State Route 78

Click here for a key to the symbols used. An explanation of acronyms may be found at the bottom of the page.

Routing

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

   Post 1964 Signage History

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

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

   Pre 1964 Signage History

   In 1934, Route 78 was signed along the route from Jct. US 101 near Oceanside to Jct. US 99 near Kane Springs, via Ramona. This was once routed along Vista Way, Santa Fe, and Mission Road to Escondido. It was LRN 196, which was originally defined to run from LRN 2 (US 101) to LRN 77 in Vista. LRN 197 was defined to run from LRN 77 in Escondido, so it appears as if the portion between Vista and Escondido was part of the LRN 77 routing. However, in 1947 the definition of LRN 196 was changed to terminate simply at Vista, and in 1951 it was changed to terminate at LRN 77 near Escondido (US 395), making it likely that in 1951, the route between Vista and Escondido was transferred (with no change to LRN 77) from LRN 77 to LRN 196.

   By 1935, Division of Highways County Maps showed Route 78 following LRN 196 on Vista Way between US 101/LRN 2 Oceanside east to US 395/LRN 77 in Vista.  Route 78 multiplexed US 395/LRN 77 east from Vista to Escondido via Santa Fe Avenue, Mission Road and what is now Mission Avenue.  Within Escondido, Route 78 and US 395 multiplexed via Broadway where Route 78 split east onto LRN 197 via Grand Avenue. 
   (Source: Gribblenation Blog (Tom Fearer), “California State Route 78”, April 2022)

   In the late 1940s, US 395/LRN 77 was modernized between San Diego and Riverside. The new alignment of US 395/LRN 77 provided a direct north/south routing between San Diego and Riverside by way of Escondido.  The new alignment of US 395/LRN 77 removed the multiplex of Route 78 between Vista and Escondido.  As a result, in 1947 the legislature altered the definition of LRN 196 as terminating at Vista instead of LRN 77. In 1950, the new 18.3-mile alignment of US 395/LRN 77 opened, routed directly north from Miramar towards Temecula via Escondido.  The new alignment of US 395 left Route 78 alone aligned over what had been LRN 77 between Vista-Escondido.  For a brief period, the former LRN 77 was not in the state highway system. In 1951, the legislature extended LRN 196 from Vista to LRN 77 in Escondido.  This measure brought Route 78 between Vista-Escondido back under state maintenance as part of LRN 196.
   (Source: Gribblenation Blog (Tom Fearer), “California State Route 78”, April 2022)

   In 1951, a proposed route was floated for Route 78 between Oceanside and Vista. The initial project would be a four-lane divided expressway. A separated intersection would be provided with US 101 (eventual I-5) in Oceanside. The route would be improved so that traffic could go faster than 25 mph, and it would be raised to prevent flooding. The section of highway between Vista and Escondido that was part of the state highway system prior to the relocation of US 395 in 1948 has been restored to state highway status and will be an easterly extension of Route 78.
   (Source: Times Advocate, 9/8/1951 via Joel Windmiller, 2/19/2023)

   During 1959, the entire planned corridor of the Route 78/LRN 196 freeway between Oceanside and Escondido was added to the Freeways and Expressway System. Construction funding was made available during 1960. Construction continued through the 1960s. Ultimately Route 78 west of Vista to I-5 in Oceanside was constructed to freeway standards from 1967 through 1973. During 1968, much of what had been Route 78 on Mission Road and Santa Fe Avenue in the Escondido-Vista corridor was designated as San Diego County Sign Route S14. 
   (Source: Gribblenation Blog (Tom Fearer), “California State Route 78”, April 2022)

   Status

   I-5/Route 78 Interchange (11-SD-078 0.0)

   The SAFETEA-LU act, enacted in August 2005 as the reauthorization of TEA-21, provided the following expenditures on or near this route: High Priority Project #3206: I-5 and Route 78 Interchange Improvements. $4,000,000.

   In June 2015, it was reported that Caltrans is in the process of rebuilding the I-5/Route 78 interchange (11-SD-078 0.0) that spills traffic into a residential neighborhood. Caltrans first shared information on proposed interchange improvements in January 2015, and followed up with additional community briefings since then. This was reolated to a number of planned I-5 corridor improvements, and the necessity to upgrade both ends of Route 78 before future work on I-5 begins. The roadway improvements would be designed to ease expected traffic flow for 30 years out. There was a specific community concern about flyovers; the community wanted flyovers to be eliminated as an idea. Caltrans indicated that a flyover would be studied for traffic, cost and impact on neighborhoods, along with other alternatives. However, they appreciated community feedback, and it provided Caltrans great ideas, including consideration of a roundabout and bike lane. In addition to objections to noise and pollution, residents expressed concern over the lack of progress in Buena Vista Lagoon restoration, which the interchange will cross. Another big concern of residents and city council members was the speed of traffic that exits the interchange and barrels through a South Oceanside neighborhood.
   (Source: The Coast News, 6/10/2015)

   In January 2022, it was reported that the congested interchange between state Route 78 and I-5 in North County could be upgraded with federal infrastructure money. The junction connects two heavily traveled freeways, but instead of an uninterrupted transition, vehicles in the westbound lanes of state Route 78 must wait at a stoplight to turn south to get onto I-5. This leads to back-ups in the westbound lanes causing delays as long as 15 minutes during rush hour and increasing the risk of accidents. To modernize the interchange, officials plan to build a flyover overpass that would route cars over existing lanes, according to the San Diego Association of Governments. It would replace the traffic light and allow vehicles on Route 78 to merge seamlessly onto I-5 without slowing or stopping. The $1.2 trillion federal Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, passed in November 2021, authorizes funding to modernize roads, bridges, rail, ports, water systems and broadband lines. California’s share includes $29.5 billion for roads and bridges, which officials hope to tap for the interchange. The federal Department of Transportation will provide $4.8 billion to California immediately and CalTrans will administer the money within the state. The North County interchange project requires two or more years for environmental review and engineering plans. After that construction of the new interchange could be completed within about 18 months.
   (Source: San Diego Union Tribune, 1/24/2022)

   In October 2024, it was reported that there were even more delays for this project. Preliminary planning began in 2012 for onramps to replace the traffic lights that back up traffic entering southbound I-5 from the westbound lanes of Route 78 and from eastbound Vista Way. According to Caltrans, more public engagement, traffic studies, an environmental impact report and, perhaps most important, funding are needed, Construction is tentatively set for 2033-2037. Environmental studies are now set to be completed by 2029. Design work is scheduled for 2029 through 2032, pending funding, and construction is tentatively set for 2033 through 2037, also pending funding. No estimate has been released of the interchange project’s construction costs, which will be high. At least $8 million has been allocated so far for preliminary design and environmental work. The project could be completed in less than two years if funding were approved, according to elected officials. But the plan has repeatedly stalled. Contributing to the delay is an unanticipated shortfall in the revenue available from the half-cent sales tax known as TransNet approved by San Diego County voters. TransNet revenue is used with state and grants to pay for transportation projects.
   (Source: MSN/SD Union Tribune, October 2024)

   In June 2026, it was reported that the public comment period was open for this project. According to the project page, the potential interchange improvements being considered are: • Adding direct freeway-to-freeway connectors from southbound I-5 to eastbound Route 78 and westbound Route 78 to southbound I-5; • Building direct access ramps that connect to future carpool and transit vehicle lanes on I-5 and Route 78; • Reconfiguration of the existing interchange to accommodate the new connections outlined above. Public review that will inform the Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Impact Studies (EIR/EIS) scheduled for spring of 2025. Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Impact Studies (EIR/EIS) expected to be complete by 2029. Design would take place between 2029 and 2032, with construction starting in 2033 and continuing for 5 years. Design and construction are contingent upon funding.
   (Source: Caltrans District 11 on FB, 6/11/2026; Project Page retrieved 6/25/2026)

   There are plans to construct an eastbound auxiliary lane in Oceanside from the El Camino Real Overcrossing (~ SD 1.483) to east of El Camino Real Overcrossing. July 2005 CTC Agenda.

   In May 2012, the Oceanside Planning Commission approved plans to construct an interchange between Route 78 and Rancho Del Oro Drive (~ SD 2.367). The interchange would be for westbound traffic only. Dropped from the plan was a proposal to connect segments of Melrose Drive south of Route 76 to create a link to the highway.

   In January 2007, the CTC considered relinquishment of right of way in the City of Vista, at Melrose Drive, consisting of reconstructed and relocated city streets. The City, by freeway agreement dated February 13, 1996, agreed to accept title upon relinquishment by the State. (~ SD 6.01)

   San Marcos Aux Lane Adjustments (11-SD-78 14.7/15.3)

   In October 2022, the CTC approved the following pre-construction phase allocation: $2,396,000. 11-SD-78 14.7/15.3. PPNO 11-1476; ProjID 1122000231; EA 43163. Route 78 In San Marcos, from 0.3 mile west to 0.3 mile east of Mission Road. Modify auxiliary lanes.  Allocation: FY25-26 PS&E $1,546,000; R/W Sup $850,000.
   (Source: October 2022 CTC Agenda, Agenda Item 2.5b.(2a) #16)

   In January 2024, the CTC revised the following project in the 2022 SHOPP: #29. 11-SD-78 14.7/15.3. PPNO 11-1476; ProjID 1122000231; EA 43163. Route 78 In San Marcos, from 0.3 mile west to 0.3 mile east of Mission Road. Modify auxiliary lanes.  This is a Construction Manager/General Contractor (CMGC) project. Note: Update description to change the project delivery type from design-bid-build to CMGC to save project time and reduce construction risks. No allocation changes.
   (Source: January 2024 CTC Agenda, Agenda Item 2.1d #29)

   In June 2025, the CTC revised this project in the 2024 SHOPP: 11-SD-78 14.7/15.3. PPNO 11-1476; ProjID 1122000231; EA 43163. Route 78 In San Marcos, from 0.3 mile west to 0.3 mile east of Mission Road. Modify auxiliary lanes.  This is a Construction Manager/General Contractor (CMGC) project. Allocation ($ × $1000): PA&ED $0; PS&E $1,546; R/W Sup $850; Con Sup $3,050; R/W Cap $2,041; Const Cap $18,550; TOTAL $26,037. Note: Deleted project. The scope of this project is being delivered by a non-SHOPP project, EA 11-2T240.
   (Source: June 2025 CTC Agenda, Agenda Item  2.1a.(1d) #86)

   Route 15/Route 78 Managed Lanes Connector and Woodland Interchange Project (11-SD-15 R30.6/R32.0; 11-SD-78 12.6/R16.7)

   There are early plans to expand this route in Escondido (~ SD R16.337). The plans could result in either two car-pool lanes or two toll lanes from Oceanside to Escondido by 2020. If car-pool lanes are picked, they would provide designated space for buses, car pools, van pools and solo drivers willing to pay a fee. Toll lanes would be open to everyone…. for a fee.The study should be completed in Spring 2012. In 2009, Route 78 handled an average of between 120,000 and 160,000 weekday vehicle trips, according to the California Department of Transportation. Route 78 was built in the 1970s and widened from four lanes to six in 1993.
   (Image Source: Rte 78 Corridor Project Page)

   The 2018 STIP, approved at the CTC March 2018 meeting, appears to allocate Advance Project Development Element (APDE) funding of $7M in Environmental and Planning funding for FY18-19 for PPNO 1139 Route 15/Route 78 HOV Connectors (~ SD R31.392).

   The 2020 STIP, approved at the CTC March 2020 meeting, appears to continued the programmed funding for PPNO 1139 "Rt 15/78 HOV Connectors (APDE)"
   (Source: March 2020 CTC Agenda, Item 4.7, 2020 STIP Adopted 3/25/2020)

   In October 2020, it was reported that SANDAG was holding a virtual meeting to get public input on improvements to the I-15 and state Route 78 interchange. These are still five years away and will depend on funding. A study to evaluate plans to improve Route 78 was completed in 2012 and some construction improvements just west of the I-15/SR 78 interchange were implemented. SANDAG and Caltrans have proposed additional improvements to this corridor, including the I-15/Route 78 Managed Lanes Direct Connectors Project, the I-5/Route 78 Interchange Project, the Route 78 Managed Lanes Project, and operational improvements along Route 78. Other long-term projects include future double tracking and express services for the SPRINTER and the construction of additional segments of the Inland Rail Trail Bike Path. First up is the I-15/Route 78 Managed Lanes Direct Connectors Project, for which environmental studies are starting. Specifically, the project will improve connectivity by:
   (Source: Rte 78 Corridor Project Page)

   • Building Managed Lanes Direct Connectors between I-15 and Route 78
   • Extending three miles of Managed Lanes in each direction on Route 78 between the interchange and San Marcos Boulevard
   • Adding a westbound auxiliary lane between Nordahl Road and Woodland Parkway/Barham Drive
   • Relocating the eastbound Route 78 on-ramp from Barham Drive
   • Widening and realigning Barham Drive from La Moree Road to Woodland Parkway
   • Replacing the Woodland Parkway undercrossing
   • Constructing a bike facility on Barham Drive/Woodland Parkway

   In May 2025, the draft EIR for the proposed I-15/Route 78 Managed Lanes Connector and Woodland Interchange project was released. . The project is a partnership with the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) and the City of San Marcos. The project proposes to build a managed lanes connector ramp at the I-15/Route 78 interchange and continue managed lanes on Route 78 through San Marcos in San Diego County. The existing I-15 Managed Lanes would be extended west on Route 78 for three miles in both directions. Early planning-level traffic studies and travel pattern data indicate that the east end of the Route 78 corridor produces most of the traffic congestion and over 50% of westbound traffic from the I-15/Route 78 interchange exit within the first three exits along westbound Route 78. The Barham Drive and Woodland Parkway Interchange would be reconstructed to accommodate the managed lanes and add a fully separated pathway for bicyclists and pedestrians. The Woodland Parkway improvements will support local land use decisions, such as expansion of California State University San Marcos, residential and employment centers, and healthcare facilities. This project is a multimodal set of improvements developed by Caltrans, SANDAG, and local cities as part of a larger effort solution for the Eastern gateway, which also includes the Route 78 Asset Management project. The project has an estimated cost of $490 million and is currently anticipated for construction in 2030, pending funding. Note that  the SANDAG Regional Plan proposes a separate project to extend the Managed Lanes on Route 78 an additional 11 miles west (San Marcos Boulevard to El Camino Real) by 2035.
   (Source: Caltrans District 11 Press Release, 5/11/2025)

   The specific proposed actions are:
   (Source: "I–15/SR 78 Managed Lanes Connector and Woodland Interchange Project, Draft Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Assessment", May 2025)

   • Construct direct connector ramps with lane management systems to connect the
     existing I-15 Express Lanes.
   • Extend managed lanes on Route 78 in both eastbound and westbound directions.
   • Reconstruct Barham Drive and the Woodland Parkway Interchange by implementing enhanced multi-modal access, with proposed Class I multiuse paths along both roads.
   • Construct a westbound lane from the Nordahl Road overcrossing to the Nordahl Road westbound on-ramp, and another westbound lane from west of Mission Road to the Woodland Parkway westbound on-ramp.
   • Remove a section of the existing auxiliary lane from the Barham Drive eastbound on-ramp to the Mission Road overhead bridge.
   • Add overhead equipment such as gantry(s) that span the lane, shoulder and buffer, with space to mount tolling equipment. Variable Toll Message Signs are proposed to display toll rates. Vehicle Detection Stations are  proposed to identify the presence of vehicles in the Express Lanes. Closed caption televisions are also proposed to view traffic in the Express Lanes and monitor tolling equipment. A distinct Express Lane separation from general-purpose lanes with either double line striping or flexible channelizers, and appropriate signage would be implemented.
   • Soundwalls would be constructed, as feasible, to abate noise impacts.

   The DEIR notes that the managed lanes proposed in the Build Alternative would be constructed as high occupancy toll (HOT) lanes, also called Express Lanes, meaning that high-occupancy vehicles (HOVs) can use the lanes free of charge, but single-occupancy vehicles (SOVs) would be required to pay a toll. The managed lanes would also be used as transit lanes for new and existing bus and Rapid bus routes serving the region. The uses for managed lanes are continually evolving; in the future, the lanes could be repurposed to embrace emerging technologies, such as connected and/or autonomous vehicles. Express Lanes provide a managed approach to improving system performance and reliability, optimizing use of capacity, and creating new sources of revenue to further improve transportation in the corridor, including transit. Also known as HOT lanes, Express Lanes provide preferential access for eligible vehicles, such as HOVs and certain low-emission vehicles, and/or for fee payment by FasTrak users. This project would utilize the Managed Lanes operational concept through implementation of Express Lanes to reduce the demand on the existing I-15/Route 78 connectors by providing dedicated lanes for managed lane traffic to transition between the I-15 Express Lanes and the proposed future Route 78 Managed Lane project. The use of lane management strategies and congestion pricing would reduce congestion in the general-purpose and connector lanes by allowing some general-purpose vehicles with FasTrak transponders to use excess capacity in the managed lane connector.
   (Source: "I–15/SR 78 Managed Lanes Connector and Woodland Interchange Project, Draft Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Assessment", May 2025)

   The DEIR noted some alternatives that were considered but eliminated:
   (Source: "I–15/SR 78 Managed Lanes Connector and Woodland Interchange Project, Draft Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Assessment", May 2025)

   • Express Lanes Extension. As part of Alternative 1: Express Lanes, under consideration was extending the Express Lanes further, to west of San Marcos Boulevard. This extension was expected to result in additional traveler benefits. However, project constraints such as schedule and budget limitations were identified. A future project would study the Route 78 Express Lane extension as part of the larger planned Route 78 Managed Lanes Project. The proposed project focuses on the interchange of the two freeways and the identified weaving issues.
   • HOV Alternative. The HOV lane alternative would implement the same managed-lane improvements as Alternative 1 but with HOV lanes instead of Express Lanes. The HOV lane-management strategy restricts allowable users with no way to adjust in real time. The Express Lane strategy allows the same users as the HOV strategy but also allows excess capacity to be used and managed in real time, based on traffic conditions. The HOV strategy can result in “empty lane syndrome” with excess capacity that remains unused. With the HOT strategy, lane congestion can be managed. In addition, the HOV strategy is not consistent with the Regional Plan.
   • Reversible Lanes. Per Assembly Bill 2542, reversible lanes must be considered when submitting a capacity-increasing project or a major street or highway lane realignment project. Reversible lanes are when managed lanes operate in one direction during the morning (AM) peak period and the opposite direction in the evening (PM) peak period. Reversible lanes are separated from general-purpose lanes by barriers in order to avoid confusion and operate safely. In certain conditions, reversible lanes can reduce the right-of-way (ROW) needs and capital costs of highway improvements while providing additional capacity during the peak period when it is most needed. A reversible lanes strategy was considered for the proposed project. Traffic analysis shows that volumes along Route 78 stay relatively consistent throughout the morning and evening peak periods in both directions. There is not enough of a difference in directionality to justify a reversible lane. On I-15, there are more vehicles traveling in the northern direction in the evening peak than in the morning peak. Further, on I-15, there are fewer vehicles traveling in the southern direction in the evening peak than the morning peak. The 2050 forecasted volumes predict similar findings. These trends show that reversible lanes would not be an  effective strategy for the Route 78 managed lanes.
   • Widen Existing I-15/Route 78 Connectors. This alternative would require major reconstruction of the existing I-15/Route 78 Separation connectors to widen the NB I-15/WB Route 78 connector and the EB Route 78/SB I-15 connector. To accomplish the widening of the two existing connectors, the proposed structures would be constructed within a tightly constrained footprint due to the existing adjacent structures and roadways that  comprise the remainder of the I-15/Route 78 Separation. Additional widening to both sides of I-15, south of the Separation, and to both directions of Route 78 would be needed to realign traffic with the widened connectors. Construction staging activities would cause substantial impacts and delays to traffic along both the I-15 and Route 78 roadways.  Widening the existing connectors would add capacity, which would lessen the congestion on each of the connectors, but it would not address the weaving movements through the general-purpose lanes from traffic that utilize the I-15 Express Lanes. Future connectivity between the I-15 Express Lanes and the future Route 78 managed lanes between I-5 and I-15 would not be provided. This alternative would exceed the total project costs of the other proposed alternatives, and increase ROW and environmental impacts.
   • Operational Improvements Only. This alternative would construct only operational improvements such as auxiliary lanes along Route 78. These improvements may improve traffic operations in isolated point locations or segments but would not address the need and purpose of this project to minimize congestion on the existing I-15/Route 78 connectors and to provide future connectivity between the I-15 Express Lanes and the future Route 78 managed lanes between I-5 and I-15.
   • General-Purpose to HOT Lane Conversion. This alternative would construct HOT lanes and HOT connectors from the I-15 Express Lanes onto Route 78. The HOT lanes on Route 78 would be constructed by converting the existing inside general-purpose lanes and constructing one new lane in each direction. Single-occupancy drivers not willing to pay a toll would need to merge over to one of the two remaining general-purpose lanes.  Intermediate HOT lane access would be available near Nordahl Road for both directions. This alternative would include operational improvements to alleviate merging and weaving conditions. These conditions were often  mentioned by the public in response to community outreach. The weaving of drivers on northbound I-15 from the Express Lanes to the general-purpose connectors would be reduced, as those travelers could stay in the Express Lanes to access westbound Route 78. Converting general-purpose lanes on Route 78 to managed lanes presents several challenges. Because Route 78 has three general-purpose through lanes in each  direction, converting one of them to a managed lane would leave only two general-purpose lanes. This reduction is likely to cause substantial congestion in the general-purpose lanes and high violation rates in the managed lanes. The region, as well as other managed lanes nationwide, already experience challenges with enforcement. Extensive signage would be required to notify SOV drivers on eastbound Route 78 that they would need to merge out of the inside general-purpose lane or pay a toll as it transitions to a managed lane. Enforcing a converted lane is not considered feasible at this time. Based on community interaction and feedback, a lack of public acceptance for a lane conversion on Route 78 is expected. Preserving the existing number of general-purpose lanes eliminates potential managed lanes accessibility impacts. If a general-purpose lane was converted, it would increase travel time and decrease access to the facility to those drivers unable to pay the toll.
   • Express Toll Lanes. This alternative would construct a tolled managed-lane connector between the I-15 Express Lanes and the future proposed managed lanes on Route 78. All HOV and FasTrak vehicles, excluding transit, would be charged a fee to use the connector. Vehicles traveling northbound on the I-15 Express Lanes would need to make a decision before reaching Citracado Parkway to remain on the facility and pay the pricing fee at the proposed connector or to exit at the existing IAP to utilize the existing connector to Route 78. In the eastbound Route 78 direction, traffic wanting to connect to southbound I-15 would also need to use the existing  southbound I-15 connector or choose to pay the pricing fee. Although future connectivity would be provided, full capacity on the proposed connector would not be reached with this alternative, as most drivers would most likely elect to use the existing I-15/Route 78 connectors.

   In November 2025, it was reported that Caltrans was demolishing parts of the Mar Vista Drive bridge during ongoing construction work. The work has been ongoing since May 2025 to improve a 17.7-mile portion of Route 78 from I-5 in Oceanside to Broadway and Lincoln Parkway in Escondido, part of the $126 million Caltrans SR-78 Asset Management Project. Construction began in May and will continue through 2027 for several road projects along that stretch of highway that are part of the Asset Management Project, including widening the Mar Vista Drive bridge.
   (Source: Fox 5 San Diego, 11/19/2025)

   In April 2025, it was reported that Skanska has secured a Caltrans contract, valued at $102 million, to rehabilitate Route 78 on the stretch from I-5 to nearly one mile east of I-15 in San Diego County. Skanska’s scope of work includes building an eastbound acceleration lane and rehabilitating over 40 lane-miles of the road’s surface structural section. Additionally, the project encompasses the construction of new curb ramps compliant with Americans with Disabilities Act standards. It also covers the installation of upgraded Midwest Guardrail systems, beyond gore paving, as well as new bridge barriers. Construction is set to commence in April 2025 and reach completion by December 2026.
   (Source: World Construction Network, 4/9/2025)

   Naming

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

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

   Named Structures

   The Twin Oaks Valley Road Bridge (Bridge 57-1033, SD 012.91) in the City of San Marcos, San Diego County is officially named the "Vicente "Vince" Andrade Memorial Bridge". Vicente "Vince" Andrade, originally from Winslow, Arizona was a powerful force both in the City of San Marcos and as a voice for North San Diego County's Latino community. In May 1998, he received the Making A Difference Award, lauding Mr. Andrade's leadership in founding El Grupo Sin Nombre, an umbrella organization aimed at giving 37 Latino groups a unified voice on political and social issues in North San Diego County. He served as Chairperson of the Board of Directors for North County Health Services, President of the Hispanic Advisory Council at California State University, San Marcos, and Chairperson of the Latino Coalition for Education. In 1996, after a three-year term on the planning commission, Vince Andrade was elected to the San Marcos City Council where he served with distinction and represented the city as a SANDAG board member and was instrumental in securing additional funds for construction of the Twin Oaks Valley Road interchange improvements. This outstanding community leader died on January 23, 1999 after a five year courageous battle against recurring cancer. Named by Senate Concurrent Resolution 9, Chaptered April 30, 2001, Resolution Chapter 46.

   ---

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

   Post 1964 Signage History

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

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

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

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

   Pre 1964 Signage History

   
   

   The history of this segment dates back to the Banner Toll Road, which was constructed around 1870 between the towns of Julian and Banner.  By 1874 the Banner Toll Road was purchased by San Diego County and made accessible to the public.  During the early 1920s the existing Julian Road and Santa Ysabel Grade were reconstructed by San Diego County from Ramona east to Julian. By 1925 San Diego County had constructed a new road from Banner east to LRN 26 (US 99, now Route 86) near Kane Springs.
   (Source: Gribblenation Blog (Tom Fearer), “California State Route 78”, April 2022)

   In 1934, Route 78 was signed along the route from Jct. US 101 near Oceanside to Jct. US 99 near Kane Springs, via Ramona. It was LRN 197 between Escondido and Ramona (junction Route 67). It was LRN 198 between Ramona and near Kane Springs and the junction with US 99 (LRN 26; now Route 86). Both LRN 197 and LRN 198 were defined in 1933.

   By 1935, Route 78 and US 395 multiplexed within Escondido via Broadway where Route 78 split east onto LRN 197 via Grand Avenue.  From Escondido Route 78 followed LRN 197 east via San Pasqual Valley Road and Pine Street to LRN 198 in Ramona.  Route 78/LRN 198 from Ramona followed Julian Road east to Santa Ysabel where it picked up a multiplex of Route 79 southbound.  Route 78/Route 79 followed Julian Road east from Santa Ysabel to Main Street in the community of Julian.  From Julian Route 78/LRN 198 followed Banner Grade east to the Imperial County Line.  Within Imperial County, Route 78 followed LRN 198 to a terminus at US 99/LRN 26 near Kane Springs. 
   (Source: Gribblenation Blog (Tom Fearer), “California State Route 78”, April 2022)

   The portion of the Route between former Route 79 and Route 86 was part of the planned Imperial Highway. The name "Imperial" refers to the Imperial Valley, which took its name from the Imperial Land Co., a subsidiary of the California Development Company charged with reclaiming the water-starved but arable land east of San Diego for agricultural purposes in the early 1900s. The company began building canals in 1900, diverting water from the Colorado River for irrigation, and forming the Salton Sea in the process. The Los Angeles area wanted to patch together a superhighway that would stretch from the Pacific all the way to Brawley in the Imperial Valley, a distance of 215 miles; the route was later extended a few miles farther south to El Centro. The most route roughly followed the old Butterfield Stage overland route, established in 1858: across the desert (Route 78) and along today’s Route 79 to Temecula, where it headed on to Corona via Lake Elsinore and Temescal Canyon (Route 71, later I-15). There the road turned left down the Santa Ana Canyon on its way to Yorba Linda (present-day Route 91) and La Habra (present-day Route 90), then across Los Angeles County to meet the sea at El Segundo (as Imperial Highway, although it is paralleled by I-105). The extension to Brawley was along Route 86 The early Imperial Highway plans involved connecting a patchwork assortment of roads of varying length and quality.  In 1912, a group of Los Angeles boosters informally known as the Committee of One Hundred, working with Los Angeles, San Bernardino, Orange, Riverside and Imperial counties, settled on a route along the edge of the inland Salton Sea that completely bypassed San Diego County, from which Imperial County had been split off in 1907. The Los Angeles section of road would be mostly a straight shot from LAX to Anaheim, where the proposed road would dip south diagonally before eventually reaching the Imperial Valley. By the 1920s, the efficacy of the Imperial Highway concept had become apparent, and a new and more forceful private group, the Imperial Highway Association, was formed in 1929 to encourage the regions involved to mount a fully cooperative effort, including working closely with San Diego County, to get the job done. The association adopted an official route for a more streamlined, uniform highway in 1931 that ran slightly west of the earlier Salton Sea route. The improved roadway, now referred to informally as “the Cannon Ball Road,” would eliminate tight right angle turns that slowed trucks, smooth and widen the various roadways involved, and have new bridges where necessary. A major section in Yorba Linda was completed in 1937. Two-lane portions of the highway through Inglewood had to be expanded to four. A  bridge over the Los Angeles River, completed in 1951, eliminated a crucial bottleneck; it replaced an old one that collapsed in 1948. The final section of the Imperial Highway as envisioned by the association was completed, and it was dedicated a scenic highway in a ceremony on the Imperial-San Diego county border in December 1961. Of its 220 total miles, 77 were county roads, with the rest being state highways. The cost to complete the project was estimated at $16 million (about $138 million in 2020 dollars). In 1965, Caltrans planned a new freeway along the path of Imperial Highway, from LAX to Norwalk. It opened in 1993 as I-105, though Imperial Highway itself remained in place, if somewhat less crucial than it once was. Through Orange County, Imperial Highway was Route 90. Major chunks of the roadway through Riverside and San Diego counties were subsumed by newer freeways and highways over the years. The 41-mile Los Angeles stretch, which passes through El Segundo, Hawthorne, Inglewood, South Los Angeles, Lynwood, South Gate, Downey, Norwalk, Santa Fe Springs and La Mirada, retains the original Imperial Highway name, as does a section of Route 86 in El Centro (also known as Imperial Avenue).
   (Source: Daily Breeze, “South Bay History: Imperial Highway once figured as part of a superhighway plan”, 3/29/2021; Orange County History “The Imperial Highway”, 2011)

   Status

   Escondido Reconstruction (North Broadway (SD N17.705) and Flora Vista Street (SD R21.298))

   In January 2021, it was reported that Cal Trans was starting construction on a $19 million multimodal project to upgrade about five miles of Route 78 between North Broadway (SD N17.705) and Flora Vista Street (SD R21.298) in Escondido. Initial work will improve curb ramps for pedestrian access in accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act. Other work will include vehicle to infrastructure (V2I) traffic signal upgrades, ITS upgrades and a Class III bike route. Subsequent construction will include removal and replacement of the pavement, high visibility striping, utility upgrades, and a shared bike lane. This project is expected to be completed in Fall 2021. The $19 million project is funded through the State Highway Operation and Protection Program (SHOPP).
   (Source: Escondido Times Advocate, 1/28/2021)

   In February 2021, more details were provided on this project. The project begins at Route 78 & Broadway, follows Broadway, down Washington, hangs a right on Ash Street and becomes San Pasqual Valley when it gets into the County, ending at Flora Vista, just after Summit Drive. Work will include repaving Route 78, reconstructing curb ramps for the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) compliance, vehicle to infrastructure (V2I) traffic signal upgrades, ITS (Intelligent Transportation System) upgrades and a Class III bike route. This is the first rebuild of the route in 15 years. For this project, all of the asphalt will be removed and replaced with a large stone matrix, similar to what is used on airports, in order to get more longevity in the pavement. Specifically, Caltrans will remove ⁶/₁₀th of the asphalt, about 8 inches or so. The new asphalt will be of “airport quality”—this means a road of large stone matrix that is typically usually used for heavier vehicles such as an airplane. The project will be reconstructing eighty-three curb ramps to make them ADA compliant, and doing signal improvements at twelve intersections along the route. Safety improvements include upgrading guardrails and updating the traffic striping, including the addition of ‘sharrows’. Tech updates and improvements include installation of fiber optic cables and implementing some V2I (Vehicle-to-Infrastructure) modules that talk to smart vehicles, V2I sensors are used in intelligent transportation systems (ITS) to capture data and issue drivers with real-time advisories about such things as traffic congestions, construction sites, road conditions, and parking zones. As an example, Teslas have an app that can be used that will tell the driver what speed to drive at if they want to catch all the greens along the route. Plans are to complete the project by November 2021.
   (Source: Escondido Times-Advocate, 2/11/2021)

   In October 2012, the CTC authorized relinquishment of right of way in the county of San Diego along Route 78 at Haverford Road near Ramona, consisting of collateral facilities. (~ SD 33.781)

   In May 2021, it was reported that Caltrans is proposing to modify the striping on Route 78/Main Street between 10th Street (~ SD 35.519) and 8th Street (~ SD 35.735) in Ramona to create 41 parallel parking spaces in previously designated No Parking areas, according to the site. Construction could begin in summer 2021 and is expected to take a few weeks to complete. The proposal includes: (1) Two (12-foot) lanes in each direction between Ninth and 10th streets. One (12-foot) and one (11-foot) lane in each direction between Eighth and Ninth streets. (2) Shoulder width 8-foot on both sides. (3) No median two-way turning lane between Ninth and 10th streets. (4) Parallel parking spaces for 21 vehicles on the westbound side and 20 on the eastbound side.
   (Source: ＄Ramona Sentinel, 5/12/2021)

   Naming

   The segment between Route 67 and Third Street (~ SD 35.535 to SD 36.296) in Ramona is officially named the "Ramon Ojeda Memorial Highway". It was named in memory of Army Specialist Ramon Ojeda, who was killed in action in Baghdad, Iraq on May 1, 2004, at the age of 22, when his convoy was attacked by terrorists. Specialist Ojeda attended school in Ramona, California, and was survived by his wife, Lesliee, who was serving in the United States Army in Iraq, and by his 14-month-old son, Angel. He wrestled at Ramona High School and had a "can do" spirit, and a remarkable ability to disarm and cheer up others with his levity. Specialist Ojeda joined the United States Army and was assigned to the Army's 25^th Infantry Division, and was the first Ramona resident killed in action in Iraq. Named by Assembly Concurrent Resolution (ACR) 47, Resolution Chapter 100, on 8/16/2006.
   (Image source: Find a Grave, LA Times)

   The portion of Rout 78 from the intersection with Route 79 in Santa Ysabel to the intersection with Route 79 in Julian (~ 78 SD 51.126 to 78 SD 58.11) as well as Route 79 from Julian to the intersection with Engineers Road in Cuyamaca in San Diego County (~ 79 SD 12.139 to 79 SD 20.198) is named the Firefighter Steven Rucker Memorial Highway. It was named in memory of Firefighter Steven Rucker of Novato, California. In late October 2003, Southern California experienced several devastating wildfires that exceeded the devastation of any fires in the past century. In San Diego County alone 400,000 acres burned, 2,600 homes where destroyed, and 17 lives were lost. Dedicated firefighters from across California and nationwide responded to the urgent call for assistance and put their lives and personal safety at risk to save the lives and property of the residents of San Diego County. Additionally, members of the Armed Forces courageously met their country's call to duty, providing valuable firefighting assets and assistance to California's emergency response efforts in keeping with the finest traditions of United States military service. Firefighters displayed courage and uncommon bravery in working the fire lines for long hours and with little rest, often while their own homes and families were in jeopardy elsewhere, and many of these firefighters lost their own homes to the fires while defending the lives and property of others. Through the tireless and heroic efforts of California's firefighters, volunteers, and members of the community, the historic town of Julian was ultimately saved from destruction by the wildfires. One of these firefighters, Steven Rucker of Novato, California gave the ultimate sacrifice and lost his life in San Diego County on October 29th, 2003 fighting the advancing fire line as it threatened the town of Julian and neighboring mountain communities. Named by Senate Concurrent Resolution 53, July 8, 2004, Chapter 114.
   (Image source: Western Sojourns, Find a Grave)

   Scenic Route

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

   Eligible for Scenic Highway status per [SHC 263.2]. The following portions have been officially designated as Scenic Highway and are signed:

   • From W Boundary of ANZA BORREGO DESERT STATE PARK to E Boundary. SD 71.9/90.1. 18.2 mi in San Diego County. Designation #31, December 14, 1971

   ---

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

   Note: Upon relinquishment of Route 86 in Brawley, the portion of Route 86 from 0.5 mile south of Fredricks Road to the north junction of Route 78 shall be redesignated as a part of Route 78.

   Post 1964 Signage History

   As defined in 1963, this segment was:

   Route 86 near Brawley to Route 10 near Blythe.

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

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

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

   In 1976, Chapter 1354 removed all conditions.

   In 2013, Chapter 525 (SB 788, 10/9/13) permitted relinquishment of Route 86 in Brawley, and added the language "(d) Following the relinquishments authorized in subdivision (b), the portion of Route 86 from 0.5 mile south of Fredricks Road to the north junction of Route 78 shall be redesignated as a part of Route 78."

   Pre 1964 Signage History

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

   The remainder of this segment was not part of the 1934 definition of signed Route 78. The portion from Palo Verde to Blythe was LRN 146, defined in 1933. The remainder was a proposed county route between Brawley and Palo Verde. It was constructed only between Palo Verde and Blythe. With the advent of the 1934 signage, the segment from Palo Verde to the Calfornia/Nevada border was signed as Route 195 (which continued to the California/Nevada border along LRN 146). After US 95 was signed in 1940, the portion N of Blythe to the Calfornia/Nevada border was signed as US 95, and the portion S of Blythe to Palo Verde, although part of LRN 146, was apparently unsigned. The portion between Brawley and Palo Verde was added to LRN 146 in 1959, although as it was constructed, it was signed as a county route. A 1967 map shows the routing between Midway Well and Route 115 as County Sign Route S78, with Route 78 signed with Route 115 between the Brawley area and US 80.

   In 1939, the American Association of State Highway Officials Executive Secretary proposed an alignment of US 95 south to Blythe. Subsequently, US 95 replaced Route 195 on LRN 146 from Blythe to the Nevada State Line.  The designation of Route 195 on LRN 146 south of Blythe to Palo Verde was deleted, leaving it without a Sign State Route. Signage for Route 195 was resassigned to what had been US 60/US 70 on LRN 64 in Box Canyon east of Mecca.  In 1959, the origin of LRN 146 was changed from Palo Verde near the Imperial County Line to LRN 187 (Route 115) east of Brawley.  The newly extended segment of LRN 146 contained a planned routing over the Algodones Dunes by way of Glamis and appears on the 1960 Division of Highways Map.  In late 1961, LRN 146 had a formal route adoption from Glamis to towards Palo Verde by the California Highway Commission.  Much of LRN 146 in the Glamis-Palo Verde corridor was adopted as expressway standard.
   (Source: Gribblenation Blog (Tom Fearer), “California State Route 78”, April 2022)

   By 1967, a county route -- Ben Hulse Highway -- had been completed between Route 115 and Palo Verde; it was shown as "planned" Route 78, but signed as County Sign Route S78. Only Route 78 from Glamis to Palo Verde had a determined State Highway routing.  The construction of a road to Glamis was difficult to due to the presence of the Alogodones Dunes.  The most practical route from Brawley to Blythe was initially via Niland-Brawley Road through the Chocolate Mountains. Within Riverside County Niland-Brawley Road emerged onto the Bradshaw Trail that ended at LRN 146 several miles north or Palo Verde. Existing Niland-Brawley Road in the Chocolate Mountains was sold to the Navy during February 1957 to fund construction the Glamis Road.  California State Senator Ben Hulse is quoted in a Los Angeles Times article from the era predicting the Glamis Road would become a State Highway.  The road connecting Brawley to Glamis opened on August 13, 1958.  The opening of the new road to Glamis saw it incorporated into the planned extension of LRN 146.  The completion of Ben Hulse Highway from Route 115 to existing Route 78 near Palo Verde occurred in 1964
   (Source: Gribblenation Blog (Tom Fearer), “California State Route 78”, April 2022; rschen7754 via Wikipedia via Gribblenation (Wikipedia History))

   Status

   Brawley Bypass

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

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

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

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

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

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

   In February 2010, the CTC approved some funding changes regarding the Brawley Bypass. Specifically, they amended the project agreement to reprogram $1,909,000 of Federal Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) Border Infrastructure Program (BIP) funds to the right of way phase on the Brawley Bypass (Stage 3) project (PPNO 0021G) in Imperial County. The purpose was to fund right of way activities related to additional impacts to agricultural land within the project vicinity. It should be noted this is a long project; the schedule shows environmental started in March 1993, and project closeout is expected to finish in January 2013 (construction should finish in February 2012). 

   In May 2012, the CTC amended the the Trade Corridor Improvement Fund (TCIF) baseline agreement for Project No. 77 – Brawley Bypass (Route 78/Route 111 Expressway) – Stage 3 Project (PPNO 0021G) in Imperial County. The amendment revised the project schedule and split off a follow-up landscape mitigation project (PPNO 0021Y). The approved baseline schedule was been revised to update the end of construction and closeout phases. The original construction schedule was developed assuming minimal structural construction on the project. However, during the design phase, a bridge was added to allow for canal maintenance, triggering an extended construction period.

   In December 2014, the CTC authorized relinquishment of right of way in the county of Imperial along realigned Route 78 between existing Route 86 (IMP R9.324) and New River (~ IMP R12.564) and along Route 86 between Fredericks Road and Gardner Road, consisting of a collateral facilities. The County, by controlled access highway agreements dated December 17, 1991 and May 6, 2003, agreed to accept title upon relinquishment by the State. The 90-day notice period expires December 1, 2014.

   In October 2012, the CTC authorized relinquishment of right of way in the city of Brawley on Route 78 (Main Street) between existing Route 86 and realigned Route 111, consisting of superseded highway right of way (~ 11-Imp-78-PM 13.2/15.5).

   In January 2012, the CTC authorized relinquishment of right of way in the city of Brawley along realigned Route 78 from Best Road (~ IMP R13.92) to Route 111 (~ IMP R15.464), consisting of collateral facilities.

   In December 2011, the CTC authorized relinquishment of right of way in the county of Imperial along Route78 between Route 111 and the realigned 111, and along Route 111 between Mead Road and Route 78, consisting of superseded highway right of way and collateral facilities. (11-Imp-78-PM 15.0/15.7, 11-Imp-111-PM 20.5/22.2)

   In May 2018, the CTC authorized relinquishment of right of way in the city of Brawley (City) along Route 78, 0.1 mile west of its intersection with Route 111, consisting of collateral facilities (11-Imp-78-PM 15.4/15.5). The City, by letter dated February 8, 2018 confirmed that the City Council, at their November 21, 2017 meeting, agreed to waive the 90-day notice requirement and accept title upon relinquishment by the State.
   (Source: CTC Minutes, May 2018 Agenda Item 2.3c)

   Naming

   The portion of this part of the route between the junction of Route 78 and Route 111 (formerly Route 86, changed by Senate Concurrent Resolution 70, July 16, 2004, Chapter 121) upon its construction near Brawley and Route 10 near Blythe (~ IMP 20.486 to RIV 15.629) is officially designated the "Ben Hulse Highway". It was named by Assembly Bill 2499, Chapter 1387 in 1961 (for LRN 146); the name was transferred to Route 78 in 1963. California State Senator Ben Hulse served the people of Imperial County from 1933 to 1958.
   _{(Image Source: East Side of the West, Imperial Unified School District)}

   The portion of Route 78 "Brawley Bypass" from Route 86 near Brawley to the Highline Canal east of Brawley, in the County of Imperial (~ IMP 20.486 to IMP 027.28) is named the Victor V. Veysey Expressway. It was named in honor of Victor Vincent Veysey, who was born in Los Angeles in 1915, and earned degrees at the California Institute of Technology and Harvard University. After 11 years of teaching at the California Institute of Technology and Stanford University, he moved to the County of Imperial to begin a career in farming. In 1955 he was elected to the Brawley School District Board of Directors, and later in 1960 was elected to the Imperial Valley College Board where he served until 1962. From 1963 to 1971 he served in the California Assembly, as the last resident of the County of Imperial to serve in the Legislature. He was a Congressman in the United States House of Representatives from 1971 to 1975, representing the 38th and 43rd Districts of California. He then went on to serve in President Ford's administration as the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works until 1977, where he played a major role in the negotiations that eventually led to the agreement on the Panama Canal. Governor Deukmejian appointed Mr. Veysey to serve as the California Secretary for Industrial Relations in 1983; and he went on to serve as Director of the Industrial Relations Center and Lecturer in Business Economics, at the California Institute of Technology. He passed away on February 13, 2001, in Hemet, California. Named by Senate Concurrent Resolution 70, July 16, 2004, Chapter 121.
   (Image source: AARoads, Wikipedia)

   Named Structures

   The New River Bridge on the Route 78 Bypass (Bridge 58-0337, IMP R012.48) in Imperial County is officially named the "Douglas B. Dunaway Memorial Bridge". This structure was named in memory of Douglas Brian Dunaway, who was born in Walsingham, England at Sculthorpe Air Base in 1959 to a military family serving abroad, who enlisted in the United States Army in 1977, and who was honorably discharged after four years of service. Upon discharge from the Army, Mr. Dunaway attended Oregon State University and earned a bachelor of science degree in civil engineering. Mr. Dunaway began his career with the Office of Structures Construction of the Department of Transportation in 1991. Mr. Dunaway was an exemplary employee who received numerous awards, including three superior accomplishment awards recognizing his ongoing efforts to deliver the highest quality product to the customers of the department, and for delivering specialized training and mentoring for staff. Mr. Dunaway gained the respect of supervisors, management, and peers for his commitment to high professional standards, and excelled as a mentor to all employees. Mr. Dunaway was one of the most experienced structure representatives in District 11 of the Department of Transportation, serving Imperial and San Diego Counties, and was named the Structure Representative of the Year in 2008. Over his 19-year career, Mr. Dunaway worked on some of the most complex structures throughout the state, including structures on Route 5, Route 14, Route 15, Route 78, Route 86, Route 94, and Route 905. Mr. Dunaway's passion was bridge building and he volunteered for several assignments in Imperial County over his career, where he enjoyed living and working. As a humanitarian, Mr. Dunaway was an avid supporter of Feed the Children, Toys for Tots, various battered women's shelters, and local shelters for the homeless. Mr. Dunaway passed away unexpectedly on March 5, 2010, while working on the Brawley Bypass as the structure representative, and is interred at the Dallas Cemetery in Dallas, Oregon. Named by Senate Concurrent Resolution (SCR) 116, Resolution Chapter 128, on 9/7/2010.
   (Image source: AAroads, Find a Grave)

   ---

Exit Information

Other WWW Links

Freeway

Classified Landcaped Freeway

National Trails

Interregional Route

Statistics

Pre-1964 Legislative Route

Acronyms and Explanations:

• "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.
• Other frequently used terms: California Transportation Commission (Commission or CTC), California Department of Transportation (Department or Caltrans), Regional Improvement Program (RIP), Interregional Improvement Program (IIP), State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), State Highway Operation and Protection Program (SHOPP), Traffic Congestion Relief Program (TCRP), Clean Air and Transportation Improvement Act of 1990 (Proposition 116), High Speed Passenger Train Bond Program (Proposition 1A), Highway Safety, Traffic Reduction, Air Quality, and Port Security Bond Act of 2006 (Proposition 1B), Corridor Mobility Improvement Account (CMIA), State Route 99 Bond Program (RTE or SR 99), Local Bridge Seismic Retrofit Account (LBSRA), Trade Corridors Improvement Fund (TCIF), Highway-Railroad Crossing Safety Account (HRCSA), State-Local Partnership Program (SLPP), Environmental Phase (PA&ED), Design Phase (PS&E), Right of Way (R/W), Fiscal Year (FY), Active Transportation Program (ATP), Trade Corridor Enhancement Program (TCEP), Local Partnership Program (LPP), Local Streets and Roads Program (LSRP), Solutions for Congested Corridors Program (SCCP).

Route 77 Route 79

© 1996-2024 Daniel P. Faigin.
Maintained by: Daniel P. Faigin <webmaster@cahighways.org>.