Is Venice Blvd (CA 187) signed anywhere?

[emory]

CA 187 is up for decommissioning, so there won't be any need to add new signs.

Any indication that the relinquishment is going to happen? In particular, was the 2015 law authorizing the relinquishment driven by L.A. County's desire to take over the route, or just Caltrans' desire to fob the route onto the county?

I've noticed other relinquishments authorized long ago, but never carried out.

Here's the quote from assembly bill 810, authorizing CA 187 and a segment of CA 1 to be transferred to Los Angeles.

Purpose. 

According to the author, SR 187 is also known as Venice Boulevard and serves as an important thoroughfare, shopping and dining destination, and public gathering place for several communities in the City of Los Angeles. A portion of Venice Boulevard has been selected as part of the city's Great Streets Initiative, which aims to activate public spaces, provide economic revitalization, increase public safety, and enhance local culture through roadway and streetscape            improvements. Los Angeles is currently performing extensive public outreach in the Mar Vista neighborhood to develop a community-led plan for these improvements, which will include creative solutions to address safety and mobility issues that may not necessarily be in line with Caltrans' design guidelines.             This project will be used as a model for further improvements along additional sections of the Venice corridor.

The City wishes to gain ownership of Venice Boulevard to allow for a locally controlled, streamlined Great Streets Initiative project, while maintaining flexibility to experiment with innovative solutions that can be adapted to meet the community's changing needs over time.

There have been many relinquishment grants over the years that never end up coming to fruition, or take an incredibly long time to do so, but Los Angeles taking over state highways is pretty much always a sure thing. There's currently three routes up for transfer to Los Angeles on the books right now, and looks like Caltrans will hang on to CA 2 in Los Angeles until they finish construction of the Glendale Freeway terminus.

[AndyMax25]

So after all of those years that Venice Blvd was not signed, then Caltrans takes the time to install shields on the route and at the I-10 WB ramp. Then within 2 year they have to go back and take them down, "your tax dollars at work", as the sign says.

[andy3175]

So after all of those years that Venice Blvd was not signed, then Caltrans takes the time to install shields on the route and at the I-10 WB ramp. Then within 2 year they have to go back and take them down, "your tax dollars at work", as the sign says.

Is all of Venice Blvd within the city of Los Angeles, or does a portion pass through Culver City? I wonder if Venice Blvd will lose lanes when the "Great Street" comes through. As for 187 shields, I doubt it matters much, especially if these 187 shields disappear at a rate comparable to signs that say 69 or 420.

[mrsman]

So after all of those years that Venice Blvd was not signed, then Caltrans takes the time to install shields on the route and at the I-10 WB ramp. Then within 2 year they have to go back and take them down, "your tax dollars at work", as the sign says.

Is all of Venice Blvd within the city of Los Angeles, or does a portion pass through Culver City? I wonder if Venice Blvd will lose lanes when the "Great Street" comes through. As for 187 shields, I doubt it matters much, especially if these 187 shields disappear at a rate comparable to signs that say 69 or 420.

Between Overland and Sawtelle, Venice is on the border of LA and Culver City.  It seems that most of the street is designed with LA streetlights, traffic lights,   and signs.  The only CC stuff you see on this section are the street name signs on this side of the street.  My guess is that the city line is on the sidewalk/private property line and that LA has full jurisdiction over any improvement on the street itself.