CA: US-101 southern end issue?

[rickmastfan67]

We honestly need to extend the route south some more.

US-101 maintains it's own carriageways thru the I-5/10 interchange malfunction, and still has one more exit beyond '1A' @ Exit 1 for Euclid Ave (onramp).

Thus, we should have the merge point between both I-5 & US-101 between Euclid Ave & I-5 Exit 133 (Grande Vista Ave).

This is what I recommend:

Code: [Select]

I-5 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=34.026161&lon=-118.207848
1 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=34.026986&lon=-118.209672
CA60 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=34.029474&lon=-118.215294
SotoSt http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=34.030829&lon=-118.217917
1A +I-5/10 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=34.034046&lon=-118.221120
1B http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=34.042983&lon=-118.221066

This will require the movement of the 'CA60' & 'I-5' labels from being hidden under 1A, but needed.  Also will prevent any false multiplex the way I have it setup, while still giving proper graph connections with I-5 (once new point is added to I-5's file) & CA-60.

If this is done, would require a news entry.

[cl94]

This is a clash between "as implied" and "as logged". In the logs, US 101's southern end is at 7th Street (Caltrans is even nice enough to give us a S0.00 postmile). Anything south of there is officially a ramp. Signs are unclear about the southern terminus, with one random pullthrough south of Exit 1A mentioning US 101 and no other signs for it SB. There are cases where the official definition of the route extends to the gore point within a large interchange (for example, SRs 51/244 on the north side of Sacramento end at the I-80 gores, as does 880 in Oakland).

All of this to say, I think this warrants a larger discussion. Do we include an implied extension even if the logs are clear about "nope" and there are examples elsewhere in the state where such a situation is logged as part of the main route?

[neroute2]

It's not quite the same, but we have I-80 continuing west of its end according to FHWA (and I've seen a few Caltrans documents that call it SR 80 west of the old SR 480 ramps).

[Duke87]

I'd leave it, the way it is matches CalTrans logs and is KISS-principle compliant.

That said, the 134B point on I-5 probably should be 134C - neither direction has an exit numbered 134B for 101, 10, or 7th St.

[oscar]

We discussed rejiggering the south end of US 101, as part of the usaca preview thread (which kind of makes sense, since it affected a usaca route as well as usai and usaus), and made significant changes to US 101 as well as I-5 and CA 60. Search in that massive thread, for past discussion that might minimize any need to reinvent the wheel.

[rickmastfan67]

Well, we have a similar issue to this over in NY, where both two routes are on separate carriageways: I-90 & US-219
Another example would be I-40 & I-240's western junction in TN.

This is one of the reasons I brought this up.