AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: Traffic between I-210, I-5 & CA 14  (Read 11068 times)

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 8495
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: September 12, 2021, 12:44:33 AM
Re: Traffic between I-210, I-5 & CA 14
« Reply #25 on: September 01, 2016, 02:28:17 AM »

Please -- somebody with a decent CAD program should pull a "redesigning interchanges" on this I-5 section (I have a rudimentary program, but it's dedicated to circuit boards only!) to elucidate what we've all been discussing -- including the possibility of an expanded role for the "auto/truck" lanes.  Even if it has to be done in Fictional, it probably would be a useful exercise. 

As an aside, Vasco Road, even with the improvements, is still a major PITA.  I use it about twice a month -- and always time it so I'm in the contraflow direction (NB mornings, SB evenings).  My GF and I were looking at a house in Discovery Bay a few years back (she has close relatives in Stockton), but the realities of the commute soured us on that idea in short order. 
Logged

mrsman

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3512
  • Age: 45
  • Location: Silver Spring, MD
  • Last Login: September 15, 2021, 06:36:07 PM
Re: Traffic between I-210, I-5 & CA 14
« Reply #26 on: September 02, 2016, 04:09:02 PM »

If the idea is to mitigate the effect of two separate close interchanges and weaving, couldn't that be accomplished in large measure by confining all movements to and from the 210 to only the truck lanes?

You could widen the northbound truck lanes to three lanes and make them a combined truck climbing lane and distributor lane for 210 traffic.  You could leave the current two southbound truck lanes as is but make them solely collector lanes for all traffic going to the 210 from both the 5 and 14.

And this is, again, what I was talking about, but for 210 instead of 14. The roadway is already there; it just needs to be improved and widened.

I like the NJ Turnpike-style "CARS/TRUCKS/BUSES" lane designation idea. And it seems stupid, but some people just need it. I got behind someone on Vasco Road, when I was there a couple of weeks ago, hanging out in the left lane, and I think it was because she had seen the "Truck Lane" sign when the right lane appeared and thought it was a special lane for trucks. She also had Oregon plates, which I bet is part of it...

And an  interesting tidbit for those who are unfamiliar, the relevant NJ Tpke section is 3-3-3-3.  So within either the NB or SB section there are 3 lanes for autos only and 3 lanes for cars/buses/trucks (generally the outer lanes).  And within the 3 lane section for cars/buses/trucks there is a restriction against trucks on the leftmost lane.  There is also for part of the section a 4th lane that is HOV during rush hours.

Now with this section of I-5, the HOV lane is part of the cars lanes.  So I'm guessing that buses may use the car lanes as well.  So the relevant signage should read:  Cars/Buses Only    vs.   Cars/Buses/Trucks
Logged

myosh_tino

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2802
  • Silicon Valley Roadgeek

  • Age: 47
  • Location: Cupertino, CA
  • Last Login: September 15, 2021, 07:28:55 PM
    • Silicon Valley Roads @ Markyville.com
Re: Traffic between I-210, I-5 & CA 14
« Reply #27 on: September 02, 2016, 07:12:13 PM »

Now with this section of I-5, the HOV lane is part of the cars lanes.  So I'm guessing that buses may use the car lanes as well.  So the relevant signage should read:  Cars/Buses Only    vs.   Cars/Buses/Trucks

That's simply too wordy.

I think the current setup works just fine.  The only vehicles that have to leave the main lanes are trucks hence the "TRUCK ROUTE" signage.  There only thing I would change is removing "AUTOS" from the signage for the main lanes.
Logged
Quote from: golden eagle
If I owned a dam and decided to donate it to charity, would I be giving a dam? I'm sure that might be a first because no one really gives a dam.

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 8495
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: September 12, 2021, 12:44:33 AM
Re: Traffic between I-210, I-5 & CA 14
« Reply #28 on: September 03, 2016, 06:04:49 AM »

Now with this section of I-5, the HOV lane is part of the cars lanes.  So I'm guessing that buses may use the car lanes as well.  So the relevant signage should read:  Cars/Buses Only    vs.   Cars/Buses/Trucks
That's simply too wordy.

I think the current setup works just fine.  The only vehicles that have to leave the main lanes are trucks hence the "TRUCK ROUTE" signage.  There only thing I would change is removing "AUTOS" from the signage for the main lanes.
Signage-wise, the only thing really needed on the BGS over the main/auto lanes is a substantial prohibitive black-on-white "NO TRUCKS" sign section.  Over the truck/auto lanes, a black & white "TRUCKS/AUTOS" sign should similarly be placed.  I would also bolster the concept by placing roadside black & white signs reading "TRUCK ROUTE", with an arrow directing truck traffic toward the semi-dedicated lanes. 

Regarding buses -- about a decade ago I took a trip from L.A. to the Bay Area using the Amtrak "San Joaquin" line (basically on a whim).  This included a dedicated bus trip from L.A. Union Station to Bakersfield; the bus remained on the main auto lanes over the I-5 section under discussion here rather than using the truck bypass.  Whether the driver was trained/directed to do that isn't known to me; the reverse trip a few days later did use the truck lanes -- but that bus diverged onto I-210, whereas the NB bus was on I-5 all the way from downtown L.A.  I'm not aware of whether the drivers for the public bus system in L.A. heading to/from Santa Clarita use one or the other set of lanes --or whether they have a choice in the matter, possibly dependent upon the ad hoc traffic situation.  Come to think of it, local buses may well just use San Fernando Road and Sierra Highway rather than the freeway.  If anyone out there has maps of the bus routes through Newhall Pass, it might shed some light as to what's going on here!
Logged

sdmichael

Re: Traffic between I-210, I-5 & CA 14
« Reply #29 on: September 03, 2016, 12:20:15 PM »

There are no local buses in that area. Even there were, there would be no point to taking the freeway, mainline or otherwise. There are some commuter routes (Santa Clarita Transit and Antelope Valley Transit) that pass through. Which lanes they take may simply be based upon traffic conditions at that time. Buses themselves are not required to take truck lanes. They can even take the HOV lanes if desired. Given the sheer volume of truck traffic along that freeway, mixing too many autos into the truck lanes would also be a bad idea. Locals already know how to get through if they want to. Not sure your point here.
Logged

coatimundi

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 798
  • Age: 40
  • Location: Marina, CA
  • Last Login: April 17, 2020, 12:42:35 AM
Re: Traffic between I-210, I-5 & CA 14
« Reply #30 on: September 03, 2016, 12:31:32 PM »

The NJ Turnpike has a lot more buses on it than does I-5, so it's more necessary there to explicitly restrict buses. I agree that the few buses per day (Amtrak shuttle, Greyhound, Bolt, Megabus, etc.) aren't going to cause much of an issue for traffic, but it's just a matter of vehicle classifications. It clears up the question about where buses fit in.
Logged

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 8495
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: September 12, 2021, 12:44:33 AM
Re: Traffic between I-210, I-5 & CA 14
« Reply #31 on: September 03, 2016, 01:04:23 PM »

There are no local buses in that area. Even there were, there would be no point to taking the freeway, mainline or otherwise. There are some commuter routes (Santa Clarita Transit and Antelope Valley Transit) that pass through. Which lanes they take may simply be based upon traffic conditions at that time. Buses themselves are not required to take truck lanes. They can even take the HOV lanes if desired. Given the sheer volume of truck traffic along that freeway, mixing too many autos into the truck lanes would also be a bad idea. Locals already know how to get through if they want to. Not sure your point here.
My point was to respond to a previous post regarding the addition of the word "BUSES" to the restrictive/advisory signage on the various BGS's on this section -- that any bus usage, including the commuter lines mentioned (the ones I referred to in my post -- my mistake if the term "local" was misconstrued), would likely utilize the path of least resistance in any case, be it either main or truck lanes -- or even the parallel surface streets -- in order to best maintain their various schedules.  Specific signage references to buses are, IMO, neither necessary nor productive.

My original thoughts regarding revamping of this section of I-5 were partially due to the limited capacity of the truck/auto lanes, based as they are on the original narrow routing through the canyon.  Like you, I'm concerned with dumping too much general traffic onto these lanes, considering the sheer amount of truck traffic plus the gradients involved.  Using these truck lanes as a virtual bypass to obviate weaving issues on the main lines (I acknowledge we may differ as to the extent and effect of such weaving) is simply a very weak Band-aid on the main problem -- too many vehicles, of all types, funneled into one facility rendered complex by its topographical nature.  I was just looking for a relatively straightforward way to redirect some specific traffic patterns -- mostly commuter -- in such a way as to avoid a complete tear-down and rebuild of the whole 210-14 segment.     
Logged

sdmichael

Re: Traffic between I-210, I-5 & CA 14
« Reply #32 on: September 03, 2016, 02:01:50 PM »

Weaving... where? Show us where this "weaving" is an issue and causes massive backups? Look at the traffic patterns (You don't live anywhere near there so you wouldn't necessarily know or understand them) and you'll see the bulk of it is northbound merging on I-5 at the north end of the truck route combined with the steep grade/slow trucks. There may be a small, yes, small, amount of "weaving" but no more than most other freeway interchanges deal with. Southbound traffic sucks during peak as there is simply too much of it. No amount of extra ramps will help that fact.

Even Caltrans isn't looking into this... as there isn't enough reason to. I just don't get why you think this interchange is such a problem. I've managed to get through it without much fuss... much as the hundreds of thousands of others have done for the past 40+ years.
Logged

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 8495
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: September 12, 2021, 12:44:33 AM
Re: Traffic between I-210, I-5 & CA 14
« Reply #33 on: September 03, 2016, 02:40:04 PM »

I'm Glendale born & bred, and lived in the L.A. area, from Manhattan Beach to Hesperia, for 39 of my 66 years.  The weaving issue to which I refer is primarily on SB 5 at the point where 3 lanes of CA 14 traffic are added to the right.  Except during the middle of the night, I've always experienced issues with getting over to the I-210 exit, having to "weave" through traffic over a short stretch of road to do so.  My observation is that the merging CA 14 traffic has displayed a consistent tendency to speed up once they hit the 6-lane-wide road segment south of there, making the rightward shift necessary to access the 210 exit, a little over a mile to the south, difficult, harrowing, dangerous, or any other negative adjective that may apply.  I have always thought that some way of getting over to the right side of the oncoming lanes from 14 would be a good idea; while the truck lanes may work, they're usually (gasp!) full of trucks, which poses its own set of issues. 

I will concede that the NB situation is somewhat less problematic, probably because of the reduced speeds due to the uphill gradient.  I've usually been able to get to the CA 14 exit (hey, it uses half of the available auto-only lanes!) from NB I-5 without serious issue -- unless I am also driving a slow/loaded vehicle (the times that occurred I used the truck lanes).  And there is less traffic merging from 210 than there is from 14 in the other direction.  So -- bottom line -- southbound is, by a matter of degrees, more problematic than northbound -- I'd still like to see a auto-only bypass lane SB around the 5/14 interchange to deposit 210-bound traffic on the right side of the roadway; NB is less of an issue and, at least for the present, not presenting a compelling case for modification -- you are basically correct on that aspect of the issue.

I do realize that my assessment is anecdotal, based on driving this segment countless times -- likely in the mid-hundreds! -- and bolstered by constant complaining from my Tujunga-based cousin, who works in the industrial area north of Magic Mountain and who uses the road five days a week (it's a consistent topic of conversation with her semi-monthly phone calls!).  If any data is available on the traffic patterns here -- either confirming my observations or not -- I'd sure like to see it!
Logged

sdmichael

Re: Traffic between I-210, I-5 & CA 14
« Reply #34 on: September 03, 2016, 02:50:41 PM »

Then talk to Caltrans District 7. I'm sure they'd love to hear about it. Anything else would be pointless. Just remember, spending millions of dollars on a ramp to save moving over a lane or two might not be worth the effort.

Use this link too:

Caltrans Traffic Concern http://www.dot.ca.gov/paffairs/pioform.html
« Last Edit: September 03, 2016, 02:56:22 PM by sdmichael »
Logged

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 8495
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: September 12, 2021, 12:44:33 AM
Re: Traffic between I-210, I-5 & CA 14
« Reply #35 on: September 03, 2016, 03:52:31 PM »

Then talk to Caltrans District 7. I'm sure they'd love to hear about it. Anything else would be pointless. Just remember, spending millions of dollars on a ramp to save moving over a lane or two might not be worth the effort.

Use this link too:

Caltrans Traffic Concern http://www.dot.ca.gov/paffairs/pioform.html
Thanks for the direct link.  I'll probably talk to them just to ascertain whether others have expressed concern with the issue.  If not, I'll probably end my discussion of this issue -- and tell my cousin to either use the truck lanes or be extra cautious -- or both, for good measure!
Logged

sdmichael

Re: Traffic between I-210, I-5 & CA 14
« Reply #36 on: September 03, 2016, 04:16:45 PM »

The important lessons to be learned are these:

If you travel along a route and it has "perpetual" problems - learn more about your local geography and you just might find a better route - instead of just complaining about the "only" way to go. There are almost always alternative routes.

If you think you have a better idea for transportation problems, contact the proper agency and get involved. None of this gets done without it.
Logged

cahwyguy

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 525
  • California Highway Guy

  • Age: 61
  • Location: Northridge, CA
  • Last Login: Today at 08:18:20 PM
    • California Highways
Re: Traffic between I-210, I-5 & CA 14
« Reply #37 on: September 06, 2016, 08:52:41 PM »

I've been reading through this discussion looking for useful information to gleen for my pages (with attribution of course -- you'll see a bunch in the next update). One thing that hasn't been mentioned in this discussion is historical. I've heard -- but never seen confirmed -- that there is some grading still visible in the 5/14 transition SB that was in preparation for the 14 to continue to the S, over the hill, and down Reseda. It's basically just a bit of widening to the W of the flyover; I forget whether this was more visible from the SB 14 or the SB 5.

I'd be curious to find out if it is true. In any case, any anticipatory construction could have further complicated these interchanges.
Logged
Daniel - California Highway Guy ● Highway Site: http://www.cahighways.org/ ●  Blog: http://blog.cahighways.org/ ● Follow California Highways on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/cahighways

sdmichael

Re: Traffic between I-210, I-5 & CA 14
« Reply #38 on: September 06, 2016, 09:39:07 PM »

I've been reading through this discussion looking for useful information to gleen for my pages (with attribution of course -- you'll see a bunch in the next update). One thing that hasn't been mentioned in this discussion is historical. I've heard -- but never seen confirmed -- that there is some grading still visible in the 5/14 transition SB that was in preparation for the 14 to continue to the S, over the hill, and down Reseda. It's basically just a bit of widening to the W of the flyover; I forget whether this was more visible from the SB 14 or the SB 5.

I'd be curious to find out if it is true. In any case, any anticipatory construction could have further complicated these interchanges.

There is some grading as well as some concrete (though no longer really visible as a "stub") from that planned extension. I saw a photo of a model of that interchange somewhere in CHPW. I am looking for it. I also have both sets of plans for the freeway interchange, one before the quake and one after the quake. Pre-quake plans do show the routing of the unbuilt ramps for 14 South (which would have had the control city of "Beach Cities"). Once I find the photo of the interchange model, it will be added to my site as a separate page, similar to some of the other interchange pages I have done in the past. Perhaps this is the impetus for me to "ramp up" my search.

EDIT: The photo of the 5/14 Interchange model was not in CHPW, but in a 1984 AASHTO book.
« Last Edit: September 07, 2016, 01:54:12 AM by sdmichael »
Logged

cahwyguy

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 525
  • California Highway Guy

  • Age: 61
  • Location: Northridge, CA
  • Last Login: Today at 08:18:20 PM
    • California Highways
Re: Traffic between I-210, I-5 & CA 14
« Reply #39 on: September 07, 2016, 11:28:10 AM »

When you add it, please let me know so I can update my pages to point to it.
Logged
Daniel - California Highway Guy ● Highway Site: http://www.cahighways.org/ ●  Blog: http://blog.cahighways.org/ ● Follow California Highways on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/cahighways

sdmichael

Re: Traffic between I-210, I-5 & CA 14
« Reply #40 on: September 08, 2016, 03:08:59 PM »

I'm mostly finished with the Antelope Valley / Golden State Freeway Interchange page. I plan to add more diagrams, when possible. Here is the link: http://socalregion.com/highways/la_highways/golden_antelope_interchange/
Logged

mrsman

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3512
  • Age: 45
  • Location: Silver Spring, MD
  • Last Login: September 15, 2021, 06:36:07 PM
Re: Traffic between I-210, I-5 & CA 14
« Reply #41 on: September 09, 2016, 12:22:52 AM »

I've been reading through this discussion looking for useful information to gleen for my pages (with attribution of course -- you'll see a bunch in the next update). One thing that hasn't been mentioned in this discussion is historical. I've heard -- but never seen confirmed -- that there is some grading still visible in the 5/14 transition SB that was in preparation for the 14 to continue to the S, over the hill, and down Reseda. It's basically just a bit of widening to the W of the flyover; I forget whether this was more visible from the SB 14 or the SB 5.

I'd be curious to find out if it is true. In any case, any anticipatory construction could have further complicated these interchanges.

There is some grading as well as some concrete (though no longer really visible as a "stub") from that planned extension. I saw a photo of a model of that interchange somewhere in CHPW. I am looking for it. I also have both sets of plans for the freeway interchange, one before the quake and one after the quake. Pre-quake plans do show the routing of the unbuilt ramps for 14 South (which would have had the control city of "Beach Cities"). Once I find the photo of the interchange model, it will be added to my site as a separate page, similar to some of the other interchange pages I have done in the past. Perhaps this is the impetus for me to "ramp up" my search.

EDIT: The photo of the 5/14 Interchange model was not in CHPW, but in a 1984 AASHTO book.


Beach Cities??  So now there are two different Beach Cities in CA that don't necessarily meet up.  The proposed 14 extension would've hit the coastline in Pacific Palisades.  And of course the 91 from the Inland Empire points to Beach Cities, but whether it points to the the OC beach cities (like Newport Beach) or the South Bay beach cities (like Redondo Beach) is of course a subject of debate.  (And we debated it here, of course).  But what sense would it be to label Pacific Palisades / Santa Monica as Beach Cities as well?  The destinations are simply too far apart.

I'm guessing that perhaps it would be Santa Monica for the 14 and perhaps 405's destination would change from Santa Monica to something else.  (Maybe Long Beach or maybe LA Airport [which has been added to many signs]).

Logged

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 8495
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: September 12, 2021, 12:44:33 AM
Re: Traffic between I-210, I-5 & CA 14
« Reply #42 on: September 09, 2016, 05:36:47 AM »

Beach Cities??  So now there are two different Beach Cities in CA that don't necessarily meet up.  The proposed 14 extension would've hit the coastline in Pacific Palisades.  And of course the 91 from the Inland Empire points to Beach Cities, but whether it points to the the OC beach cities (like Newport Beach) or the South Bay beach cities (like Redondo Beach) is of course a subject of debate.  (And we debated it here, of course).  But what sense would it be to label Pacific Palisades / Santa Monica as Beach Cities as well?  The destinations are simply too far apart.

I'm guessing that perhaps it would be Santa Monica for the 14 and perhaps 405's destination would change from Santa Monica to something else.  (Maybe Long Beach or maybe LA Airport [which has been added to many signs]).


Considering the publicity given the area via films, TV shows, and an ongoing reputation as a desirable destination, I would surmise "Malibu" might have been the eventual control city on SB CA 14 signage.  While the route would have intersected PCH/CA 1 somewhere around the western end of Sunset Blvd., the town limits of Malibu itself start a little west of Topanga Cyn. (CA 27), about a mile and a half west of the potential CA 14 junction point -- close enough for control purposes.   
Logged

cahwyguy

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 525
  • California Highway Guy

  • Age: 61
  • Location: Northridge, CA
  • Last Login: Today at 08:18:20 PM
    • California Highways
Re: Traffic between I-210, I-5 & CA 14
« Reply #43 on: September 09, 2016, 12:02:13 PM »

Beach Cities??  So now there are two different Beach Cities in CA that don't necessarily meet up.  The proposed 14 extension would've hit the coastline in Pacific Palisades.  And of course the 91 from the Inland Empire points to Beach Cities, but whether it points to the the OC beach cities (like Newport Beach) or the South Bay beach cities (like Redondo Beach) is of course a subject of debate.  (And we debated it here, of course).  But what sense would it be to label Pacific Palisades / Santa Monica as Beach Cities as well?  The destinations are simply too far apart.

I'm guessing that perhaps it would be Santa Monica for the 14 and perhaps 405's destination would change from Santa Monica to something else.  (Maybe Long Beach or maybe LA Airport [which has been added to many signs]).


Considering the publicity given the area via films, TV shows, and an ongoing reputation as a desirable destination, I would surmise "Malibu" might have been the eventual control city on SB CA 14 signage.  While the route would have intersected PCH/CA 1 somewhere around the western end of Sunset Blvd., the town limits of Malibu itself start a little west of Topanga Cyn. (CA 27), about a mile and a half west of the potential CA 14 junction point -- close enough for control purposes.   

Malibu would have been a better destination for the Whitnall Freeway (Route 64), as I think that was destined for Malibu Canyon/Las Virgenes after it turned away from the E-W along Chase (for those that don't realize, it was meant to start at the 170/5 interchange, explaining the extra land there originally). Route 14 was originally intended to end at Temescal and PCH. One of the things that helped to kill it was the construction of my high school back in '61 - Palisades High School at Temescal and Sunset (I'm class of '77). I wonder if there is any remaining evidence for Route 64, or models of the 170/5 interchange showing it as 170/5/64?

As a valley resident now, one can just imagine how different the valley would be had 14 and 64 been constructed.

Logged
Daniel - California Highway Guy ● Highway Site: http://www.cahighways.org/ ●  Blog: http://blog.cahighways.org/ ● Follow California Highways on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/cahighways

sdmichael

Re: Traffic between I-210, I-5 & CA 14
« Reply #44 on: September 09, 2016, 12:12:36 PM »

Malibu would have been a better destination for the Whitnall Freeway (Route 64), as I think that was destined for Malibu Canyon/Las Virgenes after it turned away from the E-W along Chase (for those that don't realize, it was meant to start at the 170/5 interchange, explaining the extra land there originally). Route 14 was originally intended to end at Temescal and PCH. One of the things that helped to kill it was the construction of my high school back in '61 - Palisades High School at Temescal and Sunset (I'm class of '77). I wonder if there is any remaining evidence for Route 64, or models of the 170/5 interchange showing it as 170/5/64?

As a valley resident now, one can just imagine how different the valley would be had 14 and 64 been constructed.

I've gone through the r/w maps for District 7 and have not found any reference to the unconstructed sections of Routes 14 or 64. The original plans for the 5/170 interchange (which at the time was US 6) also don't give any indication of a potential extra freeway.

However, the model I found a photo of showing the "full interchange" at 5/14 does have a survey map below it. I will work to track that down next time I go to Caltrans, which may be as soon as the next few weeks if I can make it.

Depending on what I find, I may work that data into another page or so.
Logged

Occidental Tourist

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 651
  • Last Login: Today at 03:08:48 PM
Re: Traffic between I-210, I-5 & CA 14
« Reply #45 on: September 09, 2016, 03:56:11 PM »

Quote from: sdmichael link=topic=18690.msg2173595#msg2173595
As a valley resident now, one can just imagine how different the valley would be had 14 and 64 been constructed.

Imagine how much worse traffic would be along the Santa Monica portion of PCH with 14 and 64 acting as alternate routes from the Valley into the Westside.  They likely would have had to build the PCH causeway just for the capacity.
Logged

mrsman

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3512
  • Age: 45
  • Location: Silver Spring, MD
  • Last Login: September 15, 2021, 06:36:07 PM
Re: Traffic between I-210, I-5 & CA 14
« Reply #46 on: September 11, 2016, 06:22:34 AM »

There are good arguments to be made for turning PCH into a freeway even with today's traffic patterns.  True, there is not much room for an interstate quality road, but at least some interchanges should be considered to replace some of the many lights between Santa Monica and Oxnard.
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.