Placer Parkway
The Placer Parkway project has long been in the planning study and environmental assessment stages. This project began in its infancy in 1998 when the Placer County Transportation Planning Agency (PCTPA) started studying alternatives to preserve right of way for a new expressway route in south placer county to address traffic congestion. Many may have even forgotten that the Placer Parkway was even being considered or would ever become a reality.
Born from earlier studies of a CA-102 reliever corridor that was planned to relieve congestion on Interstate 80 between Sacramento and Auburn, the placer parkway would have addressed some of that congestion by shifting it from I-80 to CA-70/99 instead, then funneling the traffic on a this new parkway to the south placer region. This option creates its own undesirable outcomes in and of itself, including the concern for further urban sprawl and more stop-and-go congestion along the I-5 and CA70/99 corridors. This would require additional added travel lanes along these facilities to be constructed to increase capacity. To combat this the PCTPA and the South Placer Regional Transportation Authority (SPRTA) proposed that the new parkway route have a mandated no development buffer along its entire route to prevent further residential and commercial sprawl that could create more congestion.
Corridor Preservation Phase
| Placer Parkway Map |
| Placer Parkway Map |
A Tier 1 Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report (EIS/EIR) was completed in 2009 which identified alternatives for the parkway. The east end of the parkway initially was intended to terminate at the Sunset Blvd interchange with CA-65, that has since been moved further north to the Whitney Blvd interchange instead, and this interchange will not be a system (freeway-to-freeway) interchange either. The western end of the parkway will still terminate somewhere north of Riego Road and is expected to be constructed as a system interchange.
It appears that the corridor study was only intended to preserve the right of way needed to construct the corridor but not the corridor itself. The study identifies that it does not address traffic congestion on the routes it will connect to (CA-65 and CA-70/99), in fact instead it will funnel traffic to and from these routes leading to congestion points along each of the corridors, especially during peak periods. Currently residential and commercial growth is already taking place in the area where the parkway is intended to be constructed, so the parkway will no doubt see a fair amount of congestion almost immediately upon its opening to traffic. Construction of the planned 4-lane expressway will likely be inadequate to handle the traffic volumes that will likely accumulate quickly since 25 years of development has occurred in the north region since the project was first considered. Construction of a 6 lane highway and widening connecting freeways would better address congestion along the corridor. However the argument for a no-build option could solidly be considered.
Additionally the first phase of the Parkway will only construct a portion of the parkway to Foothills Boulevard, making the initial corridor no more than a surface boulevard. This further casts doubt on the ultimate buildout of the corridor. Will it be built as a freeway or as a lesser express highway, will it be another CA-244 connector. There is a strong need for a east to west freeway along this route due to the growth that will be occuring along the route, but it will likely never be a traffic reliever for the congested I-80.