The following are issues relating to highway and interstate issues in the San Francisco Bay Area. As always, your comments and corrections are welcome and encouraged.
Highway 1 Bypass/Tunnel (Devil's Slide):
This project has been on the drawing board for years. Devil's Slide is a section of Highway 1 just south of Pacifica where the road twists and turns around a rock mountain high above the pounding surf below. At least once or twice a year a car goes down off the embankment and into the ocean. Many times a year the road is impassable due to mudslides and rockslides.
Everyone agrees that something must be done to fix the roadway, but are divided as how to do it. The residents of Half Moon Bay and Pacifica generally don't want the bypass, as it would slice through a nature preserve and old ranch. Thus, many people who live in the area have advocated a tunnel through one of the nearby mountains, instead of a bypass. When put to a yes/no vote in 1996, the yes vote for the tunnel won easily, with about three-quarters of the voters choosing 'Yes'.
The bypass is part of Caltrans' previous push to convert Highway 1 from Half Moon Bay to San Francisco into a freeway. The portion from Central Pacifica up to San Francisco has been in place for decades, while the rest has been planned for years. I suspect that Caltrans prefers the bypass over the tunnel because bypasses are easier to build and can be widened much easier than tunnels. Many studies have been done as to the cost of each alternative, some saying the tunnel is cheaper, others saying the bypass is the most cost-effective. I don't really know if one option is any better than the other in this case, as both will have major impacts on wildlife in the area, and both will be costly and just plain hard to build, with many steep hills and valleys. However, the strong public support of the non-binding 1996 vote has led Caltrans to choose the tunnel option.
This is what Caltrans now proposes. Two 4000-foot long tunnel bores will be built, starting roughly about one mile above the Chart House restaurant in Montara, and ending above Shamrock Ranch (the section of Highway 1 immediately south of Pacifica). The tunnels will be striped as one lane in each direction (one tunnel for northbound, one tunnel for southbound), but will be wide enough to restripe as two lanes in each direction in the future if traffic demand warrants. The northbound direction will also feature a bridge at the northern opening of the tunnel, in order to cross over sensitive animal habitats. Caltrans originally set the year 2003 as the date that construction on the two tunnel bores will begin, assuming that all of the necessary environvmental documents are approved, as 2001, with construction completed by 2006. However, the federal government did not approve the environmental work until 2002, and a lawsuit delayed start of construction. In 2004, Caltrans pulled all of its necessary permits with San Mateo County. As of early 2006, construction is set to begin in October 2006, with completion in 2011. For more information on the project, visit the Caltrans web site for the project, at www.dot.ca.gov/dist4/dslide/.
Highway 4 -- Widening in Pittsburg and Antioch:
Highway 4 is a major east-west route for East Bay commuters. Every morning on the radio, I hear about some sort of backup on Highway 4 in Antioch or Pittsburg. What I would like to see for this road is a 4- to 6-lane freeway extending from I-80 in Hercules to Highway 99 in Stockton. Highway 4 between I-80 and Highway 160 in eastern Antioch is already at freeway grade, with a recent upgrade between I-80 and just west of Martinez. However, by far the busiest section is through the cities of Pittsburg and Antioch. Between Highway 242 and Bailey Road, Highway 4 is a 6- to 8-lane freeway with HOV lanes and BART tracks running down the middle, and the HOV lanes also continue to Railroad Avenue. However, for the rest of the section to Highway 160, it is only 4 lanes wide, and has many underpowered interchanges for the amount of growth that has occurred in the area over the past two decades.
Currently, the only construction area along the highway is at the Railroad Avenue interchange, which is being completely reconstructed and the freeway widened to a total of 3 mixed-flow lanes and one HOV lane out to Loveridge Road. Caltrans also has plans to widen the highway between Loveridge Road and the proposed new Highway 4 Bypass/Highway 160 interchange (what's now that big 90-degree bend in the road) to six lanes. In October 2004, Caltrans completed the draft environmental review of the widening project, which would widen the highway to a total of eight lanes (3 lanes in each direction plus an HOV lane in each direction), as well as modify and reconstruct the Loveridge Road, Somersville Road, Contra Loma Blvd.-L Street, Lone Tree Way-A Street, and Hillcrest Avenue interchanges, and remove the G Street interchange, add auxiliary lanes between interchanges, ramp metering, widen the Roosevelt Land pedestrian undercrossing and Cavallo Road undercrossing, and provide sufficient median right-of-way to accommodate the long-planned BART extension to Antioch.
Highway 4 -- Oakley/Brentwood Bypass and Freeway Upgrade:
Continuing on the Highway 4 theme, the sections of this highway between Martinez and Antioch and in Stockton between I-5 and Highway 99 are already complete as freeways, and I would like to see the remainder converted to freeway status, especially between Antioch and Stockton. This would be a major help to East Bay and Central Valley traffic (especially when combined with an extention of Highway 84), as this would open up an alternate for trucks and commuters between the Central Valley and the Bay Area, who right now are relegated to either I-580 to the south or I-80 to the north, both congested routes. A surprising number of commuters from Stockton and the upper San Joaquin Valley commute into the Bay Area (especially the South Bay), and their commute would be greatly helped by this new freeway.
Skiers would also be helped by this new route, as people heading up to resorts south of Lake Tahoe (such as Kirkwood and Bear Valley/Mount Reba) would have a direct link to Highways 4 and 88, instead of taking I-580 to I-5 or Highway 99 to link up with Highway 4 and 88.
Plans are already in the works for a freeway bypass between Antioch and Brentwood. Caltrans plans to eventually extend the freeway out to Stockton next to the existing Highway 4 alignment. Also, Caltrans has already begun setting aside money for the upgrading Highway 4 to freeway status between I-80 and Martinez and for widening the freeway in Pittsburg and Antioch to 6 lanes. The segment between I-80 a Martinez will be built with an entirely new westbound alignment parallel to existing highway and the current alignment to become the eastbound segment. Initially, the upgrade will be an expressway until funding can be secured for the new interchanges. The section between Lone Tree Way and Balfour Road has already been constructed as a two-lane highway, and is signed as "Highway 4 Bypass," although there are no Highway 4 shields posted along it, so it is likely not a state facility as of yet. Construction of the final alignment of the bypass is planned in three stages. Stage One would construct a four-lane freeway between the existing Highway 4 freeway and Lone Tree Way, and construct interchanges at both ends, to be constructed starting in 2004 and ending in 2007. The next section, Stage Two, would widen the aforementioned open segment between Lone Tree and Balfour to four lanes, and at some point would likely involve an interchange at Balfour Road. There are no current plans, though, to upgrade this segment. Stage Three, which is currently being designed, would extend the bypass out to Vasco Road in the vicinity of Walnut Boulevard, with a new interchange at Marsh Creek Road, and would also widen Marsh Creek Road from the bypass to existing Highway 4, and would likely become redesignated as the state highway until the freeway is extended east of Brentwood. Initially, this segment would be constructed as a two-lane roadway, with construction set to start in 2005 with completion in 2006. Eventually, interchanges are also proposed at Laurel Road, Sand Creek Road, and likely Vasco Road. These interchanges, and the full conversion to a freeway, would occur over time, as the State Route 4 Bypass Authority, the local agency overseeing the widening, has funding available.
I have a lot of plans for this highway. Highway 84 extends from Highway 1 on the coast south of Half Moon Bay to Redwood City, over the Dumbarton Bridge, through the city streets of Fremont, and over some ridges to Livermore. Once upon a time, Highway 84 continued on up to Highway 4 near Brentwood, and I would like to see that portion of the highway reinstated, preferably as an expressway or freeway. Thus, Highway 4 and I-580 would be linked, creating an alternate for East Bay residents tired of the backups on Highways 4 and 24 and I-680 that are a daily headache for thousands of commuters. (In fact, Vasco Road, a county road between Livermore an Brentwood, already carries a lot of commute traffic.)
It would also be nice (but highly unlikely) to convert the portion of Highway 84 between I-580 and I-680 to freeway status. This, though, might increase traffic on the already congested Sunol Grade into Fremont. Caltrans had already completed a bypass of downtown Livermore as a newly extended Isabel Drive, a 2- to 4-lane expressway along the western edge of Livermore that is signed as Highway 84. Caltrans also proposes a new interchange for Isabel Drive/Highway 84 with I-580, just east of the Airport Boulevard interchange, although the new interchange still requires a funding commitment.
Another interesting project on Highway 84 is currently under study by Caltrans. Caltrans is planning on building, starting in 2001, a new alignment for Highway 84 through Fremont and East Union City. The new parkway would travel up Decoto Road for a few blocks, then turn northeast, crossing Fremont Boulevard, Paseo Padre Parkway, Alameda Creek, Alvarado-Niles Road, the BART and Union Pacific tracks, and eventually reaching Mission Boulevard near the Union City/Fremont border. Highway 84 would then continue southeast along Mission Boulevard out to its existing alignment at Niles Canyon Road.
Another wish of mine is for a continuous freeway (preferred) or expressway for Highway 84 between I-280 and I-880. Currently, about half of the routing between I-280 and US 101 is at expressway grade, and the section between I-880 and the east side of the Dumbarton Bridge is already a freeway, but the three eastbound approaches to the Dumbarton Bridge [Highways 84, 114 (Willow Road), and 109 (University Avenue)] are all city streets. Upgrading the highway to freeway status would help take traffic off of the other heavily-congested bridges and routes, such as the San Mateo Bridge (Highway 92), US 101, and I-880. These improvements would make the Dumbarton Bridge look much more attractive to commuters.
I have no new proposals about Highway 87, but rather I'd like to lend my support for the long-planned (by Caltrans, anyways) extention of Highway 87 freeway from Downtown San Jose to Highway 237. The section from Downtown to US 101 would not only make travel to Downtown and the San Jose International Airport much easier, but creates a viable alternative to I-880, I-680, and US 101 in the South Bay.
Work has already begun on the project. On September 17-19, Caltrans closed Highway 87 betwen Hedding and US 101 in order to connect the existing roadway with a new 4-lane detour road located just east of the current alignment, including a new overpass at I-880. The existing roadway will be upgraded to freeway standards with a total of six lanes, with interchanges at Taylor Street, I-880, and Skyport Drive. The freeway portion is currently open in the southbound direction over the entire widening section, while the northbound is on the new freeway alignment only between Heading Street and Airport Parkway. Skyport Drive was extended over the Guadalupe River from First Street to the San Jose Airport in 1999, and a newly-opened interchange at Highway 87 will serve as the new main entrance to Mineta San Jose Internation Airport from the highway. The Taylor Street interchange is also now open. Both new interchanges are SPUIs, or Single-Point Urban Interchanges, a new type of interchanges that combines all of ramps into one intersection with the cross street, instead of the more standard two interchanges (one on each side of the freeway). The entire project is expected to be completed in 2004.
As for the section from US 101 to Highway 237, the likelihood of this project being built is very small, as it would have to go through land which at one time was vacant, no-man's land but is now prime Silicon Valley business land, swept up in the Silicon Valley land boom. (Although, with so many dot-coms folding in the Valley, the land may be cheeper now than in past years.) The need for this section is also not as clear-cut as the rest of the freeway.
As you may recall, I once discussed here the need to widen the San Mateo Bridge. Well, since that time, the bridge has been completely reconstructed as three lanes in each direction.
Now, to the main reason why I put this highway into my web page. I would prefer that Highway 92 be extended as a freeway to the interchange of I-580, I-238 (yes, that "dreaded" freeway), and Highway 238 along the Jackson Street corridor. However, as this is rather unfeasible without major demolition along this corridor, I am now advocating that Jackson Street be converted into an expressway. While it will work even better with a Highway 238 freeway, it will work equally well without it. In fact, officials at the Alameda County Transportation Authority are on record as advocating the construction of a grade-separation interchange at the intersection of Jackson Street and Mission Boulevard/Foothill Boulevard. The reason why I feel that this upgrade of Highway 92 is necessary is because it allows a direct connection between I-580 and the San Mateo Bridge. Thus, commuters can use it instead of taking I-238 to I-880 to Highway 92. In conjunction with an extension of Highway 84, it also becomes a real alternative for East Bay commuters heading for the Bay Bridge (if not during regular delays, then for major delays). Plus, it allows Central Valley commuters heading to the computer and electronic firms on the Peninsula to make a direct connection, instead of taking the round-about way I mentioned earlier. Finally, it gives East and Downtown Hayward residents easier access to the East Bay's freeway infrastructure.
In addition, Caltrans in 1999 completed a realignment of Highway 92 on part of the Half Moon Bay side of the highway, removing much of the twistiness and adding a climbing lane eastbound. This eliminated the switchback segment in the old road. It is uncertain if Caltrans plans to upgrade the rest of the highway between Half Moon Bay and I-280.
Highway 101: North Bay
One of the long-awaited widening projects in the Bay Area is the widening of Highway 101 in Sonoma County. With the explosion of residents within the county over the last couple of decades, commutes have become more and more trying for local residents. Even on weekends, Highway 101 through Santa Rosa is regularly bumper-to-bumper for no reason other than too many cars in too few lanes. Attempts to pay for widening of the highway have been proposed and shot down numerous times. But finally in 2001, all of the pieces came together and construction finally began on the segment between Wilfred-Golf Club Drives and Highway 12. This widening would add a third (excluding auxiliary lanes), HOV (High-Occupancy Vehicle) lane along this section of Highway 101, in both directions. The lane is now complete and open Wilfred Avenue and Highway 12.
Caltrans reviewed other widenings in the County, with the backing of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC). The first is the segment from Highway 12 to Steele Lane, which Caltrans is actively planning with the City of Santa Rosa. This project would widen Highway 101 to six lanes (4 regular lanes and 2 HOV lanes). In order to accomodate the lanes, many of the interchanges in the area would have to be modified. The Steele Lane, College Avenue, Downtown Santa Rosa, and Highway 12 interchanges are all very closely spaced together. After pairing down many options, the alternatives reviewed in an Environmental Impact Report were the following:
Construction began in March 2006 and is expected to be completed in 2 1/2 years. See the official Caltrans web page at www.dot.ca.gov/dist4/son101/ for more information on this project.
Other improvements proposed by the MTC in the Regional Transportation Plan include HOV lanes from the Marin-Sonoma County Line to Old Redwood Highway in Petaluma, Old Redwood Highway to Rohnert Park Expressway in Rohnert Park, Rohnert Park Expressway in Rohnert Park to Santa Rosa Avenue in Santa Rosa, and Steele Lane in Santa Rosa to River Road just south of Windsor.
Marin County also proposes extending the HOV lanes south from the County Line to Highway 37 in Novato, as well as HOV lanes from North San Pedro Road in San Rafael to Lucky Drive in Larkspur. MTC also proposes interchange improvements at Wilfred Avenue-Golf Club Drive in northern Rohnert Park, Interstate 580 and Lucas Valley Drive in San Rafael, Sir Francis Drake Drive in Larkspur, Atherton Avenue in Novato, Tiburon Boulevard-Highway 131 in Mill Valley, and Tamalpais Drive in Corte Madera.
Caltrans, in conjunction with Sonoma and Marin Counties, is also pressing forward with improvements to Highway 101 between Novato and Petaluma, an area also called "The Narrows," where the highway narrows down to a four-lane expressway. The improvements would convert the expressway to a full freeway, complete with interchanges and frontage roads, as well as extend HOV lanes from Novato to Petaluma. Caltrans is current in the planning stage of this project, and has multiple alternatives with regard to interchange locations, number of interchanges, and the locations of the frontage roads. More details on this project can be found at www.dot.ca.gov/dist4/msn/, the official Caltrans web page for the project.
I am very pleased that Caltrans finally converted the entire length of Highway 237 between Highway 85 and I-880 into a freeway--with the major expansion of companies like 3com and Lockheed into the area, as well as the expansion of the city of Sunnyvale, that freeway has been needed for many years. "So why did you bother putting this highway on your page, then?" you might ask. Well, there's one important section of Highway 237 that I think should also be a freeway--the section between I-880 and I-680. There is a need for a link between these two freeways, as is apparent by the "To I-880" signs at the southern I-680/Mission Boulevard interchange in Fremont. Currently, Highway 237 is a heavily-used city street, which has many businesses along it, but few cross streets, so it might be a good candidate to be replaced by a freeway in a similar alignment. But, with all those businesses, and the fact that it's a major east-west artery in Milpitas, it would be hard to build and there would be much opposition. On the other hand, Caltransa few years ago completed a project on Highway 76 in Oceanside, where they created an expressway that weaves it way around the existing Highway 76/Mission Avenue corridor, a major artery for Oceanside residents and a major commercial and retail district, so such a project like that could be accomplished along Highway 237 (although I admit that there was a lot more room to expand in Oceanside than there is in Milpitas).
Unfortunately, the other alternatives don't look to promising. Mission Boulevard might work, as it's already a freeway at the I-880 side, and it's very short with only a couple of cross streets. But, it too has many businesses, and its main cross street, Warm Springs Boulevard, is a major north-south street, and there's probably not enough room to fit in an interchange for it. A long-shot alternative could be along the Montague Expressway corridor, but it, too, would face similar problems, plus it's too close to US 101 to make it worthwhile.
Interestingly enough, Caltrans' 1999 budget, as passed by the California Transportation Commission, sets aside money to be paid out to the city of Milpitas for a "680/880 Cross Connector Study". The budget also mentioned that Alameda County was kicking in some additional funding, strange as Milpitas is in Santa Clara County. A visit to the Alameda County Transportation Authority web site turns up more money for this project, and is a good place to for more information on this project and others in Alameda County.
I would like to resurrect a former Caltrans proposal that I think will ease much congestion along the entire length of I-880. This would be the Highway 238 freeway between I-680 in Fremont and I-580 in Hayward, along the existing Highway 238/Mission Boulevard corridor. The completion of this freeway will thus create a parallel corridor to I-880 betwen San Jose and Oakland--drivers can either take I-880 all the way, or can take I-680 to Highway 238 to I-580, thus lowering the traffic volume along I-880, and also to some extent traffic along I-680 in the Sunol Grade area. The infrastructure for such a freeway already exists in some parts of the corridor--the ramps from I-238 and I-580 are already in existence. The bridge for crossing I-680 was put in place when I-680 was originally built. Some segments of the freeway would be best routed along the existing railroad and BART corridor in the area, and would thus be relatively simple and easy to build. The tough portions are from I-580 through Downtown Hayward to Union City, through Decoto, and in Fremont between Alameda Creek and Fremont Central Park. Any alignment through here would require some tearing out of homes and businesses, as these areas are highly populated.
One possible alternative that could lower the total number of structures that would need to be demolished would be to take over the railroad right-of-way. In this part of the East Bay, both the Southern Pacific and the Union Pacific Railroads have parallel routings along this corridor. As Union Pacific recently bought out Southern Pacific, there isn't need for both routings any more. In fact, the Southern Pacific tracks along I-580 in the Altamont Pass corridor have already been torn up. My guess is that Union Pacific will choose to keep its own tracks in areas of dual routings, and so my alignment proposal reflects that.
I would start my CA 238 freeway alongside Foothill Boulevard at I-580, alongside the eastern edge of the existing road. The freeway would then parallel Foothill Boulevard and Mission Boulevard down towards Union City. Foothill would become one way southbound between A Street and D Street. A new frontage road would parallel the freeway on the eastern side, connecting with Foothill and at D Street at the south end and 2nd Street at B Street, and combined with a block of 2nd Street would be one way northbound. This would allow the creation of a staggered diamond interchange at A Street similar to US 101 at Downtown San Rafael. One long bridge over A, B, C, and D Streets and the frontage road would be constructed. E Street between Mission and Main, Main Street between Foohtill and E Street, and portions of E Street and Armstrong Street east of Main Street would be eliminated. An interchange for a CA 92 freeway would be built alongside the Mission/Jackson Street intersection.
Heading south from Downtown Hayward, the freeway continues alongside Mission Boulevard, with interchanges at Orchard Avenue/Carlos Bee Boulevard (for CSU Hayward) and Tennyson Road. Overpasses would be built at Harder Road, Calhoun Street, Mission Boulevard at Valle Vista Avenue, West Industrial Parkway, and Whipple Road. An interchange at Whipple Road is possible if there is enough interest.
The freway would exit Hayward sandwiched between BART and the Southern Pacific Tracks. Once in Union City, the CA 238 Freeway would continue along the Southern Pacific Corridor through Decoto down past Decoto Road. This portion could be build either above ground or perhaps below like CA 85 or I-280 in the Santa Clara Valley. Bridges will be built at E Street and H Street. An interchange at Decoto Road would be built.
This next portion is probably the hardest part to design and build. I would have the freeway veer off the Southern Pacific corridor (to avoid Niles) and cross BART, the Union Pacific railroad tracks, and Alvarado-Niles Road. An interchange with the new Highway 84 parkway/expressway would also be built here. The freeway would then run paralley to BART along the eastern edge of the Alameda Creek Quarries Park. The freeway would then cross BART and the Union Pacific tracks at Aladeda Creek, heading east between the Union Pacific and Southern Pacific tracks. It would then cross Mowry Avenue at the Southern Pacific tracks and follow the tracks between Overacker Avenue and Mission Boulevard. In this section many homes would unfortunately have to be razed. Mission Boulevard would be slightly realigned to the east and probably narrowed near Walnut Avenue/Morrison Canyon Road to accomodate the freeway. If there is enough room (based on ability to aquire the railroad right of way), an interchange at Mission Boulevard and Mowry Avenue would be built. New bridges would include overpasses at Mowry and Walnut Avenue. This alignment probably is the one wih the least amount of disruption to the existing structures, roads, and parkland of the area.
The last segment is pretty simple. I propose aligning the CA 238 freeway as a straight shot down the Southern Pacific tracks down to I-680. It has also been proposed by BART and the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) to extend BART down to South Fremont and connect it with an extension of the VTA Light Rail from San Jose at one big station. The easiest alignment for that would be down the Southern Pacific Tracks as well, so I have considered this extension as well. I proposed extending the freeway down the tracks, with an interchange at Stevenson Boulevard. BART would be extended from the Fremont BART station out to the freeway to be sent down the middle of the freeway. BART and the freeway would be jointly run down to south of Washington Boulevard, where the freeway would break out to the southwest towards the I-680 interchange just north of Durham Road. Bridged would be added at Paseo Padre Parkway, Washington Boulevard, and Osgood Road, and for the entrance and exit of BART into the median of the freeway. The I-680 interchange would be only a partial interchange, with only Northbound I-680 having access to the new freeway and only Southbound I-680 having an on-ramp from the CA 238 freeway. (Few people will want to travel in the other directions, and if they do they can use Mission Boulevard and Stevenson Boulevard to travel in their desired direction.)
Interestingly, there have been some recent developments to this project within the last couple of years, some good and some bad. Caltrans was recently going ahead with plans to build CA 238 as an expressway instead of a freeway. Their plans are not fully defined yet, and many of the environmental reports are still going on, but it is planned to build an expressway starting at I-580, heading towards the eastern edge of downtown Hayward, then heading parallel to Mission Boulevard along the hills, just to the west of CSU Hayward. The expressway would continue down to Harder Road. Funds have been secured to build this portion of the expressway, with funding not yet available to extend it down to Tennison Road.
An interchange is proposed at A Street, and a new flyover ramp from Westbound I-580 to Southbound 238 is also proposed, but I was not able to find out any information about the status of any other streets the expressway would cross (i.e. whether or not there would be intersections/interchanges at these streets, and if so whether there would be at-grade or above grade with access ramps).
As one would expect, there is some opposition to this project, but two votes of the city, one in 1986 and another in 1992, both showed much support for the project. However, public support did wane for the project, and plans for the project were eventually scrapped due to court order in 2002. Thanks to Hayward's The Daily Reporter newspaper and the ACTA for all of this information about Caltrans' latest plans.
In addition, the connection between my Highway 238 freeway and Interstate 680 became more problematic a few years ago, when Caltrans demolished the overpass and old alignment of I-680 at where Highway 238 was to intersect. This interchange would therefore now become more expensive to build.
Interstate 280 Extension:
This is a project that Caltrans (and the city of San Francisco) has killed, but I think that it really should happen, and would work well with the existing San Francisco freeway network. What was once proposed and what I'm re-proposing is an extention of I-280 from its current terminus near 3rd Street in San Francisco to I-80 at the old I-80/Highway 480 interchange. This then creates an alternate for people trying to get the Bay Bridge, as they can bypass Downtown San Francisco. This will also help alleviate much traffic at SBC Park (the Giants stadium), as well as traffic from Monster Park (a.k.a. Candlestick, where the 49ers play), because it creates a shorter and more direct route to the Bay Bridge for East Bay fans. Plus, it's short--only a mile or two, so it should be relatively cheep to build and thus highly cost effective for the amount of good it will do to San Francisco traffic.
Interestingly, the reason this proposal was originally killed was because the city of San Francisco feared that an extension of I-280 out to the I-80/CA 480 interchange would increase traffic on CA 480 (the Embarcadero Freeway), a freeway the city hated and that no longer exists. Hopefully, with the main reason the I-280 project was blocked now torn down, this project could be resurrected for another try.
Comments? Questions? Corrections? E-mail Jeff Waller