(3), US 466(8), I-710(ℱ).
(Source: private email, Highway headline posts through the April Headline post, AARoads through May 27, 2022)
Update the state highway numbering page based on observations from Tom Fearer. Put in a new header logo, courtesy of the graphic skills of J. Scott Hayden, moderator of the California Roads, Signs, and Maps: A Collection of Old & New Facebook Group.
Added a link to Gribblenation’s Oahu Highways page. As a reminder: If you have a regional page (state, country), please let me know so I can add it to the links directory. Yes, this is old-fashioned in these days of search engines, but it still does serve to increase the visibility and ranking of all sites.
Reviewed the Pending Legislation page, based on the California Legislature site. As usual, I recommend to every Californian that they visit the legislative website regularly and see what their legis-critters are doing. As many people are unfamiliar with how the legislature operates (and why there are so many “non-substantive changes” and “gut and amend” bills), I’ve added the legislative calendar to the end of the Pending Legislation page. No bills were passed during this review period (although one naming resolution, SCR 39, was sent to the Governor). A number of Assembly Bills had their non-substantial contents replaced with something substantial—most notable was a bill that will authorize relinquishment of Route 107 in Redondo Beach. Also notable was a new resolution to remove the designation of the Christopher Columbus Transcontinental Highway (including removal of all signs).
Reviewed the online agenda of the California Coastal Commission. I reviewed the March, April, and May agendas for the Coastal Commission meetings. No actions rose to the level of Highway Page significance.
As the March 2022 CTC approved the newest iteration of the SHOPP and the STIP, after processing the CTC agenda items, I went through the SHOPP and STIP to ensure that any new items that rose to the level of interest were captured in the pages. From the SHOPP, updates were made to: Route 4, Route 14, Route 24, Route 49, Route 96, Route 99, Route 110, and Route 246. The updates to the STIP give a lot less detail (for example, there are no postmiles nor detailed descriptions of the changes)—you’re lucky to get a title, county, route, and project number. Based on what I could figure out from the STIP, updates were made to I-10, Route 57, US 395, I-680. Note that a number of line items appeared to reference a postmile, but never indicated the route. My guess is that the STIP items will eventually make their way into the SHOPP (especially as they have PPNOs).
I checked California Transportation Commission page for the results of the March and April 2022 meetings of the California Transportation Commission (although April was a one-day meeting and had no items of interest as the focus was rail and transit). As always, note that I tend not to track items that do not impact these pages — i.e., pavement rehabilitation or replacement, landscaping, drainage, culverts, roadside facilities, charging stations, or other things that do not impact the routing or history, unless they are really significant. As such, the following items were of interest:
[ Note: ° indicates items that were below the level of detail for updating the specific route pages; ♠ is an indicator used to keep track of what has been added to the pages; ❧ indicates the results from the meeting, if the meeting minutes were available. ]
2.1a. STIP/SHOPP Program/Project Amendments
♠ (1) SHOPP Amendments for Approval: Request to:
(Related Items under Ref. 2.5b.(1) and 2.5b.(2))
- Add 23 new projects into the 2020 SHOPP. (2.1a.(1a))
- Revise 3 projects currently programmed in the 2020 SHOPP. (2.1a.(1d) and 2.1a.(1e))
Of these, the following projects/allocation were at the level of interest for the highway pages (general, these are significant new structures or changes, as opposed to repair or rehabilitation in place; additions of bike paths, pedestrian, or complete street elements; or non-visible changes). A lot of the January updates were dealing with recovery from the major fires, and damage from people experiencing homelessness, and road and bridge restoration — none of which rise to the level of interest for the highway pages.
- None
2.1b. STIP Program/Project Amendments/Approvals for Notice
There were no items of interest for this agenda item in the reviewed minutes.
2.1c. TCIF Baseline Amendments
There were no items of interest for this agenda item in the reviewed minutes.
2.1s. TCEP Baseline Amendments
♠ (1) TCEP Project Amendment: The Department proposes to amend the Cycle 2 Trade Corridor Enhancement Program for the I-680/ Route 4 Interchange Improvements – Phases 1 and 2A Project, in Contra Costa County, to Include Phase 4 scope to the request originally approved in May 2021. (PPNO 0298F)
2.2a. Submittal of Notice of Preparation for Comments
There were no items of interest for this agenda item in the reviewed minutes.
2.2b. Submittal of Notice of Documents Available for Comment (DEIRs)
There were no items of interest for this agenda item in the reviewed minutes.
2.2c. Approval of Projects for New Public Road Connection / Future Consideration of Funding
♠ (1) Approval of Projects for Future Consideration of Funding: (° indicates items that were below the level of detail for updating the specific route pages)
- 01-Men-01, PM 31.5. Elk Creek Bridge Replacement Project. Replace Elk Creek Bridge on Route 1 in Mendocino County. (MND) (PPNO 4588) (SHOPP)
(Related Item under Ref. 2.5b.(2)) - 02-Sis-96, PM 76.8/78.0. Horse Creek Bridge Replacement Project. Replace the Klamath River Bridge on Route 96 near Horse Creek in Siskiyou County. (MND) (PPN 3629) (SHOPP)
(Related Item under Ref. 2.5b.(2)) - 06-Kin-41, PM 16.6/16.9. Kettleman Roundabout. Build a dual-lane roundabout at the intersection of Route 41 and Bernard Drive in Kings County. (ND) (PPNO 7031) (SHOPP)
(Related Item under Ref. 2.5b.(2)) - 06-Tul-190, PM 11.31/11.51. Rockford Road Roundabout. Construct a roundabout at the intersection of Route 190 at Rockford Road in Tulare County. (ND) (PPNO 7033) (SHOPP)
(Related Item under Ref. 2.5b.(2)) - °08-SBd-15, PM R96.10/R103.5, R111.6/R112.3, R120.1/R124.24. Interstate 15 Regrade Center Median. Regrade median cross slopes on I-15 at various locations to improve safety in San Bernardino County. (MND) (PPNO 3002E) (SHOPP)
- °09-Mno-395-PM R9.8/R12.6. Rock Creek Pavement. Rehabilitate pavement on US 395 in Mono County. (MND) (PPNO 2669) (SHOPP)
(Related Item under Ref. 2.5b.(2))
♠ (Mar) (9)/(Apr) (1) Approval of Project for Future Consideration of Funding: 01-Men-01, PM 51.3/52.1. Jack Peters Creek Bridge Project. Widen bridge and replace rail on Route 1 in Mendocino County. (MND) (PPNO 4682) (SHOPP)
2.3a. Route Adoptions
There were no items of interest for this agenda item in the reviewed minutes.
2.3b. New Public Road Connection
There were no items of interest for this agenda item in the reviewed minutes.
2.3c. Relinquishments
♠ One Relinquishment Resolution: 06-Fre-180-PM R64.44. Right of way along Route 180 on Armstrong Avenue, in the city of Fresno.
2.3d. Vacations
There were no items of interest for this agenda item in the reviewed minutes.
2.5a Minor Projects
There were no items of interest for this agenda item in the reviewed minutes.
2.5b. Financial Allocations for SHOPP Projects / Federal Discretionary Grant Funds
♠ (1) Request $134,501,000 $137,161,000 for 18 SHOPP projects (construction / construction support phases).
(Related Items under Ref. 2.1a.(1) and 2.5c.(1))
Of these, the following were of interest for the highway pages:
- #6
$13,610,000.$10,950,000. 03-Sac-51 2.0/3.5. PPNO 03-6402B; ProjID 0322000010; EA 3F072. Route 51 (Business Route 80) in the city of Sacramento, from north of B Street Underpass to north of Exposition Boulevard Overcrossing at the American River Bridge № 24-0003 and Cal Expo Undercrossing № 24-0133. Outcome/Output: Early Work Package № 2 for Construction Manager/General Contractor (CMGC) parent project EA 3F070. Procure steel girders. (Future consideration of funding approved under Resolution E-21-19; March 2021.) (Concurrent Amendment under SHOPP Amendment 20H-014; March 2022.) Allocation: CON ENG $50,000; CONST$13,560,000. $10,950,000
♠ (2) Request of $64,082,000 for 70 2020 SHOPP preconstruction project phases for design and R/W. (2a – SHOPP Support; 2b – SHOPP SB1 Support).
(Related Items under Ref. 2.1a.(1), 2.2c.(1), and 2.2c.(9))
Of these, the following were of interest for the highway pages (for the (2b) items, there was a lot of culvert repair and polyester concrete overlays this month—none of which are of at the level of interest for the highway pages):
- (2a) #1. 01-Men-1 6.4/6.8. PPNO 01-4630; ProjID 0116000047; EA 0F710, Route 1 Near Gualala, from north of Havens Neck Drive to north of Gypsy Flat Road; also from 0.5 mile to 0.3 mile south of Iverson Road (PM 9.3/9.5). Realign roadway and widen lanes and shoulders. (Future consideration of funding approved under Resolution E-21-100; January 2022.) (Concurrent Amendment under Resolution G-22-29, Amendment 22H-000; March 2022.) Allocation: PS&E $1,157,000; R/W Sup $659,000.
- (2a) #10. 06-Kin-41 16.6/16.9. PPNO 06-7031; ProjID 0619000078; EA 0X950. Route 41 Near Kettleman City, from 0.1 mile south to 0.2 mile north of Bernard Drive. Construct roundabout. (Concurrent consideration of funding under Resolution E-22-14; March 2022.) Allocation: PS&E $2,200,000; R/W Sup $1,300,000.
- (2a) #11. 06-Tul-190 11.3/11.5. PPNO 06-7033; ProjID 0619000232; EA 1A310. Route 190 Near Porterville, from 0.1 mile west to 0.1 mile east of Rockford Road. Construct roundabout. (Concurrent consideration of funding under Resolution E-22-15; March 2022.) Allocation: PS&E $1,550,000; R/W Sup $850,000.
- (2b) #2. 01-Men-1 31.4. PPNO 01-4588; ProjID 0113000125; EA 0E110. Route 1 Near Fort Bragg, at Elk Creek Bridge № 10-0120. Replace bridge. (Concurrent consideration of funding under Resolution E-22-11; March 2022.) (Nine month time extension for PS&E and R/W Sup approved under Waiver 21-59; June 2021.) Allocation: PS&E – Programmed $1,445,000 Allocated $1,660,000; R/W Sup – Programmed $191,000 Allocated $221,000.
- (2b) #3. 01-Men-1 51.8. PPNO 01-4682; ProjID 0117000133; EA 43484. Route 1 Near the Mendocino community, at Jack PetersCreek Bridge № 10-0150 (PM 51.87). Bridge rail upgrade and widening. (Concurrent consideration of funding under Resolution E-22-12; March 2022.) Allocation: PS&E $1,935,000; R/W Sup $260,000.
- (2b) #4. 02-Sis-96 76.8/78.0. PPNO 02-3629; ProjID 0216000040; EA 1H360. Route 96 Near Horse Creek, at Horse Creek Bridge № 02-0117, from 0.4 mile west of Klamath River Bridge to 2.0 miles west of Kohl Creek. Replace bridge on new alignment to correct scour critical conditions, improve safety, and reduce operational deficiencies. (Concurrent consideration of funding under Resolution E-22-13; March 2022.) Allocation: PS&E $2,810,000; R/W Sup $830,000.
- (2b) #12. 07-LA-101 20.0. PPNO 07-4915; ProjID 0715000277; EA 31790. US 101 In the city of Los Angeles, near the neighborhood of Encino, at the Encino Pedestrian Overcrossing No. 53-1289. Remove pedestrian overcrossing. (Categorically Exempt) (Concurrent Amendment under Resolution G-22-29, Amendment 22H-000; March 2022.) Allocation: PS&E $500,000; R/W Sup $100,000.
2.5c Financial Allocations for STIP Projects
There were no items of interest for this agenda item in the reviewed minutes.
2.5d Allocations for Projects with Costs that Exceed 20 Percent of the Programmed Amount
There were no items of interest for this agenda item in the reviewed minutes.
2.5e Supplemental Fund Allocations
There were no items of interest for this agenda item in the reviewed minutes.
2.5f Financial Allocations for SHOPP
♠ Informational Reports on Allocations Under Delegated Authority
- Emergency G-11 Allocations (2.5f.(1)): $79,486,000 for 26 projects.
- SHOPP Safety Sub-Allocations (2.5f.(3)): $35,079,000 for 6 projects.
- Minor G-05-16 Allocations (2.5f.(4)): $3,702,000 for four projects.
Of these, the following were of interest for the highway pages:
- (3) #1. $3,425,000. 01-Men-20 19.1/19.6. PPNO 01-4691; ProjID 0117000225; EA 0H450. Route 20 near Willits, from 0.9 mile west to 0.4 mile west of James Creek Bridge. Outcome/Output: Improve safety by widening shoulders, improving curves, upgrading guardrail, and installing rumble strips. This project will reduce the number and severity of collisions. (Future consideration of funding approved under Resolution E-20-112; December 2020.) (EA 0H450/PPNO 01-4691 combined with EA 0J120/PPNO 01-4717 for construction under EA 0H45U/Project ID 0121000104.) Allocation: CON ENG $821,000; CONST $2,635,000. Allocation Date: 01/31/2022.
- (3) #2. $2,345,000. 01-Men-20 20.0/20.3. PPNO 01-4717; ProjID 0118000171; EA 0J120. Route 20 Near Willits, from James Creek Bridge to 0.3 mile east of James Creek Bridge. Outcome/Output: Improve safety by widening shoulders, realigning a curve,and installing rumble strips. This project will reduce the number and severity of collisions. (EA 0J120/PPNO 01-4717 combined with EA 0H450/PPNO 01-4691 for construction under EA 0H45U/Project ID 0121000104.) Allocation: CON ENG $1,080,000 CONST $1,100,000. Allocation Date: 01/31/2022
2.5g Prop 1B Project Allocations
There were no items of interest for this agenda item in the reviewed minutes.
2.5s Senate Bill 1 Programs Project Allocations Local Partnership Program (LPP) Allocations
♠ (5) Request of $68,177,000 for the locally-administered multi-funded TCEP/STIP Route 71/Route 91 Interchange EB-NB Connector project, on the State Highway System, in Riverside County, programmed in FY 2022-23. (PPNO 0077G)
♠ (9) Local Partnership Program (LPP) (Formulaic) Allocation Amendment: Request to amend LPP-A-2122-01 to revise the Expenditure Authorization (EA) and the Project ID (ProjID) number for the locally-administered LPP (Formulaic) I-5 Improvement from I-405 to Yale Avenue, Segment 1 project, on the State Highway System, in Orange County. There is no change to the original allocation amount. (PPNO 2743)
2.5t Traffic Congestion Relief Program (TCRP) Allocations
There were no items of interest for this agenda item in the reviewed minutes.
2.5w Active Transportation Program (ATP) Allocations
There were no items of interest for this agenda item in the reviewed minutes.
2.6g Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program (TIRCP) Allocations
There were no items of interest for this agenda item in the reviewed minutes.
4. TCIF and Aeronautic Program Updates / Policy Matters
♠ 4.3 Innovations in Transportation: Implementing Highways to Boulevards. The presentation here contained the following interesting information:
The mid-Twentieth Century saw a major expansion of transportation infrastructure in the United States, aided by an influx of federal funding that prioritized highway construction and suburban development. New highways, frequently constructed through predominately Black and brown neighborhoods, were designed to meet the needs of primarily white, suburban commuters. Low-income communities and communities of color continue to experience legacies of past transportation decisions that physically divide communities, contribute to racial segregation, and disproportionately expose residents to negative environmental and health
impacts.Today, certain urban highways have reached the end of their lifespans, which has provided an opportunity for some jurisdictions to reconsider their utility. According to the Congress for the New Urbanism, the Highways to Boulevards movement “seeks to replace aging highways that damage communities with assets like city streets, housing, and green space.” […]
In August 2021, the Commission solicited potential Highways to Boulevards Conversion project concepts from Regional Transportation Planning Agencies though its 2022 State Transportation Improvement Program guidelines. In December 2021, the Commission received a list of regionally identified highway and intercity rail needs as well as 17 possible Highways to Boulevards conversion projects that is available on the Commission website at: https://catc.ca.gov/-/media/ctc-media/documents/programs/stip/2022-stip/hwy-intercity-rail-needs-hwys-to-blvds-convers-revised-020222-a11y.pdf. Additionally, the Commission’s 2022 State Transportation Improvement Program guidelines require Caltrans to include a discussion of a possible Highways to Boulevard Pilot Program for the 2024 program cycle.
In January 2022, Governor Newsom proposed in the Fiscal Year 2022-23 state budget to allocate $150 million to Caltrans for a Highways to Boulevards Pilot Program. This new pilot program would be developed with guidance from the California State Transportation Agency and in consultation with the following three state agencies: the Department of Housing and Community Development, the Strategic Growth Council, and the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research. The program would provide competitive planning and implementation grants to local entities for the conversion or transformation of underutilized highways to benefit residents of underserved communities. The draft trailer bill language outlines the proposed program: https://esd.dof.ca.gov/trailer-bill/public/trailerBill/pdf/545. If included in the final state budget, this funding would support the advancement of the Climate Action Plan for Transportation Infrastructure Strategy 7.3 “Explore a ‘Highways to Boulevards’ Conversion Pilot Program.” More information on Strategy 7.3 is available here: https://calsta.ca.gov/-/media/calsta-media/documents/capti-july-2021-a11y.pdf.
The linked trailer bill notes:
(a) The Reconnecting Communities: Highways to Boulevards Pilot Program is hereby established, to be administered by the department, with guidance from the agency, and consultation with the Department of Housing and Community Development, the Strategic Growth Council, and the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, to provide funding, upon appropriation by the Legislature, for the purpose of awarding competitive grants to local and regional public agencies and other eligible entities, in partnership with the local Caltrans district, for planning or implementing the conversion or transformation of key underutilized highways in the state into multi-modal corridors that serve residents of underserved communities by developing complete streets, creating open space or parks, supporting affordable housing development, or other community oriented infrastructure. […]
(e) Eligible project types for implementation include, but are not limited to:
(1) Conversion or capping of an access-controlled state operated transportation route to increase access for bicycles, pedestrians, and transit.
(2) Conversion of a conventional state highway serving as a main street into a multimodal surface street that allows for bicycle, pedestrian, and transit access.
(3) A project that significantly enhances multi-modal connectivity along or across a state highway without conversion or capping
(4) Implementation of early action plans developed under subsection (f)
Note that this language does not appear to be in a current bill being worked upon by the legislature. From the Proposed 2022 STIP, the following are potential Highways to Boulevards Conversion Projects:
- Imperial County: Route 86 from Route 111 to Countryside Drive, West Ralph Road to Calle Estrella, and east of Brandt Road to Route 78; Route 86 from Countryside Drive to Treshill Road; Route 111 from 2nd Street to Route 98
- Lake County: Route 20; Route 281
- Madera County: Route 233 through City of Chowchilla; Route 145 through the City of Madera
- Mendocino County: Route 222 (also known as Talmage Road)
- Nevada County: Segment of Route 174 within the Grass Valley City limits
- Placer County: I-80 near Cirby Way; I-80 near Rocklin Road/Sierra College; Route 49 North of Bell Road; Route 49 near Palm Avenue; Route 65 near Blue Oaks Boulevard; Route 65 near Galleria Boulevard
- Ventura County: Route 34 (Lewis Road) from Ventura Boulevard to Pleasant Valley Road in Camarillo
♠ 4.24 Adoption of the SHOPP Guidelines
♠ 4.25 Adoption of the 2022 State Highway Operation and Protection Program (SHOPP). This resulted in amendments to the SHOPP; the amendments to the following routes rose to the interest of the highway pages: Route 1, Route 51 (BR 80), Route 99, I-80, US 101, I-805.
♠ 4.31. Presentation of the 2022 State Transportation Improvement Program Staff Recommendations
♠ 4.32. Adoption of the 2022 State Transportation Improvement Program
Other Matters/Public Comment
There were no items of interest for this agenda item in the reviewed minutes.
FREQUENTLY USED TERMS IN CTC MINUTES: California Transportation Commission (Commission or CTC), California Department of Transportation (Department or Caltrans), Regional Improvement Program (RIP), Interregional Improvement Program (IIP), State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), State Highway Operation and Protection Program (SHOPP), Traffic Congestion Relief Program (TCRP), Public Transportation Account (PTA), Clean Air and Transportation Improvement Act of 1990 (Proposition 116), High Speed Passenger Train Bond Program (Proposition 1A), Highway Safety, Traffic Reduction, Air Quality, and Port Security Bond Act of 2006 (Proposition 1B), Corridor Mobility Improvement Account (CMIA), State Route 99 Bond Program (RTE or SR 99), Local Bridge Seismic Retrofit Account (LBSRA), Trade Corridors Improvement Fund (TCIF), Highway-Railroad Crossing Safety Account (HRCSA), State-Local Partnership Program (SLPP), Traffic Light Synchronization Program (TLSP), Letter of No Prejudice (LONP), Environmental Phase (PA&ED), Design Phase (PS&E), Right of Way (R/W), Fiscal Year (FY), Active Transportation Program (ATP), Intercity Rail (ICR), California Aid to Airports Program (CAAP), Acquisition & Development (A&D), Transit and Inter-City Rail Capital Program (TIRCP), Transportation Facilities Account (TFA), Trade Corridor Enhancement Program (TCEP), Local Partnership Program (LPP), Local Streets and Roads Program (LSRP), Solutions for Congested Corridors Program (SCCP).
