AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: What about the capacity (capacitibility) of the East Los Angeles Interchange?  (Read 1023 times)

ACSCmapcollector

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 367
  • Last Login: May 18, 2017, 04:47:14 PM

What about the capacity (capacitibility) of the East Los Angeles Interchange?

Where Interstate 5 Golden State Freeway as well as the Santa Ana Freeway and Interstate 10 Santa Monica Freeway and the CA 60 Pomona Freeway meet is the most busiest freeway interchange with a name, East Los Angeles Interchange.

I wonder why this interchange has been neglected through the many years that it has been used?

Scott C. Presnal
Morro Bay, CA
Logged

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1575
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: Today at 04:41:00 PM

It's certainly not neglected by LA traffic reporters! :-o  From about '58 to '67 parts of it were literally carved out of the L.A. river bluffs and local neighborhoods -- it, and the various freeway branches extending outward from it could serve as the "poster child" for the concept of constructing freeways through neighborhoods where the cost of property acquisition was relatively miniscule.  The basic location was determined by the presence of the original US 101 "Santa Ana" freeway; the section of the interchange's location was opened by 1947.  When it was decided to route I-5 between central LA and points to the south along this facility, it became only a matter of choosing just where to place the interchange with the "Golden State" freeway (I-5 north/I-10 east) and the Santa Monica freeway  (I-10 west).  The basic Interstate portion of the interchange (at that time, US 101 from the interchange north to the west terminus of the San Bernardino Freeway was designated, but never signed as, the original I-105) was completed in late 1962 with the opening of the first section of the Santa Monica/I-10 freeway to the west.  Originally, "ghost ramps" essentially continuing the trajectory of the Santa Monica freeway eastward just north of the Santa Ana Freeway could be seen; they became the western terminus of CA 60, the Pomona Freeway, which opened in the spring of 1967.  Frankly, there's not a lot of room for this interchange to grow -- the east I-10 to I-5 south & CA 60 connection is located on a bridge structure that begins about a half-mile west as the L.A. River crossing, and continues east until the rising ground of the river bluff is encountered; that segues quickly (a couple hundred yards) to the ramp to south I-5 and then a series of bridges over I-5 and the interchange's easternmost ramps.  Without major bridge reconstruction and/or taking of nearby property, there's no place to readily increase capacity here.  Westbound is essentially the mirror-image of this; traffic from west CA 60 to west I-10 is down in a trench under I-5 and several local streets before rising up to join the main I-10 lanes and bridge the river westward.  The I-10 through lanes are also on a series of bridges, crowded in by industrial facilities or topographical features.  Again, not a lot of room to grow -- there are businesses, including the LA Times printing plant, situated right along the edges of either the aforementioned eastbound bridge or the westbound trench. 

It IS a perpetual traffic nightmare; its traffic levels have exceeded its planned capacity several times over -- but, as with many urban facilities, the cost (financial & social) of significant expansion is prohibitive.  It's lucky that the original concept was squashed by the time interchange construction commenced; this saw another freeway extending directly south (a virtual extension of the Golden State freeway) called the Industrial Freeway, which continued south to Terminal Island; this, after 1964, morphed into the CA 47 corridor, the northern reaches in central LA of which never progressed beyond an undefined-alignment line on the state planning maps.  47 presently only extends north from Terminal Island as mostly a surface facility (much of which follows Alameda Ave.)  but only as far as CA 91.  The concept of a freeway along that corridor (principally as a relief route for I-710 to the east and I-110 to the west) has been jettisoned; its place as a commercial traffic conveyor has been taken by the freight-rail Alameda Corridor from the port area to the rail yards east of downtown LA. 
Logged

coatimundi

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 788
  • Age: 36
  • Location: Marina, CA
  • Last Login: May 12, 2017, 12:42:29 AM

I would imagine that finishing the 710 would help a lot with this, as it would allow traffic to bypass this interchange and the really old stretch of I-5 along the river via the 210.

Speaking of the 710, it seems like "East Los Angeles Interchange" would be better suited for one of the interchanges along 710, since this "Downtown Confluence" (I'm trademarking that now, hoping it'll catch on) is still well within the City of Los Angeles. "Boyle Heights Interchange" seems more appropriate. Name it after the neighborhood that it destroyed. But I guess, at the time of its construction, it seemed eastern.
Logged

ACSCmapcollector

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 367
  • Last Login: May 18, 2017, 04:47:14 PM

I really don't know that any additional traffic can handle the East Los Angeles Interchange, what about modifying the interchange to fit new lanes on the Golden State Freeway and the Santa Ana Freeway, Interstate 5, as well as the Santa Monica Freeway, Interstate 10?  (Old U.S. 101 used to be signed on Interstate 5, the Santa Ana Freeway).  :hmmm:

Scott C. Presnal
Morro Bay, CA
Logged

MaxConcrete

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 325
  • Location: Houston, TX
  • Last Login: Today at 06:01:26 PM

When I have driven through the downtown L.A. freeways, parts of the interchange are so old they look more like a freeway museum. As sparker mentioned, parts date to the 1940s and most or all of the downtown complex was complete by 1962 (although sparker mentions the Pomona Freeway connections date to 1967).

So I had the perception that at some point in the future the interchange is going to need to be modernized and expanded. But in today's Los Angeles political climate, that could actually translate to modernizing and downsizing. So I'm thinking it will be basically unchanged for the rest of my lifetime (I'm 49), unless a superquake hits.

Houston, on the other hand, is close to completing a plan for a total rebuild of its downtown freeway interchange complex, demolishing and rebuilding everything, including removal of the Pierce Elevated. Estimated cost: $4 billion. Earliest possible start of construction: 2020.
http://www.ih45northandmore.com/

Dallas has $800 of work in progress right now, the Horseshoe project http://dallashorseshoe.com/, with another $100 million to start in 2017 (IH-35E collector lanes through downtown.) And the CityMap study is a starting point on planning for modernizing the remaining downtown freeways.
http://dallascitymap.com/results.html#home

I'm thinking a complete modernization of downtown L.A. freeways would cost $10 to $20 billion. Modernizing and expanding downtown freeways is a difficult task to undertake and complete, both politically and financially, and even in Texas it can involve freeway casualties, such as the planned retirement of the Pierce Elevated in Houston.

Plutonic Panda

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 184
  • Location: Los Angeles
  • Last Login: Today at 05:56:31 PM

I really hope they could find a way to somehow move the 110 and 101 interchange to somewhere and create a highway museum with it being the centerpiece. Far fetch, I know. I've always had a dream of someday moving that interchange to the high-desert and building a museum dedicated to the history of the worlds freeways and tollways as well as the interstate system. I just fucking love that interchange, too. It's beautiful and was built before the highways connected to it in the 50's if I remember right. I would hate to see it demoed even though a new interchange is needed there to increase capacity.

Also, speaking of horrible interchanges, what is the deal with the I-5/134 interchange and the 101/134 interchange. They should have direct connects to all sides and flyovers. Same thing with 405/101 interchange. I realize cost is an issue, but with today's engineering, something can be done. Is anything in the works with Caltrans? I was hoping metro would have something included in the new ballot measure, but nothing. These interchanges are laughable. Narrowed to 2 lanes to continue west or east? Mind boggling.
« Last Edit: July 14, 2016, 08:17:49 PM by Plutonic Panda »
Logged

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1575
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: Today at 04:41:00 PM

Depends upon what you refer to as "really old" (yeah, I fit that category!); the oldest I-5 segment in the LA area is actually that stretch immediately south of the East LA interchange, dating from 1947.  The portion along the LA river -- more or less from the 110/Pasadena freeway north to the 134/Ventura freeway, was completed between 1957 and 1962 (I grew up a couple of miles' distance from the 5/134 interchange). 

Technically, you're correct about the name of the interchange.  The actual East Los Angeles is an unincorporated area extending from the eastern LA city limits along Indiana St. east to Montebello, and between Monterey Park to the north and about Whittier Blvd. (pre-1953 US 101) on the south end.  Pretty much everything south of Whittier is part of the City of Commerce.  The one freeway-to-freeway interchange that is situated within the ELA zone is the junction of CA 60 and I-710.  But the L.A. area interchanges have been blessed (or damned) with nicknames, most of which are part of LA traffic-reporter lexicon.  The ELA interchange (5/10/60/101) got its name early, primarily from being east of downtown -- as well as one of the major focal points of cross-metro traffic.  Of course, the original "named" interchange was the 4-level (101/110); the other east-of-downtown junction is the "San Bernardino Split" where the spur of I-10 west of I-5 terminates at US 101; although that interchange predates the northern I-5/I-10 interchange by about 12-13 years, the short distance between them -- as well as the fact that both of them involve the San Bernardino Freeway (I-10), both have, from time to time, received the reference of "San Bernardino Split".  Derogatory names include the I-405/I-605/CA 22 interchange near Seal Beach; this has been given the term "Malfunction Junction" (sometimes used in other metro areas as well for complex interchange layouts).  And, finally, down Santa Ana way, there's the infamous Orange Crush (I-5/CA22/CA57), complete with its U-turn ramp from EB 22 to NB 57 -- ironically, one of the most heavily-utilized rush-hour movements at that location. 

When I lived in the L.A. area in the 2000's, occasionally I would hear the 60/710 interchange referred to as the "710 Stack" due to its multi-level configuration.  But I've never heard Dan Faigin's fave, the 101/405, referred to by anything that would be printable in a family publication! :ded:   
Logged

ACSCmapcollector

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 367
  • Last Login: May 18, 2017, 04:47:14 PM

I really hope they could find a way to somehow move the 110 and 101 interchange to somewhere and create a highway museum. Far fetch, I know. I just fucking love that interchange. It's beautiful and was built before the highways connected to it in the 50's if I remember right. I would hate to see it demoed even though a new interchange is needed there to increase capacity.

Also, speaking of horrible interchanges, what is the deal with the I-5/134 interchange and the 101/134 interchange. They should have direct connects to all sides and flyovers. Same thing with 405/101 interchange. I realize cost is an issue, but with today's engineering, something can be done. Is anything in the works with Caltrans? I was hoping metro would have something included in the new ballot measure, but nothing. These interchanges are laughable. Narrowed to 2 lanes to continue west or east? Mind boggling.

I don't think Interstate 5 merges with CA 134, Interstate 210, and the present Interstate  710 stub in Pasadena, CA.

Scott C. Presnal
Morro Bay, CA
Logged

Plutonic Panda

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 184
  • Location: Los Angeles
  • Last Login: Today at 05:56:31 PM

I really hope they could find a way to somehow move the 110 and 101 interchange to somewhere and create a highway museum. Far fetch, I know. I just fucking love that interchange. It's beautiful and was built before the highways connected to it in the 50's if I remember right. I would hate to see it demoed even though a new interchange is needed there to increase capacity.

Also, speaking of horrible interchanges, what is the deal with the I-5/134 interchange and the 101/134 interchange. They should have direct connects to all sides and flyovers. Same thing with 405/101 interchange. I realize cost is an issue, but with today's engineering, something can be done. Is anything in the works with Caltrans? I was hoping metro would have something included in the new ballot measure, but nothing. These interchanges are laughable. Narrowed to 2 lanes to continue west or east? Mind boggling.

I don't think Interstate 5 merges with CA 134, Interstate 210, and the present Interstate  710 stub in Pasadena, CA.

Scott C. Presnal
Morro Bay, CA
You're correct. I modified my post.
Logged

ACSCmapcollector

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 367
  • Last Login: May 18, 2017, 04:47:14 PM

Also when I was going through each invididual picture of the East Los Angeles Interchange, there is a narrow 2 lane transition ramp, does anyone know about this? From the Golden State Freeway, Interstate 5, to the Pomona Freeway, CA 60. :

http://www.aaroads.com/california/images005/thb/i-005_sb_exit_134b_01.jpg


Scott C. Presnal
Morro Bay, CA
« Last Edit: July 15, 2016, 07:44:28 PM by ACSCmapcollector »
Logged

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1575
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: Today at 04:41:00 PM

What's pictured is the SB I-5 connector ramp from the Golden State to the Santa Ana freeway.  Perpetually underpowered from the get-go, it also features an EB turn-off to the Pomona Freeway.  And the northbound I-5 connection is similarly constricted, but on the other (north) side of the Santa Ana.  Coming off the southbound Golden State, there's a rather nasty small-radius curve that must be negotiated just prior to the Pomona Fw./CA 60 left-side turnoff (looks like the picture was taken right at the end of this curve); there's a similar curve NB (with a lane drop as well) just before the merge with EB I-10 traffic coming off the Santa Monica Freeway. 

With streets (Soto St., Boyle Avenue, East 7th Street, et. al.) crossing the interchange, often with over/under bridging arrangements, this interchange could be safely described as the freeway equivalent of a "hot mess"!  In the initial years after all but the Pomona/60 freeway were completed, the interchange was rather fittingly dubbed the "Spaghetti Bowl" by the L.A. Times, as well as other local papers in the area.   The East Los Angeles Interchange name wasn't widely applied until after the Pomona/60 connection was completed (probably since the new connection took one right into ELA).
Logged

bing101

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1106
  • Location: Sacramento
  • Last Login: May 22, 2017, 07:03:05 PM



What about :58 on this video in 2013 it seems to suggest something was supposed to happen between 5 @ 710 freeways. 
Logged

coatimundi

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 788
  • Age: 36
  • Location: Marina, CA
  • Last Login: May 12, 2017, 12:42:29 AM

What about :58 on this video in 2013 it seems to suggest something was supposed to happen between 5 @ 710 freeways.

I don't see what you mean. That's the 5/710 interchange, approaching from 710 northbound. You mean the Pasadena control city? Or the construction equipment on the left side of the ramp?
Logged

DTComposer

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 655
  • Location: San Jose
  • Last Login: Today at 10:52:07 AM

What about :58 on this video in 2013 it seems to suggest something was supposed to happen between 5 @ 710 freeways.

I don't see what you mean. That's the 5/710 interchange, approaching from 710 northbound. You mean the Pasadena control city? Or the construction equipment on the left side of the ramp?


If I'm seeing that correctly the construction was actually the demo of the left side Olympic onramp.
Logged

 


Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.