Routes 65 through 72
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 Note that ISTEA repealed the previous Federal-Aid System, effective in 1992, and established the functional classification system for all public roads.
65 · 66 · 67 · 68 · 69 · 70 · 71 · 72
From Route 99 near Bakersfield to Route 198 near Exeter.
This segment remains as defined in 1963.
In 1934, Route 65 was signed along the route from Jct. Route 99 at Famoso to General Grant National Park (now Kings Canyon National Park) via Porterville. The original routing for Route 65 ran along present day Route 245 to Route 180. This was all LRN 129, defined in 1933.
The following portions of Route 65 were bypassed by freeway or expressway:
In May 2016, an article in the Modesto Bee noted the original plans for the
route. It pointed out that, driving north from Bakersfield on Route 99, a
motorist soon encounters an off-ramp onto Highway 65, which runs up the east
side of the Central Valley – but on to about 70 miles north of
Bakersfield, near the farming town of Exeter. It notes that there is another
segment .200-plus miles further to the north, 35 mile of Route 65 connecting
Marysville, north of Sacramento, with Roseville. These were the hints of what
was to be an Eastside Highway, a major north-south route – a twin, so to
speak, of I-5. It’s also evidence of the slowdown, and then virtual halt,
in major highway construction that took hold in the 1970s as California’s
population growth slowed and as liberal opposition to public works merged with
conservative dislike of new taxes. Projects were abandoned, sometimes with
pieces of elevated highway left dangling. The paperwork of years, even decades,
of complex and often heated local negotiations over routes was filed away.Land
acquired for projects was abandoned or was sold off for other purposes. The
northern section of Route 65 snuck in under the wire. Under intense political
pressure, a young Gov. Jerry Brown authorized its expansion into an expressway
to serve high-tech development. There’s some interest among San Joaquin
Valley officials in rekindling the Route 65 project to relieve pressure on
Route 99, though the source of potential construction money is, to say the
least, problematic. However, Brown’s Department of Transportation has
drafted a new state transportation plan that, in effect, says California should
not add any more carrying capacity into its roadway system and emphasize mass
(Source: Modesto Bee, 5/6/2016)
Route 99 to Porterville
Widening to Porterville (TCRP Project #114, ~ KER 0.684 to TUL 17.926)
There are currently plans to widen the segment from Route 65 from 7th Standard Road to Route 190 in Porterville (~ KER 0.684 to TUL 17.926). This is TCRP Project #122. This project is to convert Route 65 from an existing two-lane conventional highway to a four-lane expressway. Originally, this project was to be coordinated with TCRP Project #114 – Route 65 improvements in Kern County, with a single environmental document for the entire corridor. However, priorities have changed for both Kern and Tulare Counties. The scope of TCRP Project #122 is being revised to reflect only the Tulare County portion of the project (thus, project #122 is now from the Kern County line). The Kern County portion will be handled under TCRP Project #114.
In June 2017, the CTC was informed that TCRP Project 114 is currently inactive. The project had a TCRP allocation of $376,000 for environmental and has a savings of $1,298,000 programmed for the Design phase that was never allocated. Kern COG fully supports the transfer of $1,298,000 TCRP savings to TCRP Project 113 - Route 46 Expressway, Segment 4A.
Terra Bella Expressway - Segment 1 (~ TUL 15.164 to TUL 17.796)
There are also plans to widen near Terra Bella. The August 2004 CTC agenda showed a notice to prepare an EIR to widen to four-lane expressway near Terra Bella. The Draft EIR was reported out in April 2005. Construction of Phase 1 is scheduled to begin in Fiscal Year 2007-08, with Phases 2 and 3 to be constructed as funding becomes available.
In December 2011, the Tulare County Association of Governments (TCAG) updated its Regional Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). The TIP is submitted it to the California Department of Transportation and the California Transportation Commission by March 28 of each year in order for TIP's projects to be included in the state’s TIP funding. The update added a project to widen Route 65 between West Teapot Dome Avenue (Avenue 128) and Route 190, south of Porterville. Construction would start in 2015. The construction costs to widen the road from two to four lanes are estimated at $16.5 million, with $15 million coming from Measure R funds. A state contribution of $1.5 million would cover construction administration costs.
In May 2016, the CTC adjusted the funding to 1,800,000 for Terra Bella Expressway - Segment 1. Near Porterville, on Route 65 from Avenue 120 to 0.3 mile south of Route 190 (~ TUL 15.164 to TUL 17.796). Widen from 2-lane conventional highway to 4-lane expressway.
In May 2017, it was reported that work began in
April 2017 on what is being called the Terra Bella Expressway. That
multi-million dollar project will over many years transform Route 65 from the
Kern-Tulare county line to Route 190 into a four-lane expressway. Currently,
work is being done from just south of Tea Pot Dome Avenue to just south of
Route 190 (~ TUL 15.164 to TUL 17.796). Called Segment 1, work on that should
take more than 18 months at a cost of about $25 million. Planned for later on
are segments 2, 3 and 4, which will eventually complete the project to Kern
County. Segment 2 is not slated to begin until 2020 and will be from where the
current work ends to Avenue 80 between Ducor and Terra Bella.
(Source: Recorder Online, 5/8/2017)
Porterville to Exeter
A small segment, consisting of reconstructed and relocated county roads and frontage roads was up for relinquisment in February 2003, specifically the original routing from PM TUL 21.9 to TUL 29.8 in the County of Tulare (near Linda Vista in North Porterville).
In May 2017, it was reported that work will finally begin on smoothing Route
65 between Porterville and Lindsay. Five years ago Caltrans did some work on
that highway, but left it with deep groves which are tough on tires and
difficult for small trailers or motorcycles. The contract for that project has
been approved and work on a new pavement overlay all the way from Olive Avenue
in Porterville to Carins Corner on Route 137 (~ TUL 19.066 to TUL 31.583)
should begin in June. Estimated cost for that 11.5 miles of new pavement is
$13.5 million. The pavement preservation project for Route 65 was awarded on
April 18, 2017 and is currently on schedule to go into construction on June
(Source: Recorder Online, 5/8/2017)
Route 65 Realignment - Lindsay to Exeter (~ TUL 29.469 to TUL 39.539)
There are also plans to construct a new expressway in Lindsey.
In December 2012, the CTC reviewed a draft EIR regarding improvements on Route 65 and Route 245 in Tulare County to create the Tulare Expressway. The project will realign Route 65 and construct a two-lane expressway on a four-lane right of way for 9.3 miles from Hermosa Street in Lindsay to Avenue 300 on Route 245 northeast of Exeter (~ TUL 29.469 to TUL 39.539, 198 TUL R18.845 to TUL R19.74, 245 TUL 0.000 to 245 TUL 0.514). There would also be about 0.5 miles of improvements on Route 245 starting at Route 198. The project is not fully funded. The project is programmed in the 2012 State Transportation Improvement Program. The total estimated cost for capital and support is $102,711,000. Construction is estimated to begin in Fiscal Year 2018-19. In addition to the no-build alternatives, there are two alternatives being considered: Build Alternative 1 would parallel the east and west side of existing Spruce Avenue depending on location; Build Alternative 2 would project the west side of existing Spruce Avenue. The project is needed to provide a continuous expressway through the corridor. Existing Route 65 does not provide direct access to Route 245 for traffic wishing to continue NB. Currently NB traffic on Route 65 must turn E at the Route 65/Route 198 intersection, enter a left turn lane, and wait for a signal. Route 65 also passes through Exeter, resulting in traffic flow interruptions with local traffic and the use of Spruce Road (Road 204) as an alternative. This has increased the accident rate.
In November 2016, it was reported that the
CTC/Caltrans had “withdrawn from further consideration” its 2012
plan to realign Route 65 between Exeter and Lindsay. Project Manager Judy
Aguilar-Luna said the project was being discontinued for a lack of funding
through the State Transportation Improvement Program. Instead Aguilar-Luna said
Caltrans will begin studying “essential improvements” along the
route. She said these will most likely be smaller projects that can be
completed one at a time, such as improving the intersection of Route 245 and
Route 198 near Exeter or changes to the intersections of Hermosa Street and Oak
Avenue along Route 65 in Lindsay. The decision to stop the project is good news
for Lindsay businesses that front the current alignment of Route 65.
Caltrans’ initial plan proposed realigning Route 65 more closely with
Spruce Road (Road 204) and away from its current route along Road 196
(Kaweah204) and away from its current route along Road 196 (Kaweah Avenue
through Exeter). As part of the realignment, the current highway would have
become a frontage road and the new highway would have been moved farther west
away from the City and businesses. The City of Lindsay became the first public
agency to formally oppose the Route 65 plan when the City Council approved a
letter at its July 9 meeting over concerns for its highway-adjacent businesses.
In the letter, then City Planner Bill Zigler stated the “awkwardly
configured frontage road” would provide little economic help to the
businesses north of the intersection of Hermosa. The city countered the plan by
proposing a Lindsay exit at Lindmore. The exit would have created a one-way
northbound frontage road along the current highway where it splits into the new
alignment and curves west away from the city. This would have allowed vehicles
to access the affected businesses. North of Hermosa Street, the frontage road
would became two lanes and connect to the Oak Avenue extension, which was
already part of initial project. It would have also created new opportunities
for the City to develop commercial property that would have faced the new
highway. And because most of the land running along the west side of the
current highway already falls within Lindsay’s urban develop boundaries,
the new highway frontage would have been within the city’s sphere of
influence. The city later withdrew its own proposal after Caltrans said it
would have to condemn all of the properties (both homes and businesses such as
the 76 Station) on the west side of the freeway because Freemont Drive would
have created a dead-end road that exceeded the maximum length set by the State.
Transforming the current highway into a one-way, northbound “Lindsay
Exit” would have required making Fremont Drive a cul-de-sac at the
southern end near Lindmore. There is no timetable to present the three-phase
plan to make improvements along the route. Once completed, Caltrans will
circulate a new draft environmental document for the replacement project. The
draft document will be available for review at an open forum public hearing and
public notice will provided for new comments.
(Source: Foothills Sun-Gazette, 11/9/2016)
The 2018 STIP, approved at the CTC March 2018 meeting, appears to adjust the allocation for PPNO 0104 Align Rd 204, Rt 65-Rt 198, 4 lanes, TUL 29.5/38.6. Near the city of Tulare, on Route 65 from Lindsay to Exeter, and on Road 204 from Route 137 to Route 198. Widen to 4 divided lanes and realign highway. The 2018 STIP changes the allocation from $3.150M to $5.650M.
The December 2011 STIP also includes funding to begin design work in 2015 to widen Route 65 from two to four lanes from Route 137, west of Lindsay, north to Avenue 240 (~ TUL 31.583 to TUL 32.532). State transportation improvement funds would pay more than $1.55 million to cover design work on the 2.5-mile project. TCAG plans to seek funding to widen the entire 13.5-mile stretch of Route 65 between Route 137 and Route 198 (~ TUL 31.583 to TUL 39.536), north of Exeter.
Unofficially, "Porterville" Highway. Officially, this segment is named the "All America City Highway". This is because the City of Lindsay was awarded "All America City" status by the National Civic League, as have been Bakersfield and Porterville, and all three are linked by Route 65. Named by Assembly Concurrent Resolution No. 47, Chapter 41, in 1996.
The portion from Lindsey to Route 198 near Exeter is historically named the "Orange Belt Highway" (~ TUL 28.907 to TUL 39.536) .
The portion of Route 65 between Route 137 and Route 198 in Tulare County (~ TUL 31.583 to TUL 39.536) is named the "Detective Kent Haws Memorial Highway. It was named in memory of Kent Haws, born on October 1, 1969, in Phoenix, Arizona. On May 28, 1993, Kent Haws entered the United States Army and became an Airborne Ranger Avenger crew member assigned to Alpha Battery 3rd Battalion 62nd Air Defense Artillery Unit, with training in forward area air defense, intelligence handling, and jungle warfare. He was stationed in Texas and New York, attained the rank of E4 as a corporal, and was deployed to Haiti. He was an expert marksman with rifle and grenade and a parachutist, and was awarded over 10 medals, commendations, and ribbons. Upon his honorable discharge from the United States Army on October 28, 1996, Kent Haws chose to serve his community by joining the Tulare County Sheriff's Department and working in various locations, including the Main Jail Detention Facility and the Porterville Substation, and in the capacities of East Porterville Community Based Officer, member of both the search and rescue team, and the Sheriffs' Tactical Enforcement Personnel Unit (STEP). Detective Haws had a passion for protecting others, and on December 17, 2007, while on his way home from serving search warrants, he observed a suspicious person in an orange grove near the town of Ivanhoe and attempted to make contact, at which time he was fired upon and suffered a fatal injury. He is remembered by his colleagues in the Tulare County Sheriff's Department as a "STEP-brother" who led by example, was not afraid to volunteer for the most difficult of duties, and was a humble leader who understood that true leadership is characterized by action, not position. Named by Assembly Concurrent Resolution (ACR) 147, Resolution Chapter 161, on 9/19/2008.
From Route 198 near Exeter to Route 80 near Roseville on a route along the easterly side of the San Joaquin Valley, which route may include all or portions of any existing state highway route.
As defined in 1963, this segment was defined as "Route 198 near Exeter to Route 80 near Roseville on a route along the easterly side of the San Joaquín Valley to be selected by the California Highway Commission, which route may include all or portions of any existing state highway route or routes."
Looks familiar, huh?
In 1975, Chapter 244 split this segment and deleted a portion, making the routing "(b) Route 198 near Exeter to Route 104 on a route along the easterly side of the San Joaquín Valley, which route may include all or portions of any existing state highway route. (c) The Sacramento-Placer county line to Route 80 near Roseville."
The 1975 act also noted:
“The department and State Transportation Board shall cooperate with the County of Sacramento and the Sacramento Regional Area Planning Commission in the transportation corridor study conducted by the county and the commission on the adopted route for Route 65. Such cooperation by the state shall be limited to furnishing existing data.
The department shall not, prior to July 1, 1976, or such later date as adopted by the California Highway Commission, dispose of any real property acquired for the construction of Route 65 as a freeway from Route 50 to the Sacramento-Placer county line except for such real property which, as mutually agreed by the department and the county, is not required for any transportation purpose. If, at such a date, the transportation corridor study indicates the other real property is required for any transportation purpose, the department shall not dispose of the real property prior to January 1, 1977.”
In 1985, Chapter 46 brought the definition nearly back to the 1963 routing: "(b) Route 198 near Exeter to Route 80 near Roseville on a route along the easterly side of the San Joaquín Valley, which route may include all or portions of any existing state highway route."
The interchange of US 50 with Sunrise Blvd. is larger than normal, because Sunrise Blvd was, for a short time in the 1970s, designated as Route 65 south of US 50 in anticipation of the freeway routing. This route was relinquished in 1976. On one of the piers for the overcrossing, you can see where it used to call the structure "50/65 separation." The interchange was a cloverleaf until around 2001, when it was converted to a partial cloverleaf.
The routing is not determined for the portion from Route 198 to Route 80. The portion from Route 198 to Route 80 was shown as proposed both in 1963 and 1986. It was LRN 249, defined in 1959. It appears to have been Mayhew Road and Gunn Road in the vicinity of Sacramento. Sunrise Blvd was also at one time planned to be part of Route 65. This was not part of the original definition of signed Route 65.
This whole segment has existed as a "line on a map" since the first
iteration of the master "California Freeway & Expressway System" was
devised in 1959. There was never a formal adoption of alignment for any portion
of this corridor except for a short time in the '70's east of Sacramento; even
that was later rescinded. The only rumblings of anything being done to advance
this corridor came in the early '90's, when eastward expanding housing in the
Fresno/Clovis area prompted some locals to opine that an eastern bypass of the
metro area partially using the Route 65 corridor would be appropriate to
address traffic needs. This segment would have struck out northwest from the
Route 65/Route 198 junction as previously planned, crossing Route 180 just east
of Minkler and the San Joaquin River immediately downstream from Friant Dam.
But the Fresno-initiated plans included intersecting Route 41 a few miles north
of Route 145, and then turning west on another proposed alignment -- an eastern
extension of Route 152, also a longstanding "dotted line" on the same statewide
planning map. The whole thing was envisioned as a large arc around the eastern
side of metro Fresno, providing more immediate egress from the expanding
eastern suburbs. The concept got legs for a while, but was "back-burnered" by
the later part of the decade. Housing in that area has yet to recover from the
recession, so it appears that the corridor is pretty much shelved.
(Source: Sparker at AAroads, 7/3/2016)
Unconstructed between Route 198 and I-80. There is currently a corridor study in progress for the section between Route 198 and Route 152; see http://www.dot.ca.gov/dist6/ for details. There is no local traversable highway along this routing, and a general routing is not determined.
According to the Fresno Bee, 2001-02-04:
In a major indicator of the tremendous growth projected for California, the state Department of Transportation has begun considering a third north-south highway corridor through the San Joaquin Valley -- a route across the citrus groves and scenic pasture land near the Sierra foothills.
Saying it must plan today for tomorrow's traffic in a state expected to reach a population of 49 million by 2025, Caltrans is studying the possibility of a 54-mile highway from Exeter in Tulare County to Route 152 in Madera County.
The route would stretch existing Route 65, which runs from Bakersfield to Exeter, far to the north across five Sierra rivers and five state highways. It would pass near towns such as Sanger, Orange Cove, Clovis and Friant.
Caltrans' goal, however, would be to provide relief for the huge increases in traffic projected in years ahead on Highway 99. If the new Highway 65 comes to pass, the state will eventually buy thousands of acres of right-of-way for a route that could, in decades ahead, become a long-haul California freeway.
Presently, Caltrans is studying only the link from Tulare County to Madera County. Yet the long-range goal is to close a 220-mile gap from Exeter to Rocklin, along I-80 northeast of Sacramento.
Caltrans planners say Highway 65 could begin as a two-lane route or a four-lane expressway, then expand to a foothill freeway. The vision, officials say, is similar to the long-distance I-5 corridor along the Valley's west side with interchanges every few miles.
According to the Fresno Bee in early 2007, there were talks about resurrecting this freeway route. A state-funded master plan for the San Joaquin Valley includes a proposed north-south highway along the Sierra foothills. The so-called Foothill Freeway (the Route 65 extension linking Exeter to Chowchilla, which has existed only on paper since 1959) is being discussed by Fresno and Madera county planners as a way to ease congestion on Route 99, and to connect future growth hot spots such as southern Madera County's Rio Mesa area and Fresno County's Millerton New Town. Caltrans last produced a study six years ago but set it aside in the face of environmental opposition and mixed reactions from local government leaders. The proposal is "still officially inactive" but could be brought back if a consensus emerges from the current San Joaquin Valley Blueprint effort, in which planners and other leaders are trying to define a vision for the Valley at midcentury. Fresno city planners are proposing that Route 65 be part of a beltway incorporating some form of mass transit as well as highways; this loop would encircle Madera and the Fresno-Clovis metropolitan area, and would include land use policies to encourage high-density development on major transit corridors within the loop while preserving farmland elsewhere.
The state's 1959 plan called for Route 65 to extend from its current end north of Exeter in Tulare County to Rocklin in Placer County, northeast of Sacramento. The route was supposed to run north to the east side of Sacramento and on through to I-80 in northeast Roseville. In the Sacramento area, the state brought up much of the right of way in the late 1960s and early 1970s. In November 1974, the Sacramento County Board of Supervisors killed Route 65 (and three other proposed freeways). In 1975, the California Legislature "buried" the plans for 65, but for some reason, resurrected the route in 1986. The 2001 study covered only the area between Exeter and Chowchilla, where the new highway would connect to an eastward extension of Route 152, with no route determination. The 2001 study focused on two wide and largely undeveloped corridors, one on each side of the Friant-Kern Canal near the base of the foothills. Costs at that time were estimated at $671 million or $763 million, depending on the corridor. If the route were revived, a new study would be required to determine an exact route; once approved, the counties and any cities along the route could alter their general plans to preserve needed right of way. However, this requires support of all of the region's local governments.
Note that both the northern and southern ends of Route 65 are currently slated for upgrade. Millions were recently approved from bond funding to build a long-planned and awaited freeway/expressway bypass of Lincoln, CA just north of Roseville (see the next segment of the route for details). To the south, there is a proposal to upgrade Route 65 to a four lane expressway (a.k.a "Terra Bella" Expressway) in Tulare and Kern Counties (see above).
Between 1970 and 1976 Sunrise Blvd. between Route 16 and US 50 was actually
designated as Route 65; there were actually mileposts posted as such on the
road, although no reassurance shields -- or any trailblazer signage on either
of the intersecting highways -- was ever posted. The Sunrise/US 50 interchange
was a full cloverleaf at the time; plans were to reconstruct Sunrise Blvd. as
the intial 2 lanes of an eventual 4-lane upgradeable expressway. The Sacramento
Board of Supervisors voted 3-2 to kill the Route 65, Route 143, and Route 244
freeways. This happened in November 1974. Rights of way were acquired for those
freeways, and construction was supposed to begin on portions of Route 143 and
Route 244 in 1975. There was a lot of NIMBY-type opposition to the freeways.
About 20 years later, the Sacramento Bee published an article where two of the
three supervisors who voted to suspend constuction admitted that they made a
mistake with their vote. The other supervisor had a brother-in-law developer
who bought up a big swath of the Route 143 right of way and built housing. Most
of the mileposts on Route 65 were gone by mid-1977, but a few near the US 50
interchange (now a parclo) remained until the mid-80's. Reinstatement of that
route was precluded by a redefinition of Route 65 as ending at Route 104
several miles to the south; there was a deliberate gap between Route 104 and
the Placer County line. Over the years, both state and local officials have
stymied attempts to plan -- much less deploy -- any eastern Sacramento bypass
-- and developers certainly haven't helped, placing housing tracts or
commercial facilities over most of the available land area. Such a bypass is
effectively dead as of now.
(Source: Sparker at AAroads, 8/30/2016; Concrete Bob at AAroads, 8/30/2016)
Placer County has plans to connect Route 65 to Route 99 with a $200 million to $300 million roadway called Placer Parkway. There are plans for industrial areas on each end of the roadway. There are currently three possible routes that are being reviewed. The northern alternative follows West Sunset Boulevard, and a southern route is near Base Line Road. A third central route cuts through agricultural land between Sunset and Base Line. See Route 102 for more details.
From Route 80 near Roseville to Route 70 near Marysville.
As defined in 1963, this segment ran from "Route 80 near Roseville to Route 70."
This segment is signed Route 65, but before 1964, was signed US-99E (and may have been plain US 99 before US 99W was defined). For a while, Route 65 was cosigned with US 99E. Between Route 80 and Route 65, this originally followed the routing of 1964-1994 Route 256. Later, the Route 65 routing was moved to the NE. The route was LRN 3, defined in 1909, between Roseville and Marysville. Parts of this may have been US 40.
Route 65/I-80 Interchange (~ PLA R5.32 to PLA R6.629)
In March 2013, the CTC received notice of the preparation of an EIR. This EIR is for a project that would add High Occupancy Vehicle lanes and high-speed connections at the I-80/Route 65 Interchange in Placer County. The project is not fully funded; however, the project is fully funded through the Project Approval and Environmental Document phase with federal and local funds. The total estimated cost is $340,000,000 for capital and support. Construction is estimated to begin in Fiscal Year 2019-20, depending on the availability of funds. There are five alternatives being considered: (1) Taylor Road Full Access Interchange (Diamond-Shaped); (2) Taylor Road Full Access Interchange (Trumpet-Shaped); (3) Taylor Road Interchange Eliminated; (4) Transportation System Management; and (5) No-Build (No-Project).
In December 2016, the CTC approved for future consideration of funding project in Placer County that will construct improvements to the I-80/Route 65 Interchange in the cities of Roseville and Rocklin. The overall project will be constructed in four phases. Phase 1 of this project will construct a northbound auxiliary lane from Route 80 to Galleria Boulevard/Stanford Ranch Road and install a ramp meter on Route 65. Phase 1 is programmed in the 2016 State Highway Operation and Protection Program. The total programmed amount for Phase 1 is $26,650,000 for capital and support. Construction is estimated to begin in Fiscal Year 2017-18. The scope, as described in the Purpose and Need of the environmental document, is consistent with the project scope programmed by the Commission in the 2016 State Highway Operation and Protection Program. Phases 2 through 4 are not fully funded. The total estimated cost for the overall project is $348,000,000 for capital and support.
In August 2017, the CTC approved $3,600,000 from the Budget Act of 2016, Budget Act Item 2660-304-6056 for the following locally administered Proposition 1B TCIF Program project: I-80/Route 65 Interchange Phase 1- Third Lane. In and near Roseville and Rocklin, from 0.4 mile north of Route 80 to 0.5 mile south of the Pleasant Grove Boulevard Overcrossing (~ PLA R5.32 to PLA R6.629). Construct third lane for 1.3 miles. (TCIF 126). The local agency was ready to proceed with this project, and is requesting an allocation at this time. The allocation is contingent upon the approval of a budget revision by the Department of Finance. Future Consideration of Funding approved under Resolution E-16-92; December 2016.
In April 2018, construction was to begin on the
Route 80/Route 65 interchange. The first phase will provide a third lane on
northbound Route 65 from I-80 to Pleasant Grove Boulevard and improvements to
the Galleria Boulevard/Stanford Ranch Road interchange. PCTPA and its partners
garnered several funding sources to complete the $50 million first phase. The
I-80 Bottleneck project through Roseville was completed in 2011 under budget,
thus, PCTPA is able to use nearly $10 million dollars from that project
savings. Other local funding sources include traffic mitigation fees assessed
on local developments. The remaining $400 million cost will eventually add one
lane to each of the four connectors between Route 65 and I-80. Future
improvements also include maintaining the existing I-80 access at Taylor Road
and eliminating the weaving movements on I-80 eastbound between Eureka Road and
Route 65. However, in the first phase, the interchange will retain its present
configuration as a trumpet with the heaviest movement around the loop rather
than via the direct SB to EB ramp. The interchange design did not include a
reversed connection to provide a higher-speed connection from I-80 east to
Route 65 north. Apparently there was some concern about damage to the adjacent
watershed immediately to the south of the interchange, so the plans were
"massaged" to the present configuration to avoid impinging on the identified
problematic area. Because of funding limitations, a directional interchange had
not been considered, so the area required for the trumpet had not only needed
to be shifted NE along I-80, but also "squeezed" into a tighter than usual
profile so as not to impinge on an adjoining creekbed; this accounts for the
low-speed loop from EB I-80 to NB Route 65. According to Caltrans sources,
there's no near-term funded plans to effect basic changes to the present
configuration except to expand capacity on Route 65 so that the proximity of
the regional commercial center along that freeway to the north of the
interchange doesn't result in additional backup issues around the loop. It does
appear that in future phases, the interchange will become directional.
(Sources: 80/65 Interchange Improvement Project Website, 4/2018; Sparker on AAroads, 4/29/2018)
In August 2016, the CTC approved for future consideration of funding a project on Route 65 (03-Pla-65, PM R5.4/R6.4) in Placer County that will modify the Route 65 northbound ramps at the Galleria Boulevard/Stanford Ranch Road interchange and reconfigure lanes along Galleria Boulevard/Stanford Ranch Road in the cities of Roseville and Rocklin. The project is programmed in the 2016 State Highway Operation and Protection Program. The total programmed amount is $21,700,000 for capital and support. Construction is estimated to begin in Fiscal Year 2017-18. 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.
SR 65 Widening Project (03-Pla-65, PM 6.5/12.8)
In April 2016, it was reported that a small segment
of Route 65 between I-80 and Lincoln Blvd was being repaved. The article also
noted PCTPA's SR 65 Widening Project, which proposes improvements to relieve
congestion, improve operations, and enhance safety to the freeway from north of
Galleria Boulevard/Stanford Ranch Road to Lincoln Boulevard. These improvements
include widening the highway from 2 to 5 lanes in each direction with
mixed-flow lanes and auxiliary lanes between interchanges to ease the flow of
traffic. Currently this project is not funded and PCTPA, the County of Placer
and the cities of Roseville, Rocklin and Lincoln are exploring strategies to
fund this and other critical transportation projects.
(Source: Rocklin and Roseville Today,4/11/2016)
In May 2018, the CTC approved for future
consideration of funding the following project for which a Mitigated Negative
Declaration (MND) has been completed: Route 65 in Placer County. Widen a
portion of Route 65 in the cities of Roseville, Rocklin, and Lincoln. (EA
1F170) (03-Pla-65, PM 6.5/12.8). This project is located on Route 65 in the
cities of Roseville, Rocklin and Lincoln in Placer County. The project proposes
to widen the existing freeway from north of Galleria Boulevard/Stanford Ranch
Road to Lincoln Boulevard. Carpool/HOV lanes are also proposed in the project.
The project proposes to relieve traffic operation and safety issues as well as
existing mainline congestion by adding additional capacity. Additional capacity
will also accommodate future growth predictions along this corridor. The
proposed project is currently programmed to cost an estimated $59.3 million and
anticipates funding from the South Placer Regional Transportation Authority.
The project will be built in various phases depending on available funding.
Construction is estimated to begin in FY 2019-20.
(Source: CTC Agenda, May 2018 Agenda Item 2.2c(1))
In August 2016, the CTC authorized relinquishment of right of way in the city of Roseville (City) along Route 65 at Blue Oaks Boulevard (03-Pla-65-PM M8.2), consisting of collateral facilities. The City, by relinquishment agreement dated July 12, 2016, agreed to waive the 90-day notice requirement and accept title upon relinquishment by the State.
The following projects were also planned for this segment:
Lincoln Bypass (~ PLA R12.853 to PLA L23.938)
The following projects were also planned for this segment:
With respect to the Lincoln Bypass, the CTC reviewed in July 2006 the NEIR and had a proposed route adoption. Route 65 is as a major north-south highway along the east side of the Sacramento Valley. It was included as part of the State Highway System under authorization of the State Highway Act of 1909, and was made part of the California Freeway and Expressway system in 1959. The original construction from Roseville to Lincoln, then designated as LRN 3, took place between 1912 and 1914 and was adopted as a freeway by the California Highway Commission on May 20, 1964. Route 65 connects the urbanized areas of Sacramento and Roseville with the cities of Lincoln, Wheatland, Marysville and Yuba City. Route 65 begins in Roseville at I-80 extending to the junction of Route 70 in Yuba County. Legislation was passed in 1985 extending the legislative description of the route to Route 99 in Yuba City. Since the 1964 freeway adoption, there have been considerable changes in land uses along the existing alignment from Roseville through Lincoln. Once primarily agricultural in nature, the past thirty years has seen a shift to industrial, residential, and commercial land uses within the corridor. The city of Lincoln, recognizing the considerable changes in land use along this corridor, requested the Commission consider approving a modification to the current adopted alignment on March 24, 1987. This project is one of several transportation projects responding to the growth in the area. Continued growth in south Placer County and the Sacramento Valley has resulted in the need for a new and improved Route 65 corridor, which would alleviate congestion in the city of Lincoln while providing for improved inter-regional traffic flow. The existing facility as of 2006 through Lincoln is a “Main Street” highway, which will not serve the ultimate transportation needs of the region. As traffic volumes continued to increase, Route 65 within downtown and south of the city of Lincoln has exceeded available capacity. The existing road between the city of Lincoln and town of Sheridan is a two-lane conventional highway. Right of way in this vicinity is typically 100-110 feet (30.5 to 33.5 meters) wide. Between the city of Lincoln and the town of Sheridan, there are two passing opportunity locations; each approximately 1.5 miles (2.4 kilometers). Curves and left-turn channelization along this section of highway limit passing opportunities. From the town of Sheridan north, the route continues as a two-lane conventional highway, passing through the town of Wheatland, slowing down traffic to 35 mph. Three miles north of the town of Wheatland, the highway becomes a four-lane freeway and terminates at the Route 99 in Yuba City.
Caltrans prepared a Project Study Report for the Lincoln bypass in July 1987 that analyzed 16 alternatives. The Draft Project Report was approved on November 5, 2002, and analyzed a no build alternative and six viable alternatives. On May 17, 2006, the Project Report was approved recommending the preferred alternative as depicted on the attached route adoption map. This project will allow for the identification and preservation of a new corridor for the eventual staged construction of a four-lane freeway with interchanges at selected locations and the ultimate relinquishment of a portion of the existing Route 65 to the city of Lincoln and Placer County. The project begins near the junction of Industrial Avenue and Route 65 just south of the city of Lincoln (~ PLA R12.853) and extends to the Bear River, just north of the town of Sheridan (~ PLA L23.938). The Lincoln Bypass project will provide a substantial benefit in accommodating regional traffic and helping to relieve congestion and improve safety on existing Route 65 through the city of Lincoln. Without the bypass, future traffic congestion will create gridlock conditions within and surrounding the city of Lincoln. The bypass will accommodate projected traffic volumes through the year 2025. The Lincoln Bypass project consists of a four-lane freeway and two-lane expressway and includes right-of-way acquisition for an ultimate freeway. This project will include four lanes from just south of Industrial Avenue to just north of North Ingram Slough. From north of North Ingram Slough, the project will include two lanes up to the northern tie-in with existing Route 65 near the town of Sheridan. Industrial Avenue will be a partial interchange and the proposed Ferrari Ranch Road will be an undercrossing. At-grade intersections will be constructed at Nelson Lane, Wise Road and Riosa Road. This project has an overcrossing structure at Nicolaus Road and an overcrossing at UPRR/Industrial Avenue. As funding becomes available, the ultimate facility will include extending the four-lane configuration northward from North Ingram Slough to the town of Sheridan. The project is currently programmed for $262,334,000 for support and capital costs in the 2006 State Transportation Improvement Plan. The Department and local partners are financing this project jointly. Advisory and Mandatory Design Exceptions were approved on September 6, 2002. The Department approved the Project Report on May 17, 2006. An Environmental Impact Report and Environmental Impact Statement was completed in conformance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The adoption of the Lincoln Bypass will create a break in system continuity for Route 193. There are discussions with the city of Lincoln for the “legislative relinquishment” of Route 193 within its’ jurisdiction. [See AB 2733, 2005-2006] To maintain system continuity, the legislation proposes that the city of Lincoln install and maintain signs directing motorists to the continuation of Route 193 to the east and Route 65 and I-80 to the west. The city of Lincoln is required to apply for approval of a Business Route designation for that portion of the relinquished highway. The city of Lincoln has also agreed to install and maintain signs for the traveling public when Ferrari Ranch Road is designated as the main arterial route between Route 65 and the continuation of Route 193. The relinquishment cooperative agreement will convey the same continuity message. A Freeway Agreement will be developed and executed with the city of Lincoln and the county of Placer after Commission approval of the route adoption.
The SAFETEA-LU act, enacted in August 2005 as the reauthorization of TEA-21, provided the following expenditures on or near this route:
In 2007, the CTC recommended $73.715M in funding from the Corridor Mobility Improvement Account (CMIA) for the Lincoln Bypass.
In July 2008, the $325 million Route 65 bypass in Lincoln broke ground. Scheduled for completion in 2013, the nearly 12-mile roadway will stretch from Industrial Boulevard west around the city of Lincoln and link back to Route 65 near Sheridan. The intent is to divert commuters and big rigs away from Lincoln's downtown area, where traffic comes to a standstill during morning and evening rush hours. Placer County officials adopted the idea of a bypass in the 1973 general plan, and by 1988 growth in the region prompted the state to allocate the first dollars for the project. But the funds were diverted to pay for seismic retrofit projects after the Loma Prieta earthquake hit the Bay Area in 1989 and again when the Northridge quake struck Los Angeles in 1994. It wasn't until the late 1990s that local officials renewed efforts to build the bypass. Back then, the estimated cost was $50 million. The project also had to endure a lengthy environmental review since the new roadway cuts through farmland and sensitive wildlife habitat.
In August 2009, the CTC approved an amendment to the CMIA baseline agreement for the Route 65 Lincoln Bypass project to extend the four-lane portion of the project by 1.5 miles. The Department will negotiate with the contractor to execute a contract change order (CCO) that creates minimal risk to the completion of the contract within the existing contract allotment and schedule. The ultimate scope of the Lincoln Bypass project will consist of a four-lane expressway on a new alignment from south of Lincoln at Industrial Boulevard to near Riosa Road, north of Lincoln. Due to rapid escalation of the construction cost estimate, the project was staged to initially construct a four-lane facility for approximately four miles at the southern end of the project and a two-lane facility for the remaining eight miles. The funding approved in the CMIA baseline agreement was assumed to be sufficient for this initial stage. The project has been in construction since 2008 and is approximately 20 percent complete as of July 2009. The majority of the right of way work is complete and other significant risks have not materialized. The current supplemental funds and contingency balance is $18 million. This is about $5.5 million more than needed to complete the contract which can be used to fund the additional work. Even with the added work, the project will still maintain the standard 5 percent contingency balance. The contractor has indicated a willingness to perform the additional work at the unit prices of the original contract. Completing this work under CCO now can be accomplished at a much lower cost as compared to a separate contract awarded at a later date.
In June 2010, it was reported that Caltrans is well into building an 11-mile highway to the west of Lincoln that will bypass downtown Lincoln. Opening day is slated for sometime in 2012, and could knock G Street traffic from 31,000 vehicles a day down to 18,000. When the bypass opens, the state will decommission the old highway and turn ownership of G Street over to Lincoln.
In June 2011, it was reported that some traffic shifts were occuring to prepare for connection to the new Lincoln Bypass.
In September 2011, the CTC received a request to amend the CMIA baseline agreement for the Lincoln Bypass project - Phase 1 (PPNO 0145M) to add scope to included the Lincoln Bypass - Phase 2A (PPNO 4895) project, which extends the four-lane expressway from Nelson Lane to West Wise Road, and to update the funding plan and delivery schedule. At the June 2011 meeting, the Commission approved Resolution CMIA-P-1011-07, which added an additional $20,000,000 in CMIA funding for new scope, now referred to as the Lincoln Bypass project -Phase 2A (PPNO 4895); which will extend the four-lane expressway from Nelson Lane to West Wise Road. The funding for Phase 2A includes $2,999,000 in local funds.
In Spring 2012, Caltrans put the Lincoln Bypass project out for bid, looking for a contractor to construct southbound lanes in Placer County near Lincoln from 2.6 miles north of Twelve Bridges overcrossing to 5.1 miles south of the Bear River Bridge.
In September 2012, the CTC revised the project description to construct two additional southbound lanes from Nelson Lane to 0.9 miles north of West Wise Road. They also updated the project funding plan to add $100,000 of local funds to address an increase to the design phase, and redistributed $500,000 to construction support to address unaccounted workload and other costs.
In October 2012, it was reported that the Lincoln Bypass Phase I project was completed and opened. The $325 million, 11-mile, Route 65 bypass, looping west of Lincoln in Placer County, gives commuters a quicker ride from Yuba City and Marysville to I-80, and clears up the congestion in downtown Lincoln.
In May 2014, the CTC authorized relinquishment of right of way in the city of Lincoln on Route 65 (Lincoln Boulevard) between realigned Route 65 (Lincoln Bypass) and the northerly city limits, consisting of superseded highway right of way. The City, by cooperative agreement dated February 14, 2008, waived the 90-day notice requirement and agreed to accept title upon relinquishment by the State. It also authorized relinquishment of right of way in the county of Placer on Route 65 (Lincoln Boulevard) between the northerly city limits and realigned Route 65 (Lincoln Bypass) consisting of superseded highway right of way, and along realigned Route 65 (Lincoln Bypass), consisting of collateral facilities. The County, by cooperative agreement dated February 19, 2008 and by letter dated October 8, 2013, waived the 90-day notice requirement and agreed to accept title upon relinquishment by the State. The bypassed highway is now called "Old Highway 65".
The following projects were also planned for this segment:
In March 2013, the CTC approved for future consideration of funding a project in Yuba County will perform scour mitigation at Dry Creek Bridge (Bridge 16-0002, YUB 002.21) on Route 65 near Wheatland, placing rock slope protection under the bridge and replacing a deck on the roadway with concrete deck overlay. The project is programmed in the 2012 State Highway Operation and Protection Program. The total estimated cost is $4,503,000 for capital and support. Construction is estimated to begin in Fiscal Year 2013-14.
The portion of former Route 256 is likely signed as Business Route 65 in Roseville.
A short segment of this route just N of Route 80 is named the "Harold 'Bizz' Johnson Expressway" (~ PLA R4.938 to PLA M8.065). It was named by Assembly Concurrent Resolution 92, Chapter 88, in 1986. Congressman Harold T. "Bizz" Johnson, state Senator from 1949 to 1958, who served in the House of Representatives from 1958-1980, was instrumental in helping establish the Rails-to-Trails program. He also promoted water development projects and sided with consumer-owned electric utilities against the economic and political clout of big investor-owned systems like Pacific Gas and Electric Co. He also successfully broadened language in the Surface Transportation Assistance Act to allow bridges over highways, railroads and other physical features to qualify for funding under the Act's bridge replacement provisions.
The interchange of Stanford Ranch Road and Galleria Boulevard on Route 65 just N of I-80 (~PLA R5.929) is named the "Officer Matthew J. Redding Memorial Interchange". This segment was named in memory of Officer Matthew J. "Matt" Redding, a decorated police officer, was killed in the line of duty by a drunk driver on October 9, 2005 on Route 65 near the interchange of Stanford Ranch Road and Galleria Boulevard while serving the community and protecting his fellow officers. Redding grew up in Rocklin, graduated from Del Oro High School, attended Sierra College, and had a strong desire to become a police officer. He was hired by the City of Rocklin as a police officer on December 10, 2001, and was a highly respected police officer who, in under four years, was selected to serve on the Regional SWAT team and decorated for valor, life saving, and meritorious duty. Named by Senate Concurrent Resolution (SCR) 10, Resolution Chapter 84, on 7/10/2007.
The portion of Route 65 between the intersection with Sunset Boulevard (approx PLA-065-R9.549) and the intersection with Route 193 (since relinquished -- it was Lincoln Blvd and McBean Parkway in Lincoln, so presumably this is now where Lincoln (old 65) exits the Lincoln Bypass, Industrial Ave, PLA-065-R12.866) in Placer County is named the Officer Mark A. White Memorial Highway. It was named in memory of Roseville Police Officer Mark A. White, a dedicated officer, who was killed in the line of duty on Friday, February 10, 1995, when he was fatally shot during a hostage situation. At Officer White's funeral, the procession was estimated to be over nine miles long. Officers and other mourners came from all over the State of California, and some attended from as far away as Nebraska and Ohio. Officer White was remembered as a happy, warm, compassionate officer, who had a zest for life, a dedicated father and a loving husband. He was a highly respected, dedicated officer for over nine years, first serving in Sutter County as a Deputy Sheriff for five years, then in Roseville as a Police Officer for four years. While serving in Sutter County, Officer White was a member of the S.E.D. team and a diver with the search and rescue team. While serving in Roseville, Officer White was the neighborhood officer, he worked hand-in-hand with community members cleaning up the streets and making it a safer place for everyone. The highway was named to remind us of the ultimate sacrifice Officer White made on that cold, wet February afternoon, as well as remind us of the sacrifices peace officers make on a daily basis. Named by Assembly Concurrent Resolution 179, July 16, 2004, Chapter 126.
The portion of the Route 65 Lincoln Highway in the County of Placer from
Lincoln Boulevard (postmile PLA-065-R12.87) to Nelson Lane (postmile
PLA-065-R15.55) is named the "Thomas J. Cosgrove Memorial Highway". It
was named in memory of Thomas Joseph Cosgrove, who was born in November 1948,
and moved to the City of Lincoln in the County of Placer in 1987. Ever since
that time he remained dedicated to making Lincoln a better place to live by
serving as a volunteer firefighter for many years prior to the city adopting a
full-time fire department and by serving on the city council and other local
organizations. Tom Cosgrove was first elected to the City Council of the City
of Lincoln in 1994, at which time the city had a population of 8,304 people and
one traffic light at the intersection of Route 193 and Route 65. He served 18
years as a city council member and served as Mayor of the City of Lincoln in
1997, 2001, 2005, and 2010. In his 18 years as a city council member, Tom
Cosgrove was admired by his coworkers and the development community for his
intelligence, professional competency, positive attitude, willingness to help
others, and sense of humor. Tom Cosgrove played an instrumental role in the
construction of the Route 65 Lincoln Highway, a $325,000,000 project in a rural
county that was nearly impossible to build without support and a political
champion, and in the case of this highway, that champion was Tom Cosgrove.
Dating back to 1998, when the Placer County Transportation Planning Agency
Board was prioritizing what would be the next big project to take on, Tom
Cosgrove got the City Council of the City of Lincoln to pledge $1,000,000 as
matching money to get the project to the top of the list and, ultimately, that
promise was primarily fulfilled with a creative “in kind”
contribution of fill material for the Lincoln Boulevard Interchange from the
wastewater treatment plant. When it came to moving the Route 65 Lincoln Highway
forward, Tom Cosgrove was always at the ready and attended virtually any
meeting to further the progress of the project, whether it be technical
meetings with rooms full of engineers, regulatory meetings with environmental
specialists, meetings with potential funders like the California Transportation
Commission, or meetings with the public to get input on the project. Whatever
the need, Tom Cosgrove was always there. Tom Cosgrove was also the face of the
Route 65 Lincoln Highway with the community because of all the meetings he
attended, and Tom Cosgrove had all the latest information to share, whether it
be at a city council meeting, a chamber of commerce get-together, or when
running into citizens on the street. These exceptional efforts culminated in
the opening of the Route 65 Lincoln Highway on October 8, 2012. Tom Cosgrove
was also a regional leader, as exemplified by his service on the Sacramento
Area Council of Governments (SACOG) Board of Directors from 2000 to 2012,
including a term as chair in 2008. In his role with SACOG, Tom Cosgrove
championed the blueprint approach to combining transportation, land use, and
air quality considerations into cohesive long-term plans and spoke to groups
across the nation on the blueprint approach, providing the perspective of a
publicly elected official on the benefits to communities both large and small.
Tom Cosgrove also spearheaded the effort to modernize the SACOG Board of
Directors’ composition to include every jurisdiction, no matter how large
or small, at the table. The expansion to a 31-member board of directors
continues to ensure that every city and county has a say in the regional issues
that SACOG addresses. Tom Cosgrove also served as the President of the Lincoln
Area Chamber of Commerce from January 2016 until his untimely death on February
8, 2017, at 68 years of age. ; For all these reasons, Tom Cosgrove will long be
remembered by the Lincoln community for his hard work and dedication to making
the Route 65 Lincoln Highway a reality. Named by Senate Concurrent Resolution
(SCR) 46, 7/18/2017, Res. Chapter 108, Statutes of 2017.
The portion of this route that is former US 99 is, in local usage, called the "East Side Highway".
The portion of this route that is former US 99 is designated as part of "Historic US Highway 99" by Assembly Concurrent Resolution 19, Chapter 73, in 1993.
Bridge 19-0047, an underpass in Roseville, is named the "Jerrold L. Seawell Underpassing". It was built in 1950, and named by Senate Concurrent Resolution 7, Chapter 12, the same year. Jerrold L. Seawell served in both the State Assembly (1929 to 1933) and the State Senate (1933 to 1945) and as a member of the State Board of Equalization. (This is no longer in the Bridge Log; it was on Washington Blvd on a section of Old 65 since relinquished)
Bridge 19-0151 (PLA R004.87), an overcrossing near Roseville in Nevada county, is named the "Charles J. La Porte Memorial Bridge". It was built in 1973, and was named by Assembly Concurrent Resolution 92, Chapter 88, in 1986. California Highway Patrol Captain Charles J. La Porte, (1897-1943) a World War I veteran, was a motorcycle officer and the first Commander assigned to the Placer County CHP office.
The portion of this route that is former US 99 was designated as a "North-South Blue Star Memorial Highway" by Senate Concurrent Resolution 33, Ch. 82 in 1947.
From Route 70 near Marysville to Route 99 in or near Yuba City.
This segment was added in 1970 by Chapter 1473
This is a proposed, unconstructed routing. It was added in 1970. According to the 2002 Traversable Highways Report, Caltrans is conducting a route adoption study for this segment. However, no local roads fit the definition of a traversable highway along this routing. A major bridge crossing the Feather River S of Yuba City would be required. District 3 has protected all at-risk parcels through corridor preservation right of way purchases.
There are currently plans for construction of a third Feather River bridge south of Yuba City. This project could be related to an EIR that is in preparation regarding construction of a freeway link to Route 65/Route 70 and Route 99, and a bridge structure over the Feather River. [April 2002 CTC Agenda Item 2.2a.(2)]
In October 2015, it was reported that the third Feather River bridge plan
was dead. Caltrans has officially washed its hands of the project. The agency
is exploring its options to sell property marked for the third bridge in both
Yuba and Sutter counties, according to Liza Whitmore, public information
officer for Caltrans. The dream of building a third bridge to connect Yuba City
and Marysville has been around since the 1950s. It has died and been
resurrected a number of times since then. It's been called everything from
"impossibly expensive" to an "economic savior" that would limit congestion and
attract business development. Cost estimates for the project have ranged from
$100 million to $250 million to $600 million, depending on the scope of the
project, according to long-term planning documents and figures quoted by public
officials in the past.
(Source: Appeal-Democrat, 10/5/2015)
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. This is constructed to freeway standards for a 5 mile section starting at Route 190 to Porterville; from Route 80 to Rocklin; and from near Wheatland to the intersection of Route 70 and Route 65 near Marysville.
Overall statistics for Route 65:
The route that was to become LRN 65 was first defined in 1921 by Chapter 839, which declared “All that portion of the public highway commencing at Auburn in Placer County through Placerville, Jackson, San Andreas, and Angels to and connecting with the state highway lateral at Sonoma, Tuolumne county is hereby... declared to be a state highway... highway shall be known as the "Mother Lode Highway".” In 1933, it was extended from [LRN 40] near Moccasin Creek to [LRN 18] near Mariposa, and from [LRN 11] near El Dorado to [LRN 11] near Placerville via Diamond Springs. In 1935, the route was captured into the state highway code as:
In 1939, Chapter 473 combined the sections near Placerville into one, and added Diamond Springs as one of the "vias".
In 1959, Chapter 1062 extended the last segment to end at [LRN 125] near Oakhouse.
In 1963, Chapter 1698 would have clarified that the first segment terminated at [LRN 13] near Sonora, but that was overtaken by Chapter 385 and the great renumbering. This route was signed as follows:
(a) Route 66 is from:
(1) Route 210 near San Dimas to the eastern city limit of the City of Pomona.
(2) The eastern city limit of the City of Rialto to Route 215 in San Bernardino.
(b) The relinquished former portions of Route 66 within the city limits of the Cities of Claremont, Fontana, Rancho Cucamonga, Rialto, and Upland are not state highways and are not eligible for adoption under Section 81. For the portions of Route 66 relinquished under this section, the Cities of Claremont, Fontana, Rancho Cucamonga, Rialto, and Upland shall maintain within their respective jurisdictions signs directing motorists to the continuation of Route 66 and ensure the continuity of traffic flow on the relinquished portions of Route 66, including any traffic signal progression.
As defined in 1963, this route ran from Route 30 near San Dimas to San Bernardino. Note that portions of the route in Pasadena may have been signed as Route 66, although they were legislatively Route 248.
In 1986, Chapter 928 changed the terminus of the route to be Route 215 in San Bernardino.
In 2002, both SB 246 and SB 857 changed the definition of the route (perhaps without realizing it) from "Route 210 near San Dimas" to "Route 30 in La Verne". (Yes, Route 30— I guess the fact checkers were asleep).
In 2002, SB 246 (Chapter 248, 8/26/2002) permitted the portion of Route 66 in the City of Rancho Cucamonga to be relinquished to the city. However, the city was required to ensure the continuity of traffic flow on the relinquished portion of Route 66, including any traffic signal progressions, and to maintain signs directing motorists to the continuation of Route 66. That change was also captured by SB 857 (Chapter 251, 8/26/2002), which also placed similar requirements on the city of Fontana.
The Rancho Cucamonga portions were considered for relinquishment in April 2003 and again in May 2003: 08-SBd-66-PM 4.1/10.9 Route 66 in the City of Rancho Cucamonga.
In 2006, AB 3030 (Chapter 507, 9/27/2006) permitted the relinquishment of the portion of Route 66 in the City of Upland. This segment was up for the relinquishment by the CTC in December 2007.
In 2008, SB 1366 (Chapter 717, 9/30/2008) permitted the relinquishment of
the portion of Route 66 in the City of Rialto. It also changed the origin of
the route: Route 210
in La Verne near San Dimas
In April 2009, the CTC relinquished right of way in the city of Rialto on Route 66, under terms and conditions as stated in Amendment No. 1 to Relinquishment Agreement No. 1419, dated March 16, 2009, determined to be in the best interest of the State. Authorized by Chapter 717, Statutes of 2008, which amended Section 366 of the Streets and Highways Code.
In 2010, SB 993 (Chapter 499, 9/28/2010) changed the definition again to indicate portions of the route that have been relinquished or that have been authorized to be relinquished, including adding relinquishment to the City of Claremont that portion of Route 66 within its city limits or sphere of influence under specified conditions. This split the route into two segments, with a continuous relinquishment between the Los Angeles-San Bernardino county line at the western city limit of the City of Upland and the eastern city limit of the City of Fontana near Maple Avenue. Subsections (b) and (c) were also reworded; the previous (b) was:
(b) (1) Notwithstanding subdivision (a), the commission may relinquish to the City of Fontana, the City of Rancho Cucamonga, the City of Rialto, and the City of Upland the respective portion of Route 66 that is located within the city limits or the sphere of influence of each city, upon terms and conditions the commission finds to be in the best interests of the state. (2) A relinquishment under this subdivision shall become 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. (3) On and after the effective date of the relinquishment, both of the following shall occur: (A) The portion of Route 66 relinquished under this subdivision shall cease to be a state highway. (B) The portion of Route 66 relinquished under this subdivision may not be considered for future adoption under Section 81. (c) The city shall ensure the continuity of traffic flow on the relinquished portion of Route 66, including any traffic signal progression. (d) For relinquished portions of Route 66, the city shall maintain signs directing motorists to the continuation of Route 66.
In September 2012, AB 2679, Chapter 769 adjusted the words of the legislative definition to acknowledge the relinquishment in Rialto.
In May 2012, it was reported that the Claremont City Council members unanimously approved an agreement with Caltrans that resulted in Claremont assuming ownership of Foothill within city limits. The process took 10 years. In February 2011, the city and Caltrans negotiated an agreement to settle the relinquishment of $5.7 million needed to maintain the street. Funding was just identified. The allocation of the money must occur at the state Transportation Commission meeting in June or the funding will be lost, which is why the item came up at a council meeting in May 2012. The money will go toward a host of upgrades. Annual routine maintenance will cost $120,000, which will be funded with gas tax funds. When the $5.7 million is received, there will be $200,000 worth of work done within six months to make improvements required by the Americans with Disabilities Act and to correct traffic safety conditions. One of the first projects will be modifying a street signal at Mountain Avenue. The area has a high accident rate because of left-turn issues.
In June 2012, the CTC relinquished right of way in the city of Claremont on Route 66 between the city limits of Pomona and Upland, under terms and conditions as stated in the relinquishment agreement dated May 25, 2012, determined to be in the best interest of the State. Authorized by Chapter 499, Statutes of 2010, which amended Section 366 of the Streets and Highways Code.
In 2013, Chapter 525 (SB 788, 10/9/13) clarified the definition yet again to reflect relinquishments:
(a) Route 66 is from:
(1) Route 210 near San Dimas to
the Los Angeles-San Bernardino county line at the western city limit of the City of Upland.
(2) The eastern city limit of the City of
Fontana near Maple Avenueto Route 215 in San Bernardino.
(b) The relinquished former portions of Route 66 within the city limits of the Cities of Fontana, Rancho Cucamonga, Rialto, and Upland are not state highways and are not eligible for adoption under Section 81. For the portions of Route 66 relinquished under this section, the Cities of Fontana, Rancho Cucamonga, Rialto, and Upland shall maintain within their respective jurisdictions signs directing motorists to the continuation of Route 66 and ensure the continuity of traffic flow on the relinquished portions of Route 66, including any traffic signal progression.
(c) (1) Notwithstanding subdivision (a), the commission may relinquish to the City of Claremont the respective portion of Route 66 that is located within the city limits or the sphere of influence of each city, upon terms and conditions the commission finds to be in the best interests of the state.
(2) A relinquishment under this subdivision shall become 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.
(3) On and after the effective date of the relinquishment, both of the following shall occur: (A) The portion of Route 66 relinquished under this subdivision shall cease to be a state highway. (B) The portion of Route 66 relinquished under this subdivision may not be considered for future adoption under Section 81.
(4) The City of Claremont shall ensure the continuity of traffic flow on the relinquished portion of Route 66, including any traffic signal progression.
(5) For the relinquished portion of Route 66, the City of Claremont shall maintain signs directing motorists to the continuation of Route 66.
[Note: Unlike most of the discussions on this site, the discussion below moves from East to West. This is primarily because most discussions of Route 66 run it from Chicago to Los Angeles, as that was the primary direction of travel.]
The brief routing statement doesn't do this route justice, for it is what is left of old US 66. US 66 began its life as US 60, in the original 1926 US highways plan. It entered the state at Topock AZ, and extended westward through Barstow to San Bernardino and Los Angeles, ending in Santa Monica. In 1928, it was formally renumbered as US 66, and defined as the route from Los Angeles through San Fernando (which might have been a typo in CHPW), San Bernardino, Victorville, Barstow, Ludlow, Daggett, to the Arizona-California state line just W of Topock AZ. In general, this routing ran to Needles along LRN 58 (defined in 1919). The route was along the National Trails Highway, Park Moabi Road, File Mile Station Road, and Front St./Broadway in Needles. It then ran along Goffs Road through Arrowhead Junction and Goffs, and connected with the "National Trails Highway" through Essex, Amboy, and Newberry to Daggett (this was also LRN 58). In 1931, the alignment ran along Mt. Springs Road to the National Trails Highway. This route has since been bypassed by I-40, and a number of the original roads are signed as Historic US 66 or as State Route 66. Moving from East to West....
In 1947, the Department of Highways moved Route 66 to a new alignment and a new bridge across the Colorado River. The movement to the Red Rock Bridge permitted elimination of one of the narrowest and crookedest portions of US 66. The cost to move to the Red Rock Bridge was only $147K, of which $71.5K was spent replacing the rail deck of the bridge, $70.5K was spent widening the old railroad approach, and $5K was spent to connect it to the existing US 66. The opportunity to replace the bridge arose when ATSF obtained approval to build a new RR bridge 500' upstream in 1942. The Red Rock bridge was set to be scrapped for its steel, but the Army was interested in the bridge and analysis showed that the need for steel would be over before the scrapping could occur. Negotiations were reopened, and the bridge was finally donated to the states in 1944. The history of the bridge going back to Civil War days may be found in the July/August 1947 issue of CHPW. Note that an act of Congress in December 1944 was required to confirm that ATSF could transfer the bridge. The old bridge was completed in 1916, and had a load limit of 11 tons. The construction of Parker Dam also served to submerge the steel supports of the old bridge. The new bridge was designed to support 94 ton trains. Note that it appears that the both the old bridge and the Red Rock bridge (or at least their locations) are still in use as of 2013 -- the Red Rock Bridge still appears to be supporting the traffic of I-40 (although it may have been rebuilt -- it still is in the correct location with respect to the RR bridge), and the original 1916 bridge appears to now be supporting a pipeline.
In 2010, the National Park Service provided $65,000 in funding to the California Preservation Foundation to hire a consultant to begin documentation of the California's portion of the Route 66 corridor. The consultant will travel the Route 66 corridor from the Arizona border at Topock to Santa Monica and catalog the different roadside properties, such as diners, motels and attractions, and identify historic themes and key periods of significance. A chief goal for the consultant will be to complete at least one nomination for the National Register of Historic Places.
From Ludlow, US 66 ran along Curcero Road, National Old Tails Highway, Lavic Road, National Old Trails Highway (again) throug Newberry Springs, and then into Barstow along E. Main Street.
In Amboy, the current "Historic US 66" is along the National Old Trails Highway. However, where the motel and gas station in Amboy sit is the second incarnation of the route. To find the original, travelers must mosey about 200 yards south, to a gravel road behind a church that passes an old graveyard.
In Barstow, the route ran along Main Street.
From Barstow, US 66 ran cosigned with US 91 through Victorville and Cajon into San Bernardino. This segment was LRN 31, and corresponds to the present-day "National Trails Highway", D Street in Victorville, 7th Street in Victorville, and I-15 over the summit. It has been bypassed by present-day I-15 to Devore, and I-215 to San Bernardino. This section was defined in 1915. From 10 mi N of Cajon into San Bernardino, it was also cosigned with US 395. Note that from the Cleghorn Exit off I-15 to the Kenwood Avenue Exit, it ran along Cajon Blvd. It once again left the I-15 route (as Cajon Blvd again) at the Devore Road exit, running to Mt. Vernon Ave in San Bernardino.
In February 2016, it was noted that
there was an effort in place to bring more visibility to Historic Route 66. an
effort to create three national monuments in the high desert was brought to a
successful conclusion. One of these was the Mojave Trails monument, which
preserves the most pristine, undeveloped remaining stretch of historic Route
66. In 2008, the World Monuments Fund designated Route 66, along with such
world heritage sites as Machu Picchu and Shanghai, as a threatened resource on
their Watch List of 100 Most Endangered Sites. The monument protects a number
of stretches of us 66 between Needles and Barstow (as well as portions of US
95). The proclamation creating the monument noted:
(Source: Andy3175 @ AAroads, 2/14/2016; LA Times, 2/11/2016)
The Mojave Trails area has been a critical travel corridor for millennia, linking the Pacific Coast to the deserts of the southwest and beyond. The Mojave Indian Trail is the earliest known travel route passing through the Mojave Trails area, used by Native Americans for thousands of years and by early Spanish explorers and traders. In 1829, Mexican explorer Antonio Armijo pioneered the Old Spanish Trail through this area. Evidence of the trail, now designated a National Historic Trail, can still be found at Afton Canyon.
By the end of the 19th century, transcontinental rail travel had changed the American West in profound ways. In 1882, Southern Pacific constructed a railroad route from Barstow to Needles. In addition to the major rail stops established at Needles and Barstow, several smaller towns and rail stops were established along this stretch, including the alphabetically named Amboy, Bristol, Cadiz, Danby, Essex, Fenner, and Goffs. These towns remain, some as inhabited hamlets and others as abandoned ghost towns, and some historical artifacts from the original rail line still exist, including original rail ties and track and later improvements of communications poles, insulators, and wires.
A modest dirt road -- an original trackside component of the railroad project -- would later become the most famous highway in America. In 1911, in the infancy of the automobile era, the County of San Bernardino paved the first stretch of that road from Barstow to Needles. The next year, this stretch became part of the National Old Trails Road, which extended more than 3,000 miles from New York, New York, to Los Angeles, California, and connected the American coasts by pavement for the first time. In 1926, the road was officially designated as U.S. Highway 66, a designation soon known around the world as Route 66. During the 1930s, Route 66 became an important route for migrants escaping economic hardships of the Great Depression and droughts in the Central plains. As the national economy rebounded following World War II, Americans took to the highways in unprecedented numbers. The road became an American icon, earning the nickname the "Main Street of America" and inspiring popular culture through music, literature, and film.
The popularity of Route 66, however, hastened its downfall; increasing traffic quickly exceeded its two-lane capacity. In 1985, Route 66 was officially decommissioned, leaving behind a powerful albeit fragmented narrative history of America's automobile culture of the first half of the 20th century and its legacy of related commerce and architecture. The Mojave Trails area contains the longest remaining undeveloped stretch of Route 66, offering spectacular and serene desert vistas and a glimpse into what travelers experienced during the peak of the route's popularity in the mid-20th century. Today, the ghost towns along this stretch of Route 66 are a visual legacy of how the automobile shaped the American landscape.
In July 2016, it was reported that a mural on Main Street in Barstow that
featured painted wooden figures of notable celebrities who have passed through
Barstow along Route 66 was damaged (and hence will soon receive a face-lift).
The vandals damaged its standing wooden portion. The mural is painted on the
eastside portion of the Barstow Office Supply building owned by Fred and Sandy
Baca, located at 613 E. Main St. . Sandy Baca said she noticed the mural had
been damaged while driving home from church on June 26.
(Source: Desert Dispatch, 7/6/2016)
In October 2016, it was reported that construction of eight
classic-car-themed Route 66 signs was beginning in November 2016 in Barstow,
California. The signs will place vehicles popular on Route 66 during the 1950s
through the 1970s on a masonry base. The seven-foot-tall signs will light at
night, using solar energy. The project will cost the city $111,360. The signs
are part of a plan approved earlier this summer for Barstow’s Route 66
corridor — including 1950s color schemes — to encourage businesses
to be more attractive to Route 66 tourists. Colors in the plan include 1950s
hues such as aqua blue, grass green, hot-rod red, lemon yellow, dusk blue,
flamingo pink, sunset orange, toast brown, turquoise, avocado green and stone
gray. The plan also encourages historic preservation where applicable. The plan
suggests retro-themed new signs, Googie architecture, old-school facades, more
public art, and drought-tolerant trees to bring shade from the desert sun for
(Source: Route 66 News, 10/28/2016)
In August 2017, it was reported that a Route 66 enthusiast, with the help of
a gardening group, plans to plant 3,200 trees along Route 66 to honor veterans,
including more than 100 in Barstow, California. Funded by a $1 million grant
from CalFire, the multi-year project will honor military vets by planting over
3,000 trees along sections of Route 66 in the county. “In essence, each
tree will honor a veteran in our community,” IEGC Director Mary Petit
said during Monday’s City Council meeting. The trees, which Conkle said
will be primarily oak trees with other varieties, will include a memorial for
local veterans that consists of a concrete box embedded into the ground. A dog
tag with the name, rank, branch of military and years of service will be inside
the box, Conkle said, while a second dog tag will be given to the veteran or
veteran’s family. A GPS device will also be included. The first tree
planting along Route 66 will take place in September 2017 in Fontana,
California. Conkle told the newspaper he wants the Barstow planting to coincide
when the Military Vehicle Preservation Association rolls into town Oct. 11
during its Route 66 convoy. The entire Route 66 tree-planting project is
projected to take about three years, although that’s dependent on
(Source: Route 66 News, 8/28/2017)
In October 2015, it was reported that an interchange
project at I-15 and I-215 that will reconnect old Route 66 in San Bernardino
County is ahead of schedule for its projected completion of mid-2016. This will
result in about two miles of old Route 66 in the Cajon Pass being reopened to
traffic for the first time in decades. Commuters driving on Route 66 near the
interchange will no longer face a gap in the historic roadway from Kenwood
Avenue to Devore Road. Motorists should find less congestion along the old
Route 66. Caltrans isn’t reconnecting old Route 66 entirely out of the
good of its heart. The road will serve as an alternate route for when the
freeway is closed because of an accident.
(Source: Route 66 News, 10/17/2015)
In San Bernardino, US 66 left US 91 and US 395 (now I-215) and headed west along the present day Route 66 along 5th Street and Foothill Blvd. This was LRN 9. In terms of freeways, this route has been bypassed by I-10. This section was defined in 1909.
Route 66 currently terminates near the Foothill Freeway, I-210 (by 1963, LRN 240, duplicated by LRN 9). The original US 66 routing continued westward along Foothill, Alosta, Foothill (starting up again W of Glendora), Huntington, and Colorado Blvds. (LRN 9 along Foothill, and LRN 161 along Huntington). LRN 9 was defined in 1909. LRN 161 was defined in 1933, and LRN 240 was defined in 1959. After LRN 161 was defined, the parallel portion of LRN 9 was used for Route 118.
Note that there are true US 66 signs in Rialto, Rancho Cucamunga, and San Bernardino; specifically at the intersections with Mt. Vernon Avenue, Riverside Avenue, Citrus Avenue, Cherry Avenue, Etiwanda Avenue, Haven Avenue, and Archibald Avenue.
At the eastern edge of Pasadena, US 66 ran along Colorado Blvd (LRN 161), with the I-210 Freeway routing along LRN 240. Sparker at AAroads noted that there was an Alternate US 66 along Colorado Blvd. west of Fair Oaks Ave (LRN 9 turned north and NW along Sign Route 118) west to Figueroa St., where Alternate US 66 (along with Sign Route 11, which joined Alt. US 66 from Linda Vista Ave. south of the Rose Bowl) turned south (the whole of Sign Route 11 was LRN 165). LRN 161 continued west through Glendale and Burbank, signed as Route 134, originally terminating at US 101/LRN 2 in Sherman Oaks but cut back to Lankershim Blvd. (LRN 159) in North Hollywood circa 1957. The purpose of the 2nd section of LRN 161 was simply to straighten out the alignment of US 66 in the Pasadena/Arcadia area.
In June 2017, there was an article on an unusual concrete highway marker on
former US 66, at Colorado and Holliston Streets in Pasadena. The marker is a
3-foot tall concrete tablet that looks like a tombstone. On the face of the
concrete tablet is the number 11 with a circle around it, the numbers 220 and
200, and the letters “F” and “B.” The marker is the
only remant of a county house addressing system proposed by Albert Bancroft.
Implementation of the system included concrete milestones, which identified the
name of the road and the distance from the county courthouse, which was the
starting point for the numbering system. By 1908, work was completed on six
major thoroughfares, including Foothill Boulevard. So the number 11 with a
circle around it tells us that we are 11 miles from the old county courthouse
– today the site of the Foltz Criminal Court Building in downtown L.A.
The “F” and the “B?” They tell us that we are on the
old Foothill Boulevard Route. And the 220 and 200 tell us the block numbers.
(Source: Hidden History of LA, 6/8/2017)
Before the construction of the Pasadena Freeway, US 66 ran S along Figueroa
(LRN 165, defined in 1933) to US 101 (LRN 2). Once the freeway was completed,
the prior routing was resigned as Alternate US 66, and US 66 was resigned to
run S on Fair Oak to pick up the freeway, and then S on the Pasadena Freeway
(Route 11, cosigned in portions with US 6, LRN 205, defined in 1935) to US 101.
Note: Until 1935, the western terminus of US 66 was on Broadway Street in
downtown Los Angeles at 7th Street which carried US 101 at the time. The very
early state maintained alignment of US 66 and US 101 can be seen on the 1935
California Division of Highways map of Los Angles County. In October 1935, CHPW
reported that US 66 had been extended from Sunset Blvd in Los Angeles to Santa
Monica via Santa Monica Blvd. Note that there were a variety of end-points for US
66 during the 1930s.
(Sources: Various, Sure Why Not? Route 66)
By 1936, US 66 then ran NW on US 101 (LRN 2, defined in 1909) to Santa Monica Blvd. At Santa Monica, US 66 exited and continued W to Santa Monica. In 1936, it terminated at Lincoln and Olympic. There is a plaque at the Palisades Bluffs at Ocean Avenue (LRN 162, defined in 1933) where Santa Monica Blvd meets Ocean commemorationg the end of US 66, the "Will Rogers Highway", "Main Street of the USA", but this is not the official terminus (just near it).
Here's some more historical information, courtesy of Jim Powell of the Route 66 Association in Missouri:
The original routing of U.S. 66 through Pasadena was part of LRN 9, which was defined in 1909 as one of the very early state highways in California resulting from the first State Highway Bond Act, for $18,000,000, issued in 1909 to establish a State Highway system. The routing of LRN 9 (US 66) through Pasadena was: right on Shamrock Ave. in Monrovia, left on Foothill Blvd. through Arcadia into Pasadena, left on Santa Anita Ave. right on Colorado Street and left on Fair Oaks Ave.
There were attempts to reroute this highway from this original routing, due to a job in Arcadia. In a letter dated January 29, 1932, from Wm. Dunkerley, Secretary and Manager of the Pasadena Chamber of Commerce & Civic Association, to W.C. Markham, Executive Secretary of AASHTO, there is the statement: We have made request upon the State Highway Engineer at Sacramento for a rerouting of U. S. 66 into Pasadena from Arcadia in order that a road jog in this highway might be avoided.
Markham replied on February 4, 1932, as follows: I have your letter of January 29th, in reference to re-routing U.S. 66 into Pasadena from Arcadia. I do not know what reference is made by the State Highway Engineer of your State in reference to a ruling we have made that would not permit your request being approved. Your letter gives so little information that I am not able to judge what the controversy is.
On March 9, 1932, Dunkerley responded to Markham as follows: Replying to your most recent inquiry, what we are most interested in is to provide the most convenient and easily accessible route into and through Pasadena. The enclosed map, while but a sketch, will explain what we have in mind. The route in red indicates the present routing of U. S. 66 into and through Pasadena [The routing shown as north on Santa Anita in Arcadia, west on Foothill Blvd, south on Santa Anita in Pasadena and west on Colorado Street]; the blue indicates what we consider the most practical and convenient. [This route was straight through on Huntington Drive into Colorado Street.] We would like to know whether or not this can be accomplished. The State Highway Engineer has advised us that it is not within his power owing to a rule of your Association.
On March 15, 1932, Markham wrote the following to Dunkerley: I wish to acknowledge receipt of your letter of March 9th, in reference to your proposed rerouting of U.S. 66 through the City of Pasadena. I wish to say that as far as the routing of a U.S. Number through a city is concerned that is a detail to be worked out entirely by the State Highway Department of the State involved.
On August 21, 1933, pursuant to a letter and resolution dated August 16, 1933, the California Legislature, in accordance with Section 363r of the Political Code, Chapter 326, approved LRN 161 in Los Angeles County. LRN 161 was 17 miles in length, and described as: "State Highway Route 4 [LRN 4] near Glendale to State Highway Route 9 [LRN 9] near Monrovia. This connection carries from the San Fernando Road northwest approach to Los Angeles due easterly to the Foothill Boulevard, passing through and serving large communities on direct routing. The western terminus is on Southern Pacific shipping and passenger point, and at a point correlated with continuous routings to the Ventura Boulevard and to Santa Monica that will facilitate such movement. The route affects intercounty traffic as well as local.". This says the highway is from San Fernando Road (US 99) in Glendale to Shamrock Ave. in Monrovia along Colorado Blvd./Street into Huntington Drive. This road was signed as Route 134, and the parallel portion of LRN 9 on Foothill Blvd. was signed as Route 118. Colorado Street in Pasadena was also dual signed as US 66 at this time.
On June 17, 1935, the AASHTO minutes simply state that: "US 66 was extended from Los Angeles to Santa Monica." The effective date of the change was January 1, 1936. As for the end in Santa Monica: on June 14, 1935, Purcell wrote Markham as follows: There are attached eighteen copies of detailed description with sketches showing proposed routing of Extension of US Highway No. 66 from Los Angeles to Santa Monica.
This extension as shown in description is recommended for approval.
Here's the description, as submitted:
PROPOSED EXTENSION OF US 66 DISTRICT 711 TO SANTA MONICA
Beginning at the intersection of North Broadway and Sunset Boulevard, the junction of US 66, US 99, and US 101, in the City of Los Angeles; thence, northwesterly over Sunset Boulevard (State Highway Route 2) and US 101 to Santa Monica Boulevard; thence, westerly over Santa Monica Boulevard (a city street) to Myra Avenue, the junction of State Highway 162 [LRN 162] and Sign Route (2) [Route 2]; thence, continuing westerly over Santa Monica Boulevard (State Highway Route 162 [LRN 162]) and Sign Route (2) [Route 2] through the Cities of Los Angeles and Beverly Hills to the intersection of Santa Monica Boulevard and Lincoln Boulevard, in the City of Santa Monica; thence, southerly along Lincoln Boulevard to the terminus at Pennsylvania Avenue, a total distance of approximately 13.00 miles.
Remember, in 1935, Olympic Boulevard had been approved as LRN 173, but had not been constructed. This road was later marked as Route 26. If, however one was to draw a line from Pennsylvania Ave. to the junction of LRN 162 (Route 2 and US 66) with LRN 60 (Route 1 and US 101A) at Lincoln Blvd., the points would match. The highway department obviously used Pennsylvania Ave. as the point of reference since Olympic Blvd. did not yet exist.
Arroyo Seco Parkway
On September 7, 1940, Purcell (Dept. of Highways) wrote Markham (AASHTO) as follows: Pursuant to the Purpose and Policy of the American Association of State Highway Officials in the establishment of US Numbered Highways, we hereby make formal application to change the route of US 66 between Pasadena and Los Angeles, from Colorado and Figueroa Streets to the Arroyo Seco Parkway, and to designate the existing route between these points as US 66 ALTERNATE.
The proposed new route, which is expected to be opened to traffic next New Year's Day, shortens the distance by approximately 2.35 miles, and affords travel a new freeway consisting of a six lane divided highway.
As the motoring public will be better served by using this new thoroughfare, permission is requested to place US 66 ALTERNATE markers on the present routing [From Colorado Street and Broadway In Pasadena, easterly along Colorado Street to Figueroa Street thence southerly along Figueroa Street to the Arroyo Seco Parkway in Los Angeles], and to erect US 66 signs on the Arroyo Seco Parkway."
On October 9, 1940, Markham replied to Purcell as follows: We have your letter of September 7 in reference to re-routing locally U.S. 66 between Pasadena and Los Angeles.
In view of the fact that the slight change you proposed to make in this routing does not involve any key points in the description, it will not be necessary to file this request with the Committee. It might be well, however, for us to notify the map makers as to when it will go into effect, in case they give a local enlargement of the routing in metropolitan Los Angeles.
The portion of the current Route 66 (CA 66) in Los Angeles County is unsigned. With respect to the former US 66 routing, some cities are now using using the "Historic US 66" signage. Monrovia is an exception; they are using an old-style cut-out U.S. highway shield (i.e., the shield that includes the state name). In Glendora, they have renamed Alosta Avenue as Route 66.
This route is part of "Historic Highway Route 66", designated by Assembly Concurrent Resolution 6, Chapter 52, in 1991.
In October 2016, the CTC authorized relinquishment of right of way in the city of San Bernardino along Route 215 from 2nd Street to 16th Street and on Route 66 (“H” Street) from 4th Street to 6th Street (08-SBd-215-PM 6.8/7.6, and 08-SBd-66-PM S23.16/S23.41), consisting of superseded highway and collateral facilities. The City, by freeway agreement dated January 21, 2003, agreed to accept title upon relinquishment by the State. The 90-day notice period expired August 29, 2016.
In April 2016, it was reported that Barstow, with the help from a
committee made up of community stakeholders, is working on a Downtown/Route 66
Specific Plan. The city hired a company called MIG to help develop the plan,
which is supposed to set a vision for growth and revitalization along the
city's historic Route 66 business corridor and within the downtown business and
cultural district. The plan includes goals, policies, action strategies,
development standards and design guidelines with the goal of drawing more
visitors to Barstow's segment of Route 66. The plan addresses a lot of
appearance issues and suggests adding more color to the area. Signs and
lighting are also addressed. The draft plan, however, also involves investment
by the city and California. Directional and landmark signs play a major role.
There are five proposed locations for directional signs to downtown Barstow.
There are three sign locations along I-15 to notify motorists of upcoming
off-ramps to the Barstow Factory Outlets and downtown, a directional sign
located on Route 58 prior to the Main Street exit and one directional sign
location on I-40 to alert motorists of the Main Street exit. The city is also
getting ready to install eight automobile-themed signs down the Route 66
corridor. He said each one will have certain classic cars on them. The draft
plan also suggests bringing back the neon signs to increase visibility for
businesses. The businesses are also encouraged to incorporate art into
(Source: Victorville Daily Press, 4/23/2016; Route 66 News, 5/4/2016)
There may be a risk to the section of former US 66 near Amboy, due to potential expansion of the Marine Corps base in the 29 Palms area. In August of 2008, the U.S. Marine Corps filed with the Bureau of Land Management for the withdrawal of 422,000 acres contiguous with the Twentynine Palms base in San Bernardino County. These lands were being considered for a possible base expansion, and are a mixture of private property, wildlife reserves, BLM lands and State recreation areas. The proposal for the eastern expansion would extend northward to the southern edge of the National Trails/Route 66 highway, on the alignment loop south of I-40, just east of Bagdad and Amboy. The expansion, if executed, would remove the entirety of Amboy Crater from public access. More information from the neighbors in the area can be found at the Desert Neighbors Site. Later reports indicate that the current EIS seems to have abandoned expansion to the north in favor of expansion to the west and a small piece to the south.
In March 2017, it was reported that San Bernardino County Public Works
will be constructing two new bridges and road improvements on National Trails
Highway (Former US 66) at Dola Ditch (2.08 miles east of Kelbaker Road) and
Lanzit Ditch (2.77 miles east of Kelbaker Road), east of the community of
Amboy. The construction will include removing the existing timber bridges and
constructing new timber bridges. A portion of National Trails Highway will be
closed at all times to through traffic, including emergency vehicles. Traffic
will be routed around the construction on public streets and highways. The
detour plan includes using I-40 and Kelbaker Road. Local residents and
businesses will have access from Essex Road west to the construction site, but
there will be no traffic through the construction site. Construction of the
project is tentatively scheduled to start in March 2017 and run through
mid-September 2017. The release noted the replacement of two bridges is part of
a long-term plan to replace 127 bridges along the Former US 66 corridor in the
Mojave Desert. Many of the bridges are 80 to 90 years old and are deemed
functionally obsolete and structurally deficient. This is the second extended
closure of Former US 66 in the Mojave in recent years. Flash flooding in
September 2014 damaged dozens of bridges and the roadway itself, forcing San
Bernardino to close Former US 66 for months. It took six months for the county
to reopen just the 28-mile part of the road from Ludlow to Amboy. To this day,
a part of National Trails Highway from Exit 115 of I-40 to just east of Essex
remains closed because of the damage. Most Former US 66 travelers, however, go
to Essex through Goffs Road and the roadside town of Fenner.
(Source: Route 66 News, 3/2/2017)
This route (both present-day Route 66 and as historic US 66)
was part of the "Arrowhead Trail (Ocean to Ocean Trail)". It was named
by Resolution Chapter 369 in 1925.
This route (both present-day Route 66 and as historic US 66) was
part of the "National Old Trails Road".
This route (both present-day Route 66 and as historic US 66) was
part of the "Santa Fe Trail".
This route (both present-day Route 66 and as historic US 66) appears to have been part of the "National Park to Park Highway", and the "Pikes Peak Ocean to Ocean Highway".
Overall statistics for Route 66:
The route that would become LRN 66 was first defined in 1921 by Chapter 845, which called for the transfer and conveyance to the state of “... that certain road situated in the county of San Joaquin ... to wit: Beginning at a point on the W boundary of the city of Manteca, and on the township line between T1S and T2S, R7E, Mt Diablo base and meridian, and running thence W on the township line to the W side of the Southern Pacific RR RoW to the state highway at the Mossdale School...” In 1933, the route was extended from [LRN 4] near Manteca to [LRN 13] near Oakdale. In 1935, it was captured into the state highway code as:
In 1961, Chapter 1146 combined the segments and changed the western end to Route 238 near Mossdale, making the definition "[LRN 238] near Mossdale to [LRN 13] near Oakdale via the vicinity of Manteca."
LRN 238 was the routing for the eventual freeway I-5 (Westside Alignment), and LRN 66 started a few miles E of Tracy (near the present I-205/I-5 junction). Before LRN 238 was defined, this route started at LRN 5, which was US 50. The route (LRN 66) ran to LRN 13, which was Route 108 (unsigned in 1934). LRN 66 was signed as Route 120 from the start of state signage in 1934.
This route remains as defined in 1963.
This once followed Magnolia Avenue N of El Cajon. It was signed as Route 67, and was LRN 198, defined in 1933. It was not numbered as part of the 1934 state numbering, but was signed by 1953.
Route 67 Median Barriers (~ SD 15.068)
In August 2013, the CTC received notice of prepartion of an Environmental Impact Report. The proposed project in San Diego County will construct safety improvements on Route 67 near the city of Poway (approx SD 15.068) (roughly between Rosemont and Moreno). The project is programmed in the 2012 State Highway Operation and Protection Program. The total estimated cost is $49,183,000 for capital and support. Construction is estimated to begin in Fiscal Year 2015-16. The scope, as described for the preferred alternative, is consistent with the project scope programmed by the Commission in the 2012 State Highway Operation and Protection Program. Alternatives for the project include:
In September 2013, it was reported that the Caltrans was studying whether to build median barriers along a 12-mile stretch of the Route 67 between Willow Road in Lakeside (approx SD R6.22) and Shady Oaks Drive in Ramona (approx SD 19.041) . Barriers would reduce head-on collisions, but would create a the vast inconvenience for thousands of people who live off cross streets or have driveways along the highway. Barriers would mean those residents would have to make right turns and possibly drive for miles before being able to make a U-turn and head back in the direction they intended. Barriers are also a concern when it comes to evacuating Ramona during a wild fire.
In December 2016, it was reported that Caltrans had
introduced the Route 67 Centerline Project that proposes to install
"channelizers” between Willow Road in Lakeside and Shady Oaks Drive in
Ramona. The project is also set to install outside shoulder rumble strips and
fixed changeable message signs with closed-circuit cameras that will monitor
the highway. Members of the public who expressed an opinion were largely
skeptical about the effectiveness of channelizers, which are 3-inch
solid-polyurethane posts that can bounce back after impacts from a vehicle
traveling up to 100 mph. Many preferred a fixed-concrete or movable zipper-type
barrier that would keep incidents confined to one direction of traffic and help
reduce head-on collisions, several of which have resulted in major injuries and
deaths along Route 67 this year. One of the presenters noted that there are 39
driveways that would be impacted if a fixed-barrier centerline were
(Source: Ramona Home Journal, 12/15/2016)
In May 2017, it was reported that Ramona Community
Planning Group members have warmed to the idea of a centerline concrete barrier
-- specifically, because in the 1,640 feet on Route 67 between Cloudy Moon
Drive and Rockhouse Road, over the past 30 years there have been 74 accidents,
12 fatalities, 52 persons transported to the hospital, 19 major traumas, one
person paralyzed, and one person burned to death. To help prevent head-on
collisions on Route 67, Caltrans is starting its channelizer project —
installing flexible yellow posts down the centerline of the highway between
Willow Road in Lakeside and Shady Oaks Road in Ramona. Four years ago, Caltrans
discussed concrete barriers with the planning group but said they could block
driveways, restrict line of sight, and cause problems for emergency responders.
The Planning Group is only asking for K-rails in the area of the curve.
(Source: Ramona Sentinal/San Diego U-T, 5/10/2017)
The SAFETEA-LU act, enacted in August 2005 as the reauthorization of TEA-21, provided the following expenditures on or near this route:
What is a side effect of a barrier? It is harder to cross the street. At the
end of December 2017, it was reported that a vision hatched nearly three years
ago to create an interconnected trail system that stretches across much of the
county inched ahead with a December of the Poway City Council. Officials agreed
to fund the creation of designs for a pedestrian tunnel that would be built
beneath Route 67 just north of the intersection of Poway Road and the highway
(~ SD 15.241). The designs, which will cost the city $22,000, with half that
amount being reimbursed by the county, would then be submitted as part of a
state grant application. Should the California Department of Transportation
make the funding available, the tunnel could be built, thereby connecting
Poway’s trail systems from the Mt. Woodson/Potato Chip Rock west of the
highway with the Iron Mountain trails system to the east. But the vision that
has the tunnel at its core is far greater. The dream is then to purchase about
800 acres of privately owned land near Iron Mountain, and to extend the trail
system to Dos Picos County Park in Ramona. Originally, the concept was to build
a pedestrian/wildlife bridge over the highway, but Caltrans nixed that concept,
saying it would cause visual problems for motorists approaching the Poway Road
intersection. It’s not known how much it would cost to construct the
tunnel, but it is expected to be “significantly less” than the $6
million estimated to build a bridge, said Bob Manis, the city’s director
of development services.
(Source: San Diego Union Tribune, 12/27/2017)
In April 2018, it was reported that two car lanes on southbound Route 67
from Archie Moore Road (~ SD R18.55) to the Cal Fire station (~ SD R18.117) are
being reduced to one lane to widen the adjacent shoulder as part of $1.5
million in projects intended to make the highway safer. The lane reduction by
Caltrans is designed to give bicyclists more space to maneuver around cars
parked near Mt. Woodson. The lane widening increases the previous 8-foot
shoulder width by 2 to 4 feet, with 12-foot shoulder widths installed where
cars turn in and out at the Mt. Woodson intersection. As part of the lane
reduction, three white “lane drop arrows” were painted on Route 67
to indicate to drivers they should be merging to the left lane and not passing
other vehicles. Ramona and county leaders are seeking other solutions to
hazardous parking conditions near the Mt. Woodson trail off Route 67. Included
in the improvements package is the addition of high-friction surface treatments
on the Route 67 pavement at the Archie Moore, Cloudy Moon, Poway Road and
Scripps Poway Parkway intersections. Drivers will notice the black pavement
transitioning to the grey high-friction surface treatment at these four
intersections along with high-intensity yellow lines in the centerline down the
length of Route 67 that can be seen at night and even in fog. On the northbound
side of Route 67, two lanes were turned into one at Archie Moore Road on March
28 to adjust for a curve. A turning lane at Archie Moore Road was also made
safer by separating a turn pocket from the traffic lane with white chevrons
indicating space between the two lanes.
(Source: Ramona Sentinel, 4/4/2018)
In December 2017, it was reported that, in an effort to improve safety on
Route 67, Ramona Community Planning Group unanimously approved sending a letter
to Caltrans recommending cautionary signs be placed along the roadway. In two
separate actions, group members on Dec. 7 first agreed to seek signage stating
“No Unsafe Passing on the Right” based on laws cited in California
Vehicle Codes 21754 and 21755. Then planners recommended that other signage be
installed to warn drivers on the southbound side of Route 67 before the Airmail
Lane curve ( SD 19.844) that the line of sight for vehicles turning left may be
insufficient for approaching vehicles to make a safe stop behind them. Planning
group members, however, stopped short of recommending the speed limit be
reduced from 55 mph to 45 mph on the stretch of road from Cloudy Moon Drive to
Mussey Grade Road. With only 10 planning group members present, the vote was
evenly split 5-5. At least 8 votes are required for approval.
(Source: San Diego Union Tribune, 12/13/2017)
This is named the "San Vicente" Freeway.
The segment of this route between I-8 and Mapleview St. in Lakeside (~ SD R0.000 to SD R5.496) is named the "CHP Officer Christopher D. Lydon Memorial Freeway". Officer Lydon died in the line of duty at the age of 27 while attempting to apprehend a drunk driver on SB Route 67 at Riverford Road in the town of Lakeside on June 5, 1998. Named by Assembly Concurrent Resolution No. 53, Resolution Chapter 88, signed 8/26/1999.
The entirety of Route 67 is designated "Historic Highway Route 67". Route 67 originally followed an ancient Kumeyaay Native American trail through the eastern part of the County of San Diego to the Laguna Mountains that provided an efficient system of communication and trade among the Kumeyaay villages that existed along that route. This route was later catalogued by Spanish explorers, the regional owners of Mexican ranchos, and the United States military, who followed it up and over Mission Valley’s eastern rim and down into the El Cajon Valley. By 1872, the “Julian road,” as Route 67 was known back then, was used for stagecoaches. The road was realigned in 1885 in what was known as the Bernardo District onto private property, where it passed through farms and was buttressed with granite the greater part of the way, continuing through vineyards towards the town of Ramona. Not until 1876, when new commercial buildings, collectively known as “Knox’s Corners,” were built in El Cajon Valley by former Maine resident, Amaziah Knox, did the direction of the old trail begin to change in that area, with new roadways laid out in a traditional American grid pattern that would cover and eventually erase the original route. At the turn of the 20th Century, the historic road that became Route 67 also served as a railroad corridor for the San Diego, Cuyamaca, and Eastern Railroad from the City of San Diego through the City of El Cajon to the town of Foster, northeast of the town of Lakeside. This rail line was built in the 1880s to accommodate the state’s second gold rush and carried miners and goods from today’s San Diego Gaslamp District to and through Lemon Grove, La Mesa, and El Cajon Valley to Lakeside’s end-of-the-line Foster station. In 1896, a stagecoach line connected the terminus of the railroad line in the town of Foster to the town of Julian, and transported San Diego newspapers to the town of Ramona by 2:30 p.m. each day. In 1926, the County of San Diego declared the Julian road a county boulevard, meaning that vehicles were required to stop before entering the highway, and the road that became Route 67 was added to the state highway system in 1933, from the City of El Cajon to near the unincorporated community of Santa Ysabel. Route 67 begins today in the City of El Cajon at the interchange with I-8 near the Chase Avenue exit and runs north for approximately 24 miles to an intersection with Route 78 in the unincorporated community of Ramona, starting as the San Vicente Freeway before becoming an undivided highway in Lakeside. Route 67 is a significant transportation corridor with abundant natural, cultural, historic, and scenic qualities. It was named by Senate Concurrent Resolution 56, Resolution Chapter 177, 9/22/2017.
The following segments are designated as Classified Landscaped Freeway:
|County||Route||Starting PM||Ending PM|
[SHC 253.1] Entire route; constructed to freeway standards from Route 8 to Lakeside. Added to the Freeway and Expressway system in 1959.
Overall statistics for Route 67:
The route that became LRN 67 was first defined in 1921 by Chapter 836, which declared and established as a state highway "That certain highway beginning at the south abutment of a bridge across the Pajaro River (said bridge being 1.125 mi SE of Chittenden Station on the California Central RR) and continuing in a general SE-ly direction for approx 3.1 to a point on LRN 2 in the vicinity of the San Benito River Bridge, all lying in San Benito County..." In 1933, it was extended from [LRN 67] near Chittenden to the Coast Road near Watsonville. In 1935, it was codified into the highway code as:
This definition remained unchanged until the 1963 renumbering. This route was not signed in the 1934 numbering; it is present day Route 129.
(a) (1) From Asilomar State Beach to Route 1.
(b) (1) Upon a determination by the commission that it is in the best interests of the state to do so, the commission may, upon terms and conditions approved by it, relinquish to the City of Pacific Grove or the County of Monterey the portion of Route 68 described in paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) located within the jurisdiction of the city or the unincorporated area of the county, respectively, if the department and the city or county 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 concerning the commission’s approval of the terms and conditions of the relinquishment.
(3) On and after the effective date of the relinquishment, both of the following shall occur:
(A) The portion of Route 68 relinquished under this subdivision shall cease to be a state highway.
(B) The portion of Route 68 relinquished under this subdivision shall be ineligible for future adoption under Section 81.
(4) The city or county shall ensure the continuity of traffic flow on the relinquished former portion of Route 68 within its jurisdiction, including, but not limited to, any traffic signal progression.
(5) The city or county shall maintain signs on the relinquished former portion of Route 68 within its jurisdiction directing motorists to the continuation of Route 68.
As defined in 1963, this segment ran from "Asilomar Beach State Park to Route 1"
In 1992, Chapter 1243 changed "Beach State Park" to "State Beach"
In 2013, Chapter 525 (SB 788, 10/9/13) added section (b) permitting relinquishment of segment (1) in the City of Pacific Grove or the County of Monterey.
This segment was LRN 262, defined in 1959. It was not signed as part of the initial 1934 state signing. It was also not part of the 1961 definition of state sign Route 68. In late 1964, the CHC adopted 4.1 miles of local roads and streets in the Monterey-Pacific Grove area as a new section of Route 68, extending between Route 1 at the Carmel Hill Interchange and Asilomar Beach State Park.
The route ends at Asilomar State Beach, which is part of the Asilomar Conference Center. This center was built in 1913 by the YWCA, and was deeded to the State of California Park System in 1956.
Holman Roundabout Interchange Improvements (~ MON L4.214)
In July 2005, the CTC considered funding to widen from 2 lanes to 4 lanes and improve intersection on Route 68 west of Community Hospital of Monterey Peninsula entrance to Route 1/Route 68 Junction.
In June 2009, the CTC approved for future consideration of funding a project that will widen and upgrade Route 68 from just west of the Community Hospital of Monterey entrance to the Route 1/Route 68 interchange. The project is not fully funded. The project is programmed in the 2008 State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) for $100,000 for right of way. The project is proposed to be funded primarily by private development sources, the City of Monterey, and future Transportation Agency for Monterey County STIP shares. The total estimated cost is $21,170,000, capital and support. Depending on the availability of funding, construction is estimated to begin in Fiscal Year 2010-11.
In January 2018, it was reported that a
ribbon-cutting ceremony occured for the completion of the Holman Highway 68
Roundabout Project was held on Thursday, October 12, 2017. Elected officials,
community members and representatives from the Transportation Agency for
Monterey County, Caltrans, Harris & Associates, Granite Construction,
Pebble Beach Company, Community Hospital of the Monterey Peninsula and the
Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District, gathered on the sidewalk
near the roundabout to celebrate the occasion. The project which was a
public-private partnership between the City of Monterey, City of Pacific Grove,
Pebble Beach Company, the Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District,
the County of Monterey, Caltrans and TAMC was designed to relieve congestion
near the Route 68/Route 1 intersection and improve access to the Community
Hospital, Pacific Grove, Monterey and Pebble Beach. It is the first highway to
highway roundabout in Monterey County.
(Source: Transporation Agency for Monterey County, January 2018)
David Markowitz reported an interesting missignage on Route 68. Apparently, either a contractor or a guerilla art project has put up a "Historic Route 68" sign...with the wrong shield, on a segment that has never been authorized for historic signing. It is unclear where the sign came from.
This segment is named "W. R. Holman Highway". Named in honor of
Wilford R. Holman. Holman was the son of Rensselaer Luther Holman, who was born
in Underhill, Vermont, and first came to California around the Horn in 1850. He
had developed a hardware and implement business in Sacramento but in 1886 he
moved to Pacific Grove where, in 1891 in company with G. W, Towle, he developed
a department store which later, under the ownership of Holman's sons, Wilford
and Clarence, became Holman's Department Store. In 1985 the store was purchased
by a Watsonville department store and today is known as Ford's of Monterey Bay.
W. R. Holman also became know for his interest in holly. At Holly Hills Ranch,
near Watsonville, Santa Cruz County, he turned his hobby into the largest
single planting of holly in the world. He was born August 28, 1884, and died
December 1981. Holman married Zena Patrick in 1912; she died in 1980. The
highway was named in 1976. As for the road itself, Holman and Julia Platt were
largely responsible for advocating the creation of a new road to improve travel
between Carmel and Pacific Grove. The highway had other names such as the
Pacific Grove 'cut off' or the "Carmel Cut-Off".
[Thanks to the Monterey/Carmel Historical Society for this information.]
(a) (2) From Monterey to Route 101 in Salinas.
As defined in 1963, this segment ran to "Route 101 near Salinas". In 1992, Chapter 1243 changed "near Salinas" to "in Salinas"
This is constructed to freeway standards for 2 miles either direction from the Salinas River Bridge south of Salinas. The original plan was to construct a freeway alignment bypassing Salinas to the west, then rejoining the current Route 68 alignment (Main Street) at Hunters Lane. The routing would have involved a split with the US 101 freeway one mile northwest of the current Main Street (Business Route 101/Route 183) interchange, close to the current Laurel Drive/Davis Road interchange. Route 68 would have continued south on Davis Road past Blanco Road, at which point it would turn southeast to meet up with Main Street, then continue southwest on Main Street from Hunters Lane to the current freeway alignment. Two vestiges of this planned routing remain in Salinas:
According to Sean Torgson, the sign bridges on US 101 in Salinas, before the Route 68 exit, have an off-centered control destination that reads 'Monterey Pennisula'. In one case it looks as if a potential Route 68 shield is covered up w/ a 'RAMP 25 MPH' sign. He speculates that this to directly connect to a Route 68 freeway, but since it wasn't constructed, they left the shields off.
This route was LRN 117, defined in 1933. It was not signed as part of the initial 1934 state signing. Sign Route 68 was defined by the CHC in 1961. Max R. over on the Sure Why Not? Blog investigated the history of LRN 117, and noted the following:
In August 2011, the CTC approved $3,478,000 in SHOPP funding for repairs near the city of Monterey, from Route 1 to 0.3 mile west of Laureless Grade (~ MON R4.000 to MON 10.917), that will rehabilitate 13.7 lane miles of roadway to improve the ride quality and prevent further deterioration of the road surface.
The 2018 STIP, approved at the CTC March 2018 meeting, appears to allocate $8,400K for PPNO 1790, Rt 68 Op Improvements,Josselyn Cnyn-Spreckels Blvd, ~ MON 5.227 to MON R18.077.
Corral de Tierra Project (PM MON 12.8/13.2)
In June 2013, the CTC approved delaying RIP funding for construction from FY 2013-14 to FY 2014-15 for the Route 68 Safety and Operations Corral de Tierra project (PPNO 1813A) in Monterey County. This project will construct turn lanes, shoulder widening and driveway realignment at the Corral de Tierra Road intersection. It is programmed with $1,700,000 of RIP funds for construction in FY 2013-14.
In March 2016, the CTC approved for future consideration of funding a project that will construct turn lanes, merge lanes, and other improvements to the intersection of Route 68 and Corral de Tierra Road near the city of Salinas. The project is programmed in the State Transportation Improvement Program. The total estimated cost is $2,250,000 for capital and support. Construction is estimated to begin in Fiscal Year 2016-17. The scope, as described for the preferred alternative, is consistent with the project scope programmed by the Commission in the 2014 State Transportation Improvement Program. A copy of the MND has been provided to Commission staff. The project will result in less than significant impacts to the environment after mitigation. The following resource area may be impacted by the project: biological resources. Avoidance and minimization measures will reduce any potential effects on the environment. These measures include, but are not limited to, ESA fencing to be installed around sensitive areas, project area will be revegetated with native species, preconstruction surveys to be conducted for nesting birds and estivating California tiger salamanders, and loss of California tiger salamander habitat to be mitigated at a 1:1 ratio. As a result, an MND was completed for this project.
In June 2017, the CTC approved delaying construction on this project until FY 2017-18 to 2018-19. The environmental document was completed in 2015, the design is 95 percent complete and right of way is nearly complete. There is currently a corridor study for Route 68 that encompasses this project. The study addresses the ultimate needs and improvements for the corridor. The county was successful in November 2016 in passage of a measure to fund transportation projects, which included $50 million for this project location. With the passage of the measure, there is the desire to delay the construction of the project to allow time to assess the study and determine if there is an opportunity for leveraging additional funds for ultimate improvements in the corridor. In order to review and consider the corridor study, the county along with TAMC are requesting to move construction. This change could further benefit the corridor by allowing the parties to consider options with the current project scope, as well as coordinate with the corridor study, and facilitating the potential to match funds and opportunities for enhancement for the ultimate improvements.
The 2018 STIP, approved at the CTC March 2018 meeting, appears to delete $1,700K in funding from the Corral de Tierra Project. The project will improve safety and traffic flow at the Highway 68 and Corral De Tierra intersection by adding dual left turn lanes from westbound Hwy 68, adding a southbound merge lane and a northbound right turn lane on Corral De Tierra, and adding a fourth leg to the intersection.
In July 2010, the CTC approved for future consideration of funding a project that will construct roadway improvements including intersection improvements and bridge widening at San Benancio Road (~ MON 13.289) near the city of Monterey. The project is programmed in the 2010 State Transportation Improvement Program and includes local funds. Construction is estimated to begin in Fiscal Year 2010-11. Total estimated project cost is $5,401,000 for capital and support.
In October 2012, the CTC approved for future consideration of funding 05-Mon-68, PM 17.7/17.9 Route 68 Salinas River Bridge Widening Project. This project in Monterey County will bring the Salinas River Bridge up to current geometric and seismic standards by widening shoulders, adding approach and departure slabs, improving acceleration and weaving lane geometry, improving the bridge railing, seismically retrofitting the bridge, and providing maintenance access to the river bottom.
In May 2015, it was reported that Caltrans has Sustainable Transportation Planning Grant funding to the Transportation Agency for Monterey County for its State Route 68 Corridor Plan, which will determine operational and capacity improvements affordable over the next 5 to 20 years that contribute to the long-range sustainability of Route 68.
The segment of Route 68 between Anza Drive in the County of Monterey and
Blanco Road in the City of Salinas (~ MON 15.896 to MON 19.955) is officially
named the "Ohlone Costanoan Esselen Highway." It was named in honor of
the Esselen people, who have been indigenous to the Greater Monterey County
area for more than 10,000 years.From their known ancestral tribal villages from
the coast and inland, the Esselen people hunted, traded, and lived peacefully
together, and are known today as the Ohlone Costanoan Esselen Nation. The
Esselen people lived from Big Sur on the Pacific Coast to the Pajaro River to
Fremont Peak to Salinas and the Pinnacles caves, across the fertile valley to
Arroyo Seco, up to Monterey, Carmel, and back to Big Sur, where they built a
vibrant, healthy, and culturally rich society. For generations, their ancestors
maintained strong family and kinship ties through tribal and family gatherings,
weddings, baptisms, funerals, and other family events. Their cultural ties have
bound their tribe and families for generation after generation. Since the
arrival of Europeans, California Indians have endured a long and
well-documented history of change forced by assimilation and discrimination.
The Esselen people were forced from their ancestral lands and into starvation
and illness; to survive they hid in local mountains and canyons known today as
Palo Colorado, Ventana Wilderness, Arroyo Seco, Tassajara, Pinnacles, Chualar
Canyon, Prunedale Canyon, Corral de Tierra, Fort Ord, Santa Lucia, and El
Portero. In 1883, the Esselen people were formally recognized by Special Agents
Helen Hunt Jackson and Abbott Kinney of the Bureau of Indian Affairs, and in
1906 were placed under the jurisdiction of the Bureau of Indian Affairs,
Washington, D.C., and became known as the Monterey Band of Monterey County
specifically identifying Tom Santos Miranda and his family. Frequent
communication was vital to tribal society. Esselen ancestors developed roads by
following deer trails and creek beds from coastal villages to inland villages
and families and their most used route is known today as Route 68. Route 68 was
later used by Spaniards, Padre Junipero Serra, the Juan DeAnza Expedition, Los
Californios, and most recently by tourists traveling from mission to mission,
or to the Pebble Beach Golf Course, the racetrack located at Laguna Seca, and
Fort Ord. Named by ACR 55, Res. Chapter 135, Statutes of 2013 on 09/27/13.
[SHC 263.4] Entire portion.
The following segments are designated as Classified Landscaped Freeway:
|County||Route||Starting PM||Ending PM|
This route is part of the De Anza National Historic Trail.
[SHC 253.1] Entire route. Added to the Freeway and Expressway system in 1959.
[SHC 164.13] Entire route.
Overall statistics for Route 68:
The route that became LRN 68 was first defined in 1923 by Chapter 181, which directed the highway commission “...to layout and construct a highway or highways from the county line separating the city and county of San Francisco in, to, and through the county of San Mateo, as such location or locations as the said California Highway Commission may select...”
In 1925, Chapter 471 extended the route by directing the highway commission “...to lay out or construct a highway or highways from a point at or near the intersection of Army Street and San Bruno Avenue in the city and county of San Francisco, thence through the county of San Mateo to a point in the city of San Jose in the county of Santa Clara to be selected by the California Highway Commission....” There was a note from the governor with this indicated that the city of San Francisco must pay for the highway within the city, and is expected to help financially with the construction in San Mateo as agreed to in the 1923 act.
In 1935, the route was codified into the highway code as:
The Bay Shore Highway from San Francisco to San Jose.
The route includes the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge and the approaches thereto on the San Francisco End, as those approaches are described in Section 1 of Chapter 9, Statutes of 1933.
In 1937, Chapter 48 added to the Bay Bridge paragraph wording including “both Harrison and Bryant Street from 10th Street to 5th Street in the City and County of San Francisco”. That same year, Chapter 841 changed "10th" to "Tenth" and "5th" to "Fifth".
In 1947, Chapter 1233 changed the southern end to "[LRN 2] near Ford Road S of San Jose", and deleted the paragraph relating to the Bay Bridge.
In 1961, Chapter 1146 changed the terminus of the route to "[LRN 5] near Oakland" (which by definition extended the route over the Bay Bridge).
No current routing.
This was originally part of Route 65, and was renumbered as Route 69 when a new alignment was proposed for Route 65 in 1964. Route 69 was not signed as part of the original 1964 state signage or the original 1934 signate of state routes. This was part of LRN 129, defined in 1933.
The route that would become LRN 69 was first defined in 1925, by Chapter 82, which stated “All that portion of the public highway commencing at Irwin Street, within the corporate limits of the city of San Rafael, in Marin county, California, and leading therefrom to Point San Quentin, in Marin county, California, and known as the San Rafael-San Quentin road is hereby declared to be a state highway...”
In 1933, the route was extended from San Jose to Richmond (East Shore Highway). In 1935, it was defined in the highway code as:
This route includes two of the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge approaches (on the Alameda County end) described in Section 1 of Chapter 9, Statutes of 1933, one which starts approximately at the intersection of Cypress and Seventh Streets in Oakland, and one which starts at a point on the westerly side of Ninth Street in the vicinity of Ashby Avenue in Berkeley.
In 1937, Chapter 841 changed the Berkeley approach to be "the north and south portions of the one which starts at a point on the westerly side of Ninth Street in the vicinity of Ashby Avenue in Berkeley"
In 1947, Chapter 1233 removed the Bay Bridge approaches, and added the following third segment: "Route (b) above near Buchanan Street Extension in Albany to a point in Western Drive approximately 1,900 feet northwesterly of Scofield Avenue, Richmond." This segment later became part of I-580.
In 1957, Chapter 36 deleted the new Richmond (c) segment, and clarified the second segment to be "San Jose to the Richmond-San Rafael Toll Plaza" (which removed the original (b) routing in Richmond)
In 1959, Chapter 1062 added a "a connection to LRN 5 near Warm Springs" to (b), and extended (a) to [LRN 56] near Point Reyes Station. It also swapped the segments. The resulting route was signed as follows:
From San Jose to the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge Toll Plaza including a connection to LRN 5 near Warm Springs.
Route 99 near Catlett Road to Route 20 in Marysville.
In 1986, Chapter 928 split the route into the current two segments: (a) Route 99 near Catlett Road to Route 20 in Marysville. (b) Route 20 in Marysville to Route 395 near Hallelujah Junction via Quincy and Beckwourth Pass. The portion in Marysville became part of Route 20.
Some chronological notes:
1970. I-5 completed through Natomas between Elkhorn and downtown Sacramento, bypassing the old El Centro Road (LRN 232/Route 24) routing of Route 70/Route 99. According to Joel Windmiller, Route 70 may have continued down I-5 into downtown Sacramento for a very short period of time.
Early 1970s. Route 70 is truncated to begin at the Elkhorn Y, co-signed with Route 99.
Late 1990s Route 70 signage pushed back further, this time to the legislative western terminus (in Catlett). Note that through all these years, the legislative definition never changed; none of the Route 70 extension south to downtown Sacramento (co-signed with Route 99) was ever covered by it but was probably a direct replacement of former Route 24.
Note that the original plans were for there to be an "East Valley" corridor,
consisting of Route 99 from I-5 north to Route 70, Route 70 north to Route 149,
all of Route 149, and Route 99 north through Chico probably reconnecting to I-5
(although plans north of Chico were shelved in the 1990s). This was for a
Midwest-style expressway with freeway segments through the significant towns
and interchanges at major intersecting highways. This would have included a
freeway bypass of Marysville, the site of the last in-town surface street
routing. Unfortunately only the segments at the ends of the corridor -- I-5 to
Olivehurst and Oroville to just north of Chico -- were completed as planned;
everything else was cut back to conventional 4-lane commercial standards
(although a largely at-grade bypass of Marysville via the Feather River berm
and making use of the present Yuba River Route 70 bridge is under study as of
2018) due to lack of the funding needed to acquire significant property between
Marysville and Oroville for even an expressway upgrade.
(Source: Sparker on AAroads, 3/28/2018)
The portion of this route between Route 99 and Route 65 was LRN 232, defined in 1949. LRN 232 originally turned W out of Sacramento, running along the river with Route 16 to Woodland. The pre-1951 routing was cosigned with US 99E (and at one point, with Route 24), and likely ran along LRN 50. A 1969 map shows a different routing (cosigned with Route 99), along Jibboom Street, Garden Highway and El Centro Road. Note that the segment from Route 99 to Route 65 was not signed state highway until the move of Route 24 from the westerly (Woodland) route to the El Centro Avenue route in the 1950s. The portion of El Centro Road S of I-80 was still in existance as of 1995, but has since been replaced by residential streets.
Max R, in a discussion on AARoads in June-July 2017, provides more history of Route 70: Route 70 from Oroville along the Feather River Highway to Quincy has some interesting history in terms of route numbering and alignments. Originally the Feather River Highway was part of Route 24, asseen on the 1938 State Highway Map. Prior to the construction of Oroville Dam the Feather River Highway was substantially different. East out of Oroville, Route 24 took what is now Oroville Dam Blvd/County Route B2 to the approximate location of Oroville Dam where it would have crossed the Feather River. Route 24 followed the west bank of the North Fork Feather River where it would have joined the modern alignment of Route 70 via Dark Canyon Road. The 1935 County Road Map shows the older alignment. In 1955, the Feather River Highway was renumbered as US 40A and really honestly it is kind of the perfect alternate to even Donner Summit, much less Donner Pass. By 1958 the newly adopted planned alignment of US 40A out of Oroville appears to the west of the highway to make way for the Oroville Dam project. By 1963, US 40A is shifted onto the new aligment modern of the Feather River Highway. By 1965, State Highway Maps show the Feather River Highway renumbered to Route 70.
In his 2006 Strategic Growth Plan, Governor Schwartzenegger proposed a comprehensive Route 70/Route 99 project. The project (stretching from the I-5/Route 99 junction (~SUT 0.0) to Route 149 in Butte County (~ BUT R20.641L)) converts two-lane conventional corridors to four-and-five-lane expressways, completes key segments to freeway by constructing interchanges, and provides additional capacity and throughput for current and projected future populations. It connects the Sacramento, Yuba-City and Chico urbanized area with an improved facility, saves lives by removing two lane segments, and supports improved freight movement.
In 2007, it was noted that the California Transportation Commission allocated $126 million for a project in Yuba and Sutter counties to widen Route 70 to four lanes from south of East Nicolaus (apx 070 SUT R4.102) to the Bear River (apx 070 YUB 0.127). The East Nicolaus bypass would relieve traffic congestion and improve highway safety, and is scheduled to last from spring 2008 to fall 2011. The bypass will be to the west of East Nicolaus. This southern section of Route 70 closely follows the route of the old Sacramento Northern Railroad. South of East Nicolaus, the old rail grade is visible on the west side of the highway. North of East Nicolaus, the grade is visible as Route 70 zags at the intersection of El Centro Blvd - the grade runs between Route 70 and El Centro Blvd north to Kempton Road. This widening will make Route 70 a 4-lane facility from the the southern end of the route all the way to Marysville. In October 2009, a local newspaper reported on the effects of the rerouting on East Nicolaus, for Caltrans rerouted Route 70 around East Nicolaus partly to eliminate traffic backups at a stop sign where the highway and Nicolaus Avenue met. The switch was part of an $82 million project to expand Route 70 to four lanes between Route 99 and Marysville, a project set for completion in 2011. Most residents are happy. Marcum-Ilinois School officials said their traffic situation has improved immeasurably, with far fewer cars and trucks zooming past the school, which fronts what was Route 70 until June 2009. The highway now runs about a half-mile to the west, with an full interchange to Nicolaus Avenue. Some businesses adapted to the rerouting with signs, such as the Country Store, a stone's throw from the former intersection but far from eyesight of drivers now. Other businesses failed, such as The Hub, a burger joint near the intersection whose menu board still boasts of a Dragon Burger with 2⅓ pounds of beef, closed its doors; the restaurant occupies what was once Perozzi's, a popular eatery for locals and commuters for more than 36 years. The old road is now known as El Centro Boulevard, the name used before Route 70 was established. Yet modern mechanisms haven't caught up--Google Maps still lists the road by the Route 70 designation.
The following project is planned this route: Upgrading Route 70 to 4-lane expressway from Route 99 (070 SUT 0.0) to the existing freeway S of Marysville. This will eventually be upgraded to full freeway. This was on the April 2002 CTC agenda for approval for future consideration of funding [2.2c.(4), 2.5b(5), north of Bear River (apx 070 YUB 0.093) to S of McGowan Parkway (070 YUB R7.351)]
In articles noting the completion of the Route 149 widening, it was noted that there are also plans to widen Route 70 to 4 lanes from the junction of Route 99 in Sutter County (~ SUT 0.0) to Marysville (~ YUB 14.59). It will also be 4 lanes in the Oroville area and north to the junction of Route 191. About 2 more miles will be widened to 4 lanes immediately south of Oroville.
In October 2013, the CTC received a MND for future consideration of funding regarding a project located on Route 70 east of the Feather River, approximately 13 miles south of the City of Marysville in Yuba County. The proposed project will replace the existing at-grade intersection of Feather River Boulevard at Route 70 (apx 070 YUB R0.353) with a modified L-1/L-9 configuration interchange. The interchange will include a five-lane overcrossing of Route 70, five interchange ramps, removal of the existing at-grade intersection and traffic signal, and utility relocation.
In December 2013, the CTC approved funding $4.361M for the Feather River Boulevard/Route 70 Interchange in Yuba County near Plumas Lake and north of Bear River at the southern intersection of Feather River Boulevard and Route 70 (apx 070 YUB R0.353) . The project will remove the traffic signal and construct interchange.
As of November 2007, construction had begun on an interchange with Plumas Lakes Blvd (070 YUB R3.472). It is just to the south of the Union Pacific RR/Arobga Rd twin bridges.
The following project is planned this route: Marysville Bypass. Starting at Route 70/Route 65 junction (070 YUB R8.414), running E of Marysville and linking with the existing Route 70 freeway south of Oroville (apx 070 BUT 11.532). Note that this bypass was later deprecated for the widening discussed below.
Oroville. Home to the famous "Business I-70" shield.
The portion of this route that is former US 99 was designated as a "Blue Star Memorial Highway" by Senate Concurrent Resolution 33, Ch. 82 in 1947.
Route 20 in Marysville to Route 395 near Hallelujah Junction via Quincy and Beckwourth Pass.
In 1986, Chapter 928 split the route into the current two segments: (a) Route 99 near Catlett Road to Route 20 in Marysville. (b) Route 20 in Marysville to Route 395 near Hallelujah Junction via Quincy and Beckwourth Pass. The portion in Marysville became part of Route 20.
The route between Blairsden and Indian Falls is cosigned as Route 70/Route 89, although it is legislatively Route 70.
This portion of the Route 70 routing started life in 1919, when the LRN 21 routing replaced former LRN 30, the Oroville-Quincy Highway, between a point NW of Oroville and Quincy. In 1931 the routing was extended from Quincy to Chats, CA (Hallelujah Junction) near (signed) US 395 [LRN 29]. The rationale for the extension was that the extension would extend the Feather River road, [LRN 21], joining' it to [LRN 29] (now US 395) near the latter 's interstate connection with State of Nevada highways. The inclusion in the State system extended State jurisdiction over a section that was projected to eventually be considered state and interstate. It was anticipated that LRN 21 would provide the advertised water grade arterial through the scenic Feather River to the county seat, Quincy. National forest highway in cooperation with Plumas County aid were completing on good standards a surfaced road E of Quincy as funds permitted; but they were unable to complete the connection through Plumas and Lassen counties. State aid permitted that connection.
In 1933, LRN 87 was added to the mix. LRN 87 ran between Marysville and Oroville. In 1934, the routing was signed as Route 24. In the late 1930s, it was resigned as Alternate US 40 (and was likely still Route 24). In 1963, it was renumbered as Route 70 when that route number was freed by the decomissioning of US 70.
In the late 1930s, there was a temporary routing of Alternate US 40 that took a more southern alignment than the current Route 70 routing, running through Berry Creek and Bucks Lake to Quincy along Orville-Quincy Highway, Spanish Ranch, and Bucks Lake Road. This appears to be the former LRN 30. Much of that route is no longer part of the state highway system, although the portion from Oroville to Brush Creek is part of Route 162.
Route 70 Passing Lane Project Yuba/Butte County - 03-Yub-70 PM 14.70/25.82, 03-But-70 PM 0.0/11.8
>In December 2013, the Project Study Report
proposed what became PPNO 9801 (9801A, 9801B), on Route 70 between 14th St. in
Marysville to Ophir Road in Oroville, a project to widen the existing 2-lane
conventional highway into a 5-lane facility, 2 lanes per direction with a
continuous two-way left turn lane. The existing freeway north of Ophir Road
will be extended S to Palermo Road. The current facility included several
driveways along the corridor serving residential, agriculatural, and industrial
properties; no new connections were proposed. The report noted that there have
been several proposed improvements along this corridor including the proposed
"Marysville Bypass to Oroville Freeway", which would have used a new alignment.
This project does not use that alignment. The 2009 Transportation Concept
Report proposed multiple "passing lane" projects, but has been revised for a
continuous five-lane facility. The corridor has been divided into six
(Source: January 2014 Project Study Report)
In October 2017, the CTC added the following project into the SHOPP: 03-But-70 5.6/8.8: On Route 70 in Butte County: Near Oroville, from 0.3 mile north of Cox Lane to south of Palermo Road. Widen for two-way left-turn lane and standard shoulders, and provide a roadside clear recovery zone. This is Segment 2.
In October 2017, the CTC added the following project into the SHOPP: 03-But-70 8.8/11.8: On Route 70 in Butte County: Near Oroville, from south of Palermo Road to north of Ophir Road. Widen for two-way left-turn lane and standard shoulders, and provide a roadside clear recovery zone. This is Segment 1.
In December 2017, the CTC amended the SHOPP to add the following project, for planning only: 03-But-70 0.0/3.8: On Route 70, in Butte County: Near Oroville, from Yuba County Line to south of East Gridley Road/Stimpson Road; also, in Yuba County on Route 70 from PM 25.7 to PM 25.8. Widen for two-way left-turn lane and standard shoulders. This is part of Segment 4.
In March 2018, it was reported that the California
Transportation Committee approved $400 million in funding to widen the highway
to five lanes between the Yuba County line (~ BUT 0.0) and Oroville (~BUT
14.708). Construction on the first project, the stretch of road between Ophir
and Palermo roads, south of Oroville, won’t happen before 2020. The
article included a very
touching story about Caltrans engineer Paul Inman, who was killed on that
dangerous stretch of road. This appears to be segments 1, 2, 3, and part of
(Source: Chico ER News, 3/23/2018)
The 2018 STIP, approved at the CTC March 2018 meeting, appears to adjust the funding for these segments, seemingly delaying two of the segments for a year. The PPNOs involved are PPNO 9801 (Segment 1), PPNO 9801A (Segment 2), PPNO 9801B (Segment 3), PPNO 9824 (Segments 4 and 5).
In August 2011, the CTC approved for future consideration of funding a project that will rehabilitate the route in the city of Marysville, including new pavement, curb ramps, and sidewalks. The CTC also approved $41,500,000 in SHOPP funding for repairs in Marysville, from First Street Undercrossing to east of Binney Junction; also on Route 20 from Feather River Bridge to 0.1 mile east of Levee Road, that will rehabilitate 17.0 lane miles of roadway to improve the ride quality, prevent further deterioration of the road surface, minimize the costly roadway repairs and extend the pavement service life. (Vicinity of 070 YUB 14.734)
In December 2017, the CTC approved for future consideration of funding a project, located near the city of Marysville, proposes to replace the Simmerly Slough Bridge on Route 70 (03-Yub-70, PM 15.4/16.5). The project also proposes to realign the approach roads at both ends of the new bridge, construct a new access road to Laurellen Road, and rehabilitate pavement leading to the new bridge. The project is fully funded and programmed in the 2016 SHOPP for an estimated total of $82.9 million, which includes Construction (capital and support) and Right-of-Way (capital and support). Construction is estimated to begin in December 2019. The scope, as described for the preferred alternative, is consistent with the project scope programmed by the Commission in the 2016 SHOPP. The project was also included in the final adopted 2018 SHOPP in March 2018.
In February 2006, the CTC considered relinquishment of right of way in the County of Butte, between Lower Honcut Road and Grover Lane, consisting of reconstructed and relocated county roads. (apx 070 BUT 0.949)
In May 2015, the CTC authorized relinquishment of right of way in the county of Butte along Route 70 at East Gridley Road and Stimpson Road near Robinsons Corner, consisting of reconstructed county roads. (apx 070 BUT 4.018)
In April 2006, the CTC considered a resolution to approve for future consideration of funding a project to upgrade Route 70 near Ophir Road (070 BUT 10.8/12.6) in Butte County to freeway, including construction of an interchange near Oroville. This was based on a Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) prepared due to the potential for significant levels of hazardous waste within the project limits. This project consists of three independent phases: a Safety phase, Phase 1, and Phase 2. The Safety phase is fully funded in the 2006 State Highway Operation and Protection Program for $10,213,000 for capital and support. Construction is estimated to begin in Fiscal Year (FY) 2006-07. Phase 1 is fully funded in the 2004 State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) for $25,886,000 for capital and support and is estimated to begin in FY 2007-08. Phase 2 is not funded. The total estimated cost of Phase 2 is $54,000,000, and the proposed year of construction is FY 2011-12.
The SAFETEA-LU act, enacted in August 2005 as the reauthorization of TEA-21, provided the following expenditures on or near this route:
Wicks Corner Improvements
The following project is planned this route: Construction of a new four-lane freeway along a route from 1.25 mi S of Route 149 (070 BUT R19.052R) to .25 mi N of Route 191 (070 BUT R22.1) in the County of Butte. This route is just N of Table Mountain Blvd. This was on the June 2003 agenda as a Route Adoption of a Controlled Access Highway at 03-But-70 KP 31.0/35.6 (PM 19.3/22.1) in the County of Butte.
On July 24, 2008, Caltrans announced the opening of all four approaches to the new signal at the junction of Route 70/Route 191 (070 BUT R21.937). Also opened at that time was the new WB Route 70 alignment from the intersection of Route 191, including the connector ramp to westbound Route 70 and the ramp to northbound Route 149. The next day, the connector ramp from SB Route 149 to EB Route 70 opened. EB Route 70 from Oroville remained in its current alignment. This work was part of the $105 million project to make Route 149 a four-lane expressway with freeway-to-freeway interchanges at the intersections of Route 70/Route 149 and Route 99/Route 149. Completion is expected in 2009. (source)
In October 2013, the CTC reviewed a project for future approval of funding. This project in Butte County will replace the existing Flag Canyon Creek Bridge (070 BUT 24.26) on Route 70 near the city of Oroville. The project is programmed in the 2012 State Highway Operation and Protection Program. The total estimated cost is $5,595,000 for capital and support. Construction is estimated to begin in Fiscal Year 2014-15. The scope, as described for the preferred alternative, is consistent with the project scope programmed by the Commission in the 2012 State Highway Operation and Protection Program.
In September 2012, the CTC approved SHOPP funding of $4,040,000 on Route 70 in Butte County PM 28.2 near Oroville, at West Branch Feather River Bridge (#12-0134) (070 BUT 28.22). Outcome/Output: Seismic retrofit one bridge and repair of damaged worn elements.
In November 2010, the CTC approved for future consideration of funding a project to seismically retrofit the West Branch Feather River Bridge (070 BUT 28.22) near Oroville (actually, closer to Pentz and Cherokee, PM 28.22). The project is programmed in the 2010 State Highway Operation and Protection Program. Construction is estimated to begin in Fiscal Year 2011-12. Total estimated project cost is $23,409,000 for capital and support. The scope as described for the preferred alternative is consistent with the project scope programmed by the Commission in the 2010 State Highway Operation and Protection Program. A copy of the Negative Declaration (ND) has been provided to Commission staff. The project will avoid and minimize potential impacts to storm water, water quality, and the American peregrine falcon. The project will also require construction activities in the habitat of the pallid bat and the cliff swallow. All of which are either State fully protected, State species of special concern, or protected by the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act. As a result, an ND was completed for this project.
In January 2018, the CTC added the following project to the SHOPP: 03-But-70
46.0/47.0. Route 70 Near Paradise, from 0.8 mile west to 0.2 mile east of Shady
Rest Area. Restore and repair damaged roadway by raising the existing vertical
alignment by approximately five feet and protecting the embankment against
future flooding with Rock Slope Protection (RSP) or a retaining structure.
PA&ED Allocated at $1,700,000. Other phases not authorized yet. PA&ED:
10/11/2019. R/W: 11/10/2020. RTL: 12/05/2020. BC: 06/05/2021.
(Source: CTC Agenda, January 2018, Agenda Item 2.1a(1))
In March 2015, the CTC approved for future consideration of funding a project in Plumas County near Quincy that will replace the existing Yellow Creek Bridge (070 PLU 14.90) and construct retaining walls, slope protection, guardrails, and other improvements. The project is programmed in the 2014 State Highway Operation and Protection Program (SHOPP). The total estimated cost is $13,420,000 for capital and support. Construction is estimated to begin in Fiscal Year 2016-17. The scope, as described for the preferred alternative, is consistent with the project scope programmed by the Commission in the 2014 SHOPP.
Spanish Creek Bridge (070 PLU 35.32)
In March 2006, the CTC considered a plan to replace an existing bridge near Keddie. This project is fully funded in the 2006 State Highway Operation and Protection Program (SHOPP). The total estimated project cost is $42,040,000. Construction is estimated to begin in Fiscal Year 2009-10. There are three alternatives:
In March 2009, the CTC approved for future consideration of funding a project to replace the existing Spanish Creek Bridge (070 PLU 35.32) and construct roadway improvements north of the city of Quincy. The project is programmed in the 2008 State Highway Operation and Protection Program. The total estimated project cost is $58,064,000, capital and support. Construction is estimated to begin in Fiscal Year 2009-10.
In January 2018, the CTC approved for future consideration of funding a
project on Route 70 (02-But-70, PM 42.06/42.21/46.44, 02-Plu-70, PM
23.67/31.82) in Butte and Plumas Counties: Construct fish passages at five
tributaries along Route 70 in Butte and Plumas Counties. The project involves
improvement of aquatic organism passage at five tributaries in Butte and Plumas
Counties to the Feather River along Route 70. The five locations that are
tributaries to the Feather River are Mill Creek, Bear Creek, Rush Creek, Soda
Creek and an unnamed tributary. The project is fully funded by District 2 Minor
A and United States Forest Service for an estimated $12.7 million. Construction
is estimated to begin in Fiscal Year 2019-20. 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
(Source: CTC Agenda, January 2018, Agenda Item 2.2c(1))
Spring Garden Bridge
In August 2015, the CTC approved for future consideration of funding a project in Plumas County that will rehabilitate and widen the Spring Garden Bridge (070 PLU 51.21) near the town of Quincy. The project is programmed in the 2014 State Highway Operation and Protection Program. The total estimated cost is $17,670,000 for capital and support. Construction is estimated to begin in Fiscal Year 2015-16. The scope, as described for the preferred alternative, is consistent with the project scope programmed by the Commission in the 2014 State Highway Operation and Protection Program.
In August 2016, the CTC approved $13,545,000 for Plumas 02-Plu-70 50.6/51.7. Route 70 near Quincy, from 0.6 mile west to 0.5 mile east of Spring Garden Bridge Overhead No. 09-0062 (070 PLU 51.21). Outcome/Output: Rehabilitate the existing structure by replacing the bridge deck, widening to make shoulders standard, retrofitting the sub-structure, and installing standard bridge rail.
In October 2017, it was reported that in Spring
2017, Plumas County residents encountered a traffic signal at the Spring Garden
Bridge, 5 miles east of Quincy, that interrupted a normally fluid drive. It is
quiet on top of the bridge, and if it weren’t for the signal and the
extensive roadwork caution signs, commuters would probably never guess that
underneath the 50-year-old bridge is a flurry of activity. The $10.2 million
bridge rehabilitation project has been in the California Department of
Transportation’s repair lineup for about six to seven years and is
estimated to take about two years, 1,200 cubic yards of concrete, and 600,000
pounds of steel to complete. Because there are no alternate routes and the
bridge has to remain functional for traffic, the project had to be divided into
five stages. With the help of MCM Construction Inc. from Sacramento, the bridge
is already in Stage 2 of the process. The piers that hold up the bridge are
lined with a massive amount of lumber and falsework (temporary construction)
that will be removed when the project is done. The crew is made up of 12 to 30
construction workers a day who have filled walls with thousands of pounds of
concrete and widened the bents that hold the deck. The result will be a 16-foot
wider bridge, with a higher friction surface that should reduce the accident
rate on the roadway, updated railing and even a new bike lane. The project will
pause for winter 2017 and the signal will be removed until weather permits the
crew to start work again next spring. The next phase of work will then begin:
repairing the deck, which will entail a complete replacement of the girders,
supports and road surface, making one-way traffic a must.
(Source: Plumas News, 10/13/2017)
The 2018 STIP, approved at the CTC March 2018 meeting, appears to allocate $330K for PPNO 3703 Feather River Inn, intersection improvements (~ PLU R66.073), with the bulk of the work being done in FY21-22.
In December 2014, the CTC authorized relinquishment of right of way in the county of Plumas along Route 70 at 0.6 miles west of Grizzly Road (apx 070 PLU R78.759), consisting of collateral facilities. The County, by resolution dated April 16, 2013, waived the 90-day notice requirement and agreed to accept title upon relinquishment by the State.
The portion of this route from Oroville to Quincy was historically named the "Feather River Highway".
The portion of this route from Pacific Heights/Georgia Pacific Way to the westbound ramp of Garden Drive (~ BUT 12.498 to BUT 16.622) is named the "Post No. 1747 Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States Memorial Highway". This section of Route 70 runs near the Headquarters of Post No. 1747; the naming was in honor of the 100th Anniversary of the Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States, and the 70th Anniversary of Post No. 1747 in Oroville. Named by Assembly Concurrent Resolution 149, Chapter 97, July 12, 2000.
The junction between Route 70 and Route 149 near the City of Oroville (~ BUT R20.643R), in the County of Butte, is named the "Wick's Corner Interchange". This segment was named in memory of Moses Wick, born in Ohio in 1822. Moses Wick served in the Mexican War under the command of General Zachary Taylor, who eventually became President of the United States. In 1852, Moses Wick moved to California with his wife Maria in a wagon train pulled by his team of oxen on a journey that took six months. The land in the area of the current cloverleaf junction between Route 70 and Route 149 was deeded in 1852 to Moses Wick as a reward for his military service. On September 3, 1852, Moses Wick made a homestead of the 160 acre territory and began raising cattle as a pioneer cattle rancher. Through purchases and other land grants, he eventually owned about 800 acres adjacent to "Wick's Corner". Wick made a modest living as a butcher by selling and supplying beef to gold miners and merchants in the area. He also used his faithful team of oxen to haul freight and cargo back and forth to the mines between Oroville and Sacramento. Moses Wick died in 1888 at the age of 66 years and was survived by his second wife Roxie Ann, his son Charles, and daughter Ella Wick Crum. He cattle ranch was operated until his son Charles sold most of the ranch to Senator Thomas Rockhill in 1906 for $25,000. The cattle ranch became a tavern and an early stagecoach stop for the Central Pacific Railroad. Although Wick's historic home was demolished in 1947, this area continues to be known as "Wick's Corner". The modern Route 70 was constructed in the 1960s when the former highway was submerged beneath the rising waters of Lake Oroville. Mrs. Merle McAndrews, the great granddaughter of both Moses Wick and Senator Thomas Rockhill, still lives on the property in a portion of one of the original ranches that was built more than 70 years ago. Named by Assembly Concurrent Resolution (ACR) 39, Resolution Chapter 71, on 7/3/2007.
Tunnel 09-0001 (PLU 000.73), in Plumas county near Tobin, is named the "Grizzly Dome Tunnel". It was built in 1936, and was not officially named.
Tunnel 09-0024 (PLU 000.99) in Plumas county is named the "Elephant Butte Tunnel". It was built in 1937, and was named through historical and long usage.
This route also has the following Safety Roadside Rest Areas:
Senate Concurrent Resolution 66, Chaptered May 18, 2006 (Resolution Chapter 51), designated, upon application by an appropriate local governmental agency, any section of former Alternate U.S. Highway Route 40 that is still a publicly maintained highway and that is of interest to the applicant, as Historic Alternate U.S. Highway Route 40. This recognizes the role that Former Alternate U.S. Highway Route 40 played in the development of the transportation routes into California over what is now known as the Davis "Y". Alternate U.S. Highway Route 40 is currently Route 113 from Davis to Woodland and Yuba City, and Route 70 through Marysville, Oroville, and the Feather River Canyon to Hallelujah Junction on Route 395, a route that today serves 27 towns and the six counties of Yolo, Sutter, Yuba, Butte, Plumas, and Lassen. The Feather River Scenic Byway is a 130 mile segment of Route 70, which was part of Alternate U.S. Highway Route 40.
[SHC 253.1] Entire route. Added to the Freeway and Expressway system in 1959. This is constructed to freeway standards in segment (1) from Olivehurst to Marysville; and in segment (2) from Route 162 to Route 149.
Overall statistics for Route 70:
This route is designated a Blue Star Memorial Highway between Marysville and Hallelujah Junction. The marker is located at the roadside rest stop by the Feather River in Belden. Designated by Assembly Concurrent Resolution 150, Chapter 98, July 12, 2000.
The Route 70 designator was used for US 70, which ran along what is roughly now Route 10 (I-10). It appears that US 70 ran concurrent with US 60 throughout much of California. The US 70 designation was added in 1935. Portions of the route also were cosigned with US 99 and US 101. US 70 really never had a distinct identity in the state (it was always cosigned: either with US 99 or US 60, if not both). It does appear that the portion of LRN 77 along Valley Blvd between the eastern city limits of Los Angeles and El Monte was signed as US 70 after 1935.
The route that became LRN 70 was first defined in 1925, by Chapter 351 which directed the commission “...to transfer and convey unto the State of California that certain road situate in the said county of Mendocino and described as follows: Commencing at a point on the state highway 2446 ft from the S boundary of the town limits of the town of Ukiah city and running thence in an E-ly direction along the course of the right of way of the present county road to the W line of the grounds of the Mendocino State Hospital...” In 1935, this route was codified as:
"[LRN 1] near Ukiah to the west line of the grounds of the Mendocino State Hospital"
This definition remained until 1963. It is present-day unsigned Route 222.
In 1974, Chapter 537 deleted segments (b) and (c). Segment (b) was transferred to Route 15, and (c) was transferred to Route 79 (from Route 15 to Route 79 near Aguanga) and to Route 371 (from Route 79 to Route 74).
In 1994, Chapter 1220 clarified the definition to terminate at "Route 91 via Pomona and Chino Hills."
The original routing of Route 71 (which included the current routing) was from US 80 (now I-8) in San Diego to US 66 near Claremont via Elsinore and Temecula. The 1934 signed route definition was Jct. US 80 near San Diego to Jct. US 66 near Claremont, via Elsinore and Temecula. In October 1935, it was noted that the segment of Route 71 along the San Diego to San Bernardino route had been resigned as US 395. It can be broken into the following segments:
Between US 80 (LRN 12; now I-8) and Temecula, the route was signed as Route 71 between 1934 and the signage of US 395. US 395 signage was announced in CHPW in October 1935. This segment is part of present-day I-15. It was LRN 77, defined in 1931.
Later, there was a definition of a segment of Route 71 running between Route 79 near Aguanga and Temecula. This was originally part of Route 79 (another 1934 signed route), but was later signed as part of Route 71 until 1973. It was LRN 78. It is presently signed as Route 79 (and what had been Route 79 between Aguanga and the junction with Route 74 is Route 371; that segment was LRN 277, defined in 1959). This was all defined in 1931.
Between Temecula and Corona, the route was signed as Route 71 between the 1934 signage of state highways and its redesignation as I-15 in 1974. It was LRN 77, defined in 1931. This segment may have also been signed as part of US 395 (it is unclear); US 395 was first signed in October 1935. Temescal Canyon Road just south of Corona was the original Route 71 before the Interstate, dating back to 1820 or earlier. It was used by gold diggers in 1849 and was a military road between San Diego and Los Angeles from 1861 to 1865. It was adopted by the state in 1931. In 1959, a marker was placed at a site 200 feet south of Glen Ivy Road to commemorate the road’s history. This marker was rededicated in 2013.
Between Corona and Pomona, the route has been signed as Route 71 since the 1934 signage of highways. This was also LRN 77, and was defined in 1931. By 1961, in Corona, Route 71 north followed Ontario Avenue, Main Street, then 6th Street west to Route 91/Pre-1964 Route 18. It then ran multiplexed with Route 91 to the current Route 71/Route 91 junction at Prado Dam. Originally in Corona, Route 71 originally followed Pomona Road and Auto Center Drive to cross the Santa Ana River northeast of the current Prado Dam site, before connecting to the current alignment. Due to dam construction, this routing no longer is traversable across the river. Near Prado Regonal Park, Route 71 continued north on Euclid Avenue (current Route 83), making a left on Pine Avenue to continue northeast on El Prado Road and Central Avenue. From Central Avenue, Route 71 northbound then went west on Chino Hills Parkway, crossing under the current alignment (at which point this part of old Route 71 becomes part of current Route 142). Route 71 north continued on west Route 142 to Peyton Drive. Route 71 then went up north on Peyton Drive to Pomona; near the current Route 71/Route 60 interchange, Route 71 fed into Garey Avenue. The intersection of Peyton and Garey may have been reconfigured for freeway construction.
Route 71 had a different segment also signed as Route 71 (along Garey Avenue); this ran to US 66 and was part of the original 1909 definition of LRN 19. According to Chris Sampang, traveling through Pomona on Garey Avenue (which later became Route 215 from 1964-1965), it appears the state highway took a couple of paths - one, straight on Garey Avenue to Route 66; another, as seen on this map, was McKinley Avenue and White Avenue to Route 66 (Foothill Boulevard, supplanted by current Route 210). This may explain why White Avenue becomes a divided highway immediately to the north of McKinley Avenue.
Additional information on the history of the road near Prado Dam can be found here.
Note: Route 71 is one of five "backward" routes in California (the others are Route 153, Route 282, I-580, and I-780). Postmile values normally increase from south to north or west to east depending upon the direction the highway follows within the state. For Route 71, postmiles increase from North to South.
TCRP #50 - Route 71 Freeway (07-LA-71 0.5/ 4.5)
In September 2000, the California Transportation Commission considered a $1.5 million proposal to complete three miles of six-lane freeway of Route 71 between I-10 and Route 60. This is District 7 TCRP Project #50. The project includes adding one mixed flow lane and one HOV lane in each direction on Route 71 between I-10 and Route 60, converting existing 6-lane expressway to 8-lane freeway between Holt Avenue and Mission Boulevard, and converting existing 4-lane expressway to 6-lane freeway between Mission Boulevard and Route 60. This segment is the last remaining segment to be converted to freeway and to provide HOV lanes between I- 10 and Route 91. Project Location The total estimated cost was $146 million. The estimated construction completion date is June 2009. However, the project was up for suspension (due to budget) in December 2003. Funds were shifted to Project 41.1 (Route 5 HOV Lanes). Construction is now scheduled for completion in February 2011. Additionally, funds were deallocated from the early phases of this project in September 2005 due to the inactivity of the project.
In June 2007, the CTC considered an amendment to TCRP #50. This amendment proposes to add the Route 71/Mission Grade Separation project (STIP PPNO 2232) to the scope of this TCRP project and program new TCRP funds for construction. The Mission Grade Separation project is located within the Route 71 project corridor. The environmental document covers both projects. Although, the Route 71 freeway conversion project (original scope of TCRP Project #50) is on hold due to insufficient funding the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority is committed to fully fund the project when funding becomes available. This amendment will help to achieve an increment of the intended goal of TCRP Project #50 by improving flow as an early stage implementation. Construction was revised to complete in the FY 2012/2013 time period. As of November 2008, the grade separation project between Mission Blvd and Route 71 was underway. The median on Route 71 had been completely paved, the left turn lanes have been reduced from two lanes to one, and equipment is ready to drive beams into the northbound Route 71 lanes to start that portion of the grade change and overpass.
In September 2002, the CTC considered future consideration of funding for upgrading the freeway and improving the interchange in Pomona. In particular, the City of Pomona has a project to improve the interchange of Mission Blvd and Route 71. This project will remove the existing at-grade intersection of Mission Boulevard at Route 71 by constructing an overcrossing of Mission Boulevard over the existing Route 71 expressway. Six through lanes and two turning lanes are proposed for the overcrossing, and the design provides a compressed diamond configuration allowing full uncontrolled ingress and egress on Route 71 using standard freeway type on and off-ramps. Completion of the project will improve traffic circulation at this heavily used intersection. The project schedule anticipates advertising for construction bids in early 2007 with estimated construction starting in Summer 2007. Construction is anticipated to take 24 months to complete. It appears that, as part of this project the 2nd Street intersection and the Pomona Boulevard interchange are going to be eliminated.
In August 2011, it was reported that the Route 71/Mission Grade Separation project (STIP PPNO 2232) was completed. Traffic on Mission is now carried up and over Route 71, eliminating the extra stops and wait time for motorists. This completes the first phase of a major project on Route 71. The second phase will convert it into a full freeway, without the city street aspect. The interchange fully opened (with all ramps functional) in December 2011. Caltrans officials have said Route 71 could become a six-lane freeway with a carpool lane by 2023.
In February 2012, it was reported that Pomona officials have been working to secure grants that would go to completing studies and other work that could help expedite turning Route 71 into a full-fledged freeway some day. Pomona has applied for a federal grant that could help pay for the design and widening of two bridges between I-10 and Mission that carry Route 71 traffic over railroad tracks. The city is seeking $25 million to go toward an estimated $33 million construction project that would involve widening to freeway width the so-called Spadra bridge and the West Pomona bridge.
In January 2013, it was reported that the Pomona
City Council was selecting their preferred alternative for the Route 71
widening between I-10 and Route 60. This is part of the project where Pomona,
Caltrans and the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority have
been working to update plans and studies completed in the past to expand Route
71 from a four-lane highway to a full-fledged eight-lane freeway between I-10
and Route 60. Currently scheduled for completion in 2030, if earlier funding
can be obtained, construction to widen Route 71 could begin in 2015 and
conclude as early as 2017. Five options are available but the first two are not
being recommended by city public works personnel, according to a city staff
report. Alternative 1 involves leaving the highway as it for the long
term. Alternative 2 would require building a wider, below-ground Route
71. The concept, approved in 2002, has a high cost in part because it would
require the acquisition of about 140 properties. Alternatives 3, 4, and
4A, would require the acquisition of less than 40 properties in part, in
whole or temporarily. Alternative 3 involves widening Route 71, adding
a frontage road that connects Phillips Drive and North Ranch Road and adding a
pedestrian bridge near Ninth Street to replace one at Grier Street.
Alternative 4 includes completing the widening; eliminating the
current intersections at Phillips, North Ranch and Old Pomona Road; building a
frontage road between Phillips and Old Pomona; constructing an overcrossing at
Old Pomona that connects Village Loop Road and Lexington Avenue; and adding the
pedestrian bridge. Alternative 4A would include all of the elements of
Alternative 4 but would leave out the overpass. City public works personnel
prefer Alternative 4 because it would enhance access to the area, the city
staff report said.
(Source: Inland Valley Daily Bulletin, 1/6/13)
In March 2016, the Los Angeles MTA presented its
full proposal for what transit lines could be built -- and when -- if Los
Angeles County voters approve a half-cent sales tax increase in November 2016.
This proposal included funding for a project on Route 71 from I-10 to Rio
Rancho Rd. that will add 1 Mixed-Flow lane in each direction on Route 71, from
I-10 to Rio Rancho Rd. for a total of 3 miles. The project will provide 3 Mixed
Flow lanes throughout with 4 Mixed Flow lanes in segments"
(Source: Los Angeles Times 3/18/2016; Metro Board Report 3/24/2016)
In November 2016, it was reported that Measure M
will fund an upgrade of Route 71, the highway/freeway combination that runs
between San Dimas and Corona, to a full-fledged freeway through the city of
Pomona. For most of its run through Pomona, Route 71 currently is a four-lane
highway with street intersections. Measure M is going to change that —
but it will take some time. (Route 71 is also an expressway rather than a
freeway in Riverside County between Corona and the San Bernardino County line;
Measure M will have no effect on that portion.) In Pomona, the 71 will be
widened from a four-lane highway to an eight-line freeway, from just south of
Mission Boulevard to Rio Rancho Road. According to Caltrans, design work for
the construction will be completed in about 2020. Construction could begin by
late that year, and will take about four years.
(Source: Daily Bulletin, 11/22/2016)
In March 2017, the CTC authorized that $395,000 be allocated from Budget Act Item 2660-002-3007 for plans, specifications and estimates for the State administered TCRP project "Route 71 Expressway to Freeway Conversion" (Route 10 to Route 60). On Route 71 in Pomona, between Route 10 and Route 60 (07-LA-71 0.5/ 4.5). Add one mixed flow lane and one HOV lane in each direction on Route 71. Future consideration of funding approved under Resolution E-02-48; October 2002.
In June 2017, the CTC authorized transfer of TCRP savings from projects on I-10 and I-405 to other projects, including TCRP #50. TCRP Project 50 includes $30,000,000 in TCRP funding for two segments along Route 71: Mission Boulevard/Route 71 Interchange (PPNO 2232) and Route 71 – six lanes from Route 10 to Route 60 (PPNO 2741). A total of $16,400,000 was previously programmed and allocated for construction of the Mission Boulevard/Route 71 Interchange segment (PPNO 2232) and the project is now complete. A total of $4,800,000 was previously programmed and allocated for the Route 71 – six lanes from Route 10 to Route 60 segment (PPNO 2741), leaving an un-programmed balance of $8,800,000. The Department and Metro propose to re-program the $8,800,000 of identified TCRP savings to the Design (PS&E) phase of the Route 71 - six lanes from Route 10 to Route 60 segment and update the project schedule and funding plan. This programming action, along with the addition of federal re-purposed funds, will fully fund the PS&E phase.
In conjunction with the above, the CTC also approved the following Tier 2 allocation: Los Angeles 07-LA-71 0.5/ 4.8 $8,800,000 Project 50 - Route 71 Expwy to Fwy Conversion (Route 10 to Route 60) . In Pomona, between Route 10 and Route 60. Add one mixed flow lane and one HOV lane in each direction on Route 71. Future Consideration of Funding approved under Resolution E-02-48; October 2002. Outcome/Output: The project proposes to upgrade 3.2 miles of existing four-lane expressway to an eight-lane freeway by adding 6.4 lane miles of mixed flow and 6.4 lane miles of concurrent flow HOV lanes. Allocation to come from TCRP savings as follows: • Tier 2: $8,800,000 from TCRP Project 52 - HOV and Auxiliary Lanes, Waterford to Route 10.
The 2018 STIP, approved at the CTC March 2018 meeting, appears to close out PPNO 2741, Convert to 6-lane freeway, Route 10 to Route 60, but to add a new PPNO 2741N, Convert to 8-lane fwy, Rt 10-Mission Rd, HOV+mixed-flow , for $20,000K in construction and construction support in FY20-21.
In April 2018, it was reported that Metro was
applying for TCRP (Trade Corridor Relief Program) funds in addition to SB1
funds for the Route 71 Freeway Conversion Project in the San Gabriel Valley
that will upgrade Route 71 to a full freeway between I-10 and Rio Rancho
(Source: Metro The Source, 4/19/2018)
In August 2010, the CTC approved relinquishment of right of way in the city of Chino Hills along Route 71 between Chino Hills Parkway and Pine Avenue (~ SBD R3.339 to SBD R6.516), consisting of collateral facilities.
High Priority Project #1957: Pine Avenue extension from Route 71 to Euclid Avenue in the City of Chino. $6,800,000. (~ SBD R6.516)
In June 2002, the CTC had on its agenda a proposal for Route 71 near City of Chino from San Bernardino County line to Santa Ana River (~ RIV 0.000 to RIV 2.795 to widen it to four lane expressway including two additional animal crossings.
Route 71/Route 91 Interchange (~ RIV R2.895)
There are currently plans (TCRP #64) to improve the Green River Interchange to NB Route 71, including adding an auxiliary lane and connector ramp. (June 2002 CTC Agenda Item 2.1c.(1)). In August 2007, the CTC approved two actions regarding this project, specifically with Project #64.1 and #64.2. TCRP #64.1 would improve the Green River Interchange and add an auxiliary lane and connector ramp east of the Green River Interchange to northbound Route 71 in Riverside County. Project #64.2 would improve the Green River Interchange and add an auxiliary lane and connector ramp east of the Green River Interchange to northbound Route 71 in Riverside County. The actions that were approved were to transfer $590,000 in TCRP funding from TCRP #64.1 to TCRP #64.2 for Plans, Specifications, and Engineering (PS&E), to program $4,410,000 in new TCRP funds for PS&E on #64.2, and to update schedules. The overall project goal is to relieve congestion and improve local traffic circulation on Route 91 in the area of Green River Road and Route 71. TCRP Project #64.1 relieves congestion on Route 91 in the area of Green River Road and Route 71 and improves local traffic circulation on Green River Road in the vicinity of Route 91 by replacing the current 3-lane Green River Road overcrossing with a 6-lane overcrossing, modification of ramps, and local street improvements at the interchange. Project 64.1 was completed in 2007 with funds remaining in the account due to various transfers. TCRP Project #64.2 relieves congestion on Route 91 in the eastbound direction by adding a lane in the vicinity of the Green River Interchange on eastbound Route 91 between Route 241 and Route 71, near the Riverside/Orange County line, extending to the Route 71/Route 91 interchange near the city of Corona in Riverside County. This project should complete in FY11/12.
In October 2011, the CTC approved for future consideration of funding a project to construct a direct flyover connector from eastbound Route 91 to northbound Route 71 and reconfigure the eastbound Route 91 ramp between Green River Road and the Route 91/Route 71 interchange. The project is not fully funded. The project is programmed in the 2010 State Transportation Improvement Program. The total estimated cost is $113,000,000 for capital and support. Construction is estimated tobegin in Fiscal Year 2015-16. The scope as described for the preferred alternative is consistent with the project scope programmed by the Commission in the 2010 State Transportation Improvement Program. A copy of the MND has been provided to Commission staff. Due to potential impacts to hazardous waste, visual resources, hydrology and water quality, noise, biological resources, and traffic, an Initial Study was completed for the project. Based upon environmental studies and proposed environmental commitments, including minimization and avoidance measures, restoration activities, and incorporation of BMPs, the project will not have a significant effect on the environment. As a result, an MND was completed for this project.
In April 2018, it was reported that the RCTC
requested state funds to cover most of the $117 million cost of the long
awaited Route 71/Route 91 interchange rework, and the California Transportation
Commission could approve the request in May. Riverside County officials
proposed putting up $23.4 million, or 20 percent of the price tag. However,
there’s one giant qualification: Even if the Riverside County
Transportation Commission manages to win a promise to fund the project, the
dollars would come from a pot of money generated by California’s
controversial raising of the gasoline tax increase last year through SB1 and
there is a movement under way to repeal the tax increase. Parsons
Transportation Group did an environmental analysis in June 2011, then updated
it in November 2014, a commission report states. Because of the time that has
elapsed, officials say the analysis needs to be updated again. That effort
received a $2 million boost earlier this year from the state transportation
agency. As for the project, the centerpiece is a new sweeping, multi-lane
flyover ramp that would connect eastbound Route 91 with northbound Route 71. It
would also reconfigure the eastbound Route 91 ramp between Green River Road and
the Route 71/Route 91, the report states. If the state commission funds the
interchange, and if the gas tax survives, construction could start in 2019 and
take about two years.
(Source: Press Enterprise, 4/14/2018)
Dawson/Dos Lagos Widening (Temescal Canyon)
In March 2018, it
was reported that a $12.3 million funding agreement for a widening project
intended to relieve heavy congestion on Temescal Canyon Road between Lake
Elsinore and Corona has won approval from Riverside County supervisors. The
Riverside County Transportation Commission is supporting the project with
Measure A infrastructure funds, and under the agreement unanimously approved
Tuesday, March 13, by the Board of Supervisors, the commission will release the
money as the project progresses. About $2.7 million is expected to be used in
the current fiscal year, which ends June 30. Construction is likely to begin in
fall and end in the first half of 2020. Temescal Canyon Road is the primary
north- south road in the area and often is an alternate route for motorists
trying to avoid congestion on I-15 during peak commuting hours, a
transportation agency statement said.
(Source: Press Enterprise, 3/14/2018)
In June 2018, the CTC approved for future consideration of funding a project that will construct roadway improvements to widen Temescal Canyon Road (former Route 71) from two to four lanes along two segments of roadway between Dawson Canyon Road and Dos Lagos Drive (total length 1.3 miles). The Project is estimated to cost $23,470,000 and is fully funded through construction with Local Funds ($3,870,000), Riverside County Transportation Commission Measure A Funds ($12,300,000), and Local Partnership Program Funds ($7,300,000). Construction is estimated to begin in Fiscal Year 2018-19
HOV lanes are planned or under construction as follows:
The segment from I-10 to Route 60 (~ LA R0.682 to LA R4.217) has been named the "Pomona Police Officer Daniel T. Fraembs Memorial Highway". It was dedicated on Friday, May 11, 2001, however, the legislation formally naming the route was not approved until July 26, 2001. Pomona Police Departement Officer Daniel T. Fraembs was born an orphan in Hong Kong. The story is that as an infant, he was found abandoned on a beach by a Hong Kong policeman who brought him to an orphanage. He was adopted at the age of nine months by Donald and Dorothy Fraembs of Cincinnati, Ohio. He became a citizen in 1963, graduated from high school and Fullerton Community College, joined the United States Marine Corps, and then the Orange County Sheriff's Department, where he worked for five years. In 1993, he joined the Pomona Police Department as a police officer. On May 11, 1996, he was ambushed during a confrontation with two gang members near Humane Way, near the Humane Society driveway. He was the first police officer in the department's 108-year history to be killed in the line of duty. Ronald Bruce Mendoza was convicted of Fraembs' murder and is awaiting execution in San Quentin Prison. Named by Senate Concurrent Resolution 12, Chapter 92, July 26, 2001.
The segment from Route 10 to the Riverside County line (~ LA R0.682 to SBD R8.438) is also officially designated the "Chino Valley" Freeway. It was named by Assembly Concurrent Resolution 20, Chapter 55, in 1993.
The segment of this route from Route 10 to Route 91 (~ LA R0.682 to RIV 2.763) is officially named the "Corona Freeway". It was named by the State Highway Commission in 1958, and follows former LRN 77. The first freeway segment opened in 1971. It was named because the route traverses the community of Corona (Latin: Circle), which was named in 1896 because of the circular drive around the city; this was the scene of spectacular auto races 1913-1916.
The segment between Route 60 and Central Avenue in San Bernardino County (~ LA R4.217 to SBD R4.915) is named the "Correctional Officer Manuel A. Gonzalez, Jr. Memorial Highway". This segment was named in memory of Correctional Officer Manuel A. Gonzalez, Jr., who was stabbed to death by an inmate on January 10, 2005 while working at the California Institution for Men in Chino. Officer Gonzalez was born on September 15, 1961, in Los Angeles, California, and grew up in Santa Fe Springs, California. He graduated from Pioneer High School in 1979 and thereafter attended Rio Hondo College from 1980 to 1982. He enlisted in the United States Army, servubg in Germany and then in Fort Carson, Colorado, and was honorably discharged in 1986. Officer Gonzalez was hired by the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation in 1988, where he proudly served the department for 17 years, working at the state prison in Corcoran, California, until 1993, at the state prison in Lancaster, California, until 1996, and at the California Institution for Men in Chino, California, until his death in 2005. Officer Gonzalez was a well-respected and reliable employee who went beyond his duties in order to assist other staff members and worked diligently to make prison facilities more safe. Named by Senate Concurrent Resolution (SCR) 11, Resolution Chapter 85, on 7/10/2007.
The segment between Soquel Canyon/Central Avenue and Pine Avenue in Chino Hills (~ SBD R4.862 to SBD R6.521) is named the "Mayor James Thalman and Mayor Michael Wickman Memorial Highway". This segment was named in memory of Mayors James Thalman and Michael Wickman. Mayor James Thalman was instrumental in the efforts of the community of Chino Hills to incorporate as a city, and both he and Michael Wickman were elected as members of the first city council of Chino Hills in November 1991, following its incorporation as a city. During his tenure on the city council, James Thalman was the voice of the city on water issues and represented the city on numerous water committees, as well as serving as a member of the League of California Cities, the Four Corners Policy Committee, and the California Joint Powers Insurance Authority. During his tenure on the city council, Michael Wickman represented the city on the McCoy Equestrian Center Committee and as a member of the board of directors for Omnitrans. James Thalman served three terms as mayor of Chino Hills, and Michael Wickman served as mayor of Chino Hills in 1995 and in 2000. Named by Senate Concurrent Resolution (SCR) 52, Resolution Chapter 26, on 4/21/2006.
[SHC 253.1] Entire route. Added to the Freeway and Expressway system in 1959. Route 71 is full freeway from Rio Rancho Rd. to Route 83. South of Route 83 (in Riverside County), it is freeway. North of Rio Rancho (Rio Rancho is about 1/4 mile north of Route 60), it is two lanes each direction, with a median strip. Intersections are at Old Pomona, North Ranch, Phillips, Ninth, Mission, and Second. It becomes a freeway at Pomona Blvd. up to I-210.
Overall statistics for Route 71:
The following segments are designated as Classified Landscaped Freeway:
|County||Route||Starting PM||Ending PM|
The route that became LRN 71 was first defined in 1925 by Chapter 335, which directed the transfer and conveyance of “...that certain road situate in the said county of Del Norte and described as follows: Commencing at a point where the Redwood highway of the state of Oregon intersects the common boundary line between the state of Oregon and the state of California, and running thence in a S-ly direction along the course of the right of way of the present county road or highway through Smith River Valley, thence crossing Smith River at the present county bridge or site more feasible to connect with the present county road on the S bank of Smith river, thence along the present county road or highway by the acreage leased [by] the California Highway Commission for repair shop sites by the County of Del Norte and connecting at Crescent City with the Redwood Highway...” In 1935, it was codified into the highway code as:
Crescent City northerly to the Oregon Line near Chetco
In 1957, Chapter 36 to simply terminate at the "Oregon State Line"
This route was signed as US 101.
From Route 39 to Route 605 in Whittier. (a) This will cease to be a state highway when the Route 90 freeway is completed from Route 5 to Route 39. (b) The relinquished former portions of Route 72 within the City of Montebello, the City of Pico Rivera, and the County of Los Angeles are not state highways and are not eligible for adoption under Section 81. For the relinquished former portions of Route 72, the Cities of Montebello and Pico Rivera and the County of Los Angeles shall maintain within their respective jurisdictions signs directing motorists to the continuation of Route 72.
The Montebello Relinquishment was considered by the CTC in September 2000.
The portion of Route 72 in Pico Rivera was up for relinquishment in July 2005.
In 1963, Chapter 1372 changed the terminus of the route to be "Downey Road near the City of Los Angeles." This was just a rewording reflecting the 1965 deletion of Route 245, which was a temporary state highway during construction of Route 5 running from Route 5 near Los Angeles to Route 60 at the intersection of Downey Road. The 1965 act also added some relinquishment conditions:
So clearly the intent was for Route 72 to be a temporary route while the freeway system was being built out.
In 1981, Chapter 292 truncated the route to be "Route 39 to Downey Road near the City of Los Angeles." This eliminated the portion between Route 5 and Route 39, reflecting the completion of the Route 57 freeway. The second condition ("Route 72 shall cease to be a state highway when Route 90 freeway is completed from Route 5 to Route 39.") remained. As for the former portions of Route 72: the portion from Route 5 to Harbor Blvd [Route 39] was relinquished from the state highway system, and the portion from Harbor Blvd [Route 39] to Route 39 was transferred to Route 39.
In 1985, Chapter 385 added additional conditions to the route definition: “…except as follows: (a) Route 72 shall cease to be a state highway when Route 90 freeway is completed from Route 5 to Route 39. (b) Notwithstanding subdivision (a), that portion of Route 72 from Atlantic Boulevard to Downey Road shall cease to be a state highway when the County of Los Angeles completes the reconstruction of Whittier Boulevard approximately between these two limits.”
In 1988, Chapter 106 added an additional condition: “(c) Notwithstanding subdivision (a), the portion of Route 72 from Route 605 to Atlantic Boulevard shall cease to be a state highway when the County of Los Angeles, the City of Montebello, and the City of Pico Rivera complete the reconstruction of their respective portions of Whittier Boulevard approximately between these two limits.”
In 1992, Chapter 1243 changed the route to "Route 39 to Atlantic Boulevard near the City of Los Angeles". This reflected the completion of subsection (b), eliminated Atlantic to Downey Road.
At one time, there was a permit that allowed the closure of this route to all vehicular traffic, except emergency traffic, between Eastern and Atlantic Blvd on Friday, Saturday, and Sundy nights between 9:30 pm and 5:00 am. This permit was granted to reduce the "cruising" that was occuring on the route on those evenings. This segment is no longer part of the routing.
In 2010, Chapter 421 (SB 1318, 9/29/10) changed the terminus of the
Atlantic Boulevard near the City of Los Angeles
to Route 605 in Whittier". Appropriate adjustments were made in
subsection (b) as well. It used to read: "(b) Notwithstanding subdivision (a),
any portion of Route 72 from Route 605 to Atlantic Boulevard ceases to be a
state highway when the County of Los Angeles, the City of Montebello, and the
City of Pico Rivera complete the reconstruction of their respective portions of
Whittier Boulevard approximately between these two limits."
The route currently is along Whittier Blvd.
Route 72 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 72 between 1934 and 1964.
High Priority Project #1610: Reconstruct Whittier Blvd. (Route 72) and improve parkway drainage from Five Points to Philadelphia Ave in Whittier. $1,360,000. (~ LA 4.267 to LA 5.145)
Historically, this route is close to the original "El Camino Real" (The Kings Road). The original 1964 route (from I-5 to Route 39) has officially been designated as "El Camino Real by Assembly Bill 1769, Chapter 1569, in 1959. The roads that connect the Route 39 terminus with I-5 are also part of El Camino Real.
The portion of this route from the eastern entrance of Route 72 at the
intersection of Costa Glen Avenue and Whittier Boulevard to the western
entrance to Route 72 at the intersection of Penn Street and Whittier Boulevard
(~ LA 0.603 to LA 4.855) is officially named the "Detectives Mike Lane and
John Pierce Memorial Highway." Named in memory of Whittier Detectives Mike
Lane and John Pierce. Detective Mike Lane graduated from Loara High School in
Anaheim and joined the Whittier Police Department on January 22, 1968, as a
cadet, attaining the position of police officer on May 23, 1969. In 1973,
Detective Lane was assigned to the Whittier Police Department’s Detective
Division, Criminal Tactical Unit, and Major Crime Investigations. Detective
Lane was also a member of the Southeast Burglary Investigation Team from its
inception in April 1975, until March 4, 1977, when he became a detective in the
Whittier Police Department’s Investigative Division, Narcotics Detail. On
December 13, 1979, Detective Lane was working undercover on a motorcycle theft
investigation when he was attempting to buy back a stolen motorcycle from a
local outlaw motorcycle gang when he was confronted by the suspects while still
in his vehicle. Shots were exchanged and he sustained fatal injuries.Whittier
Detective John Pierce attended and graduated from El Rancho High School and
Fullerton City College. After a stint in the California National Guard,
Detective Pierce joined the Whittier Police Department on October 2, 1967, as a
uniformed patrol officer, and in the early 1970s, he served as a liaison
officer in the Whittier Police Explorer Post. In 1973, Detective Pierce was
promoted to the Whittier Police Department’s Investigative Division,
assigned to narcotics and vice, and later served on the Whittier Police
Department’s SWAT Team. In 1976, Detective Pierce attained the rank of
agent. Detective Pierce also served as a training officer in the Whittier
Police Department’s Investigative Division. In April 1977, Detective
Pierce was named the “California Outstanding Narcotics Officer” by
the We Tip organization. On September 21, 1976, while working on an undercover
investigation regarding the sale of narcotics, Detective Pierce was assaulted
by two subjects and sustained serious injuries. These injuries left him
paralyzed from the neck down and ultimately resulted in his death on May 18,
1977. These two heroic police officers, who were killed in the line of duty
while protecting the community against dangerous criminals, will never be
forgotten; in fact, as of 2013, these are the only two officers the Whittier
Police Department has lost. Named on 09/27/13 by ACR 62, Res. Chapter 139,
Statutes of 2013.
In November 1957, the designation I-72 was proposed for what is now I-580. This was part of an approach to have I-5 numbered as I-11, and I-80 as I-76, and included a lot of single interstate numbers for routes that are now loop or spur routes (3di). The numbering was rejected by AASHTO in favor of I-5W.
Overall statistics for Route 72:
The route that would become LRN 72 was first defined in 1931 by Chapter 82 as the route from Weed to California-Oregon State Line, near Calor. In 1935, it was codified into the highway code as the following route:
“[LRN 3] at Weed to the Oregon State Line near Calor”
This definition remained unchanged until the 1963 renumbering. The route was (and is) signed as US 97.
Return to State Highway Routes