Fire closes part of US 101 and 110 in downtown LA

[Lyon Wonder]

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/massive-downtown-la-fire-shuts-754803

Massive Downtown L.A. Fire Shuts Down Parts of 101, 110 Freeways

"Embers spewed from the fire landed across a freeway, igniting brush and charring a traffic sign. But fortunately winds were light and did not blow the fire even farther.

The southbound lanes of 101 and 110 were reopened by 4:40 a.m., the California Highway Patrol tweeted. But the northbound side of 110 was still closed after sunrise, as commuter traffic backed up for miles. The southbound 101 Temple, Broadway and Los Angeles off-ramps were also closed as of 6:30 a.m., according to a tweet from the California Highway Patrol. Around 10 a.m., the California Highway Patrol tweeted that three lanes on the northbound side of the 110 are open, while three remained closed. The northbound 110-101 is also open, CHP advised in a subsequent tweet. Another tweet noted that some traffic signs on the northbound side of the 110 were burned down."

[CtrlAltDel]

Weird. I’m familiar with the location because it abuts the Four-Level Interchange, which is the first stack interchange ever built. And I’ve often wondered what it would be like to live in the place right next to it. I mean, I understand others might not want to live so close to the highway, but I most certainly wouldn’t. Having done some research, though, I’ve found that the places that were built or are being built in the area (all of which are by the same developer) are a bit high on price and a bit low on tenant satisfaction. Oh well.



Anyway, the fire was intense. The palm tree under the I-10 / CA-60 sign is toast. The CA-110 sign melted. It’s five lanes away. The whole thing is crazy.

[Brian556]

Those building look like they are way too close to the freeway. It's like there no ROW whatsoever.

[CtrlAltDel]

Those building look like they are way too close to the freeway. It's like there no ROW whatsoever.

It is pretty tight. At the palm tree there's 18 feet between the end of shoulder and the walls of the building. Elsewhere, however, there's as little as 5. I have to admit that I'm not sure how that came to be. The area had nothing built on it before this.

[andy3175]

Yup, this sign melted/is charred; it will have to replaced.

The fire made headlines on the evening national news. I don't think the porcelain enamel signs on the offramp were affected by the blaze. In addition to the DaVinci Apartments, which were destroyed, the fire also several governmental buildings (Dept of Water and Power, LA Parks and Recreation, and LA County Health Services.

Also from the LA Times (http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-los-angeles-fire-20141208-story.html):

A series of dense, upscale apartment complexes have been built over the last decade around the 101-110 interchange in downtown L.A., including the under-construction DaVinci.

Developer Geoffrey Palmer's company is known for the Orsini, the Medici and other faux-Italian apartment buildings that have risen along the four-level interchange. The complexes have been part of the revitalization of downtown, though critics have complained about the design and size of the buildings.

The building was in the news earlier this year when the developer sought a pedestrian bridge that would link the DaVinci to other complexes in the area and offer residents a route to downtown attractions.

The developer told the city that transients living under the 110 Freeway would pose a safety threat to future renters. The bridge proposal faced criticism from some in downtown, but the City Council approved it in May.

[ARMOURERERIC]

A lot of questions on how he got away with building a 7 story ALL Frame building

[AndyMax25]

I'm actually glad that sign melted and has to be replaced. I get so annoyed every time I drive by it and have to see that glaring misplaced, offset panel at the bottom of the 110 shield. You can see it in the Google street view photo.

In my opinion, the mainline sign should match the original 60's sign that said 110 North with Pasadena at the bottom. Or, at the very least, mimic the transition road sign to say 110 North TO 5 North.

The I-5 shield was first installed at this location by a non-Caltrans person who took matters into his own hands in order to make motorist more aware that the I-5 north ramp was a left exit. When the sign was up for replacement, Caltrans appeased this position and produced a misleading sign and also removed the Pasadena control city marker.

Hopefully they get it right this time, if not better...I highly doubt it.

[AndyMax25]

Intense!

[AndyMax25]

Original


Rogue I-5 shield installed on the overhead just prior to the location above

[MarkF]

I always thought it was cool to have Hollywood as the control city for NB 101.  Too bad that went away with the last re-signing.

[Pete from Boston]

I hope the rogue I-5 shield survived.  That thing is legendary.

[KG909]

[Tom958]

The plot thickens, lol:

Was Monday's Fire in Downtown L.A. an 'Architectural Hate Crime'?

[mrsman]

I'm actually glad that sign melted and has to be replaced. I get so annoyed every time I drive by it and have to see that glaring misplaced, offset panel at the bottom of the 110 shield. You can see it in the Google street view photo.

In my opinion, the mainline sign should match the original 60's sign that said 110 North with Pasadena at the bottom. Or, at the very least, mimic the transition road sign to say 110 North TO 5 North.

The I-5 shield was first installed at this location by a non-Caltrans person who took matters into his own hands in order to make motorist more aware that the I-5 north ramp was a left exit. When the sign was up for replacement, Caltrans appeased this position and produced a misleading sign and also removed the Pasadena control city marker.

Hopefully they get it right this time, if not better...I highly doubt it.

I totally agree.  The new sign is terrible.  Where are the control cities?

Has this sign yet been brought to the attention of the Redesign This thread on the Illustrations forum?  If it hasn't, it would be a good candidate.

I'm not graphically inclined (so I can't show it very well), but if I were to redesign this sign with APL (arrow per lane), I would have it as follows: Left to right:

NORTH I-5 / Sacramento / 2 miles /NO TRUCKS/(Left Arrow)
NORTH CA-110 / Pasadena  / NO TRUCKS/ (2 straight arrows)
GORE
NORTH US 101 / Hollywood / TRUCK RTE / (Straight Arrow)
(Straight and Right Arrow)
SOUTH US 101 TO SOUTH I-5 EAST I-10 EAST CA-60 / Santa Ana/ San Bernardino/ TRUCK RTE / (Right Arrow)

[DTComposer]

I'm actually glad that sign melted and has to be replaced. I get so annoyed every time I drive by it and have to see that glaring misplaced, offset panel at the bottom of the 110 shield. You can see it in the Google street view photo.

In my opinion, the mainline sign should match the original 60's sign that said 110 North with Pasadena at the bottom. Or, at the very least, mimic the transition road sign to say 110 North TO 5 North.

The I-5 shield was first installed at this location by a non-Caltrans person who took matters into his own hands in order to make motorist more aware that the I-5 north ramp was a left exit. When the sign was up for replacement, Caltrans appeased this position and produced a misleading sign and also removed the Pasadena control city marker.

Hopefully they get it right this time, if not better...I highly doubt it.

I totally agree.  The new sign is terrible.  Where are the control cities?

Has this sign yet been brought to the attention of the Redesign This thread on the Illustrations forum?  If it hasn't, it would be a good candidate.

I'm not graphically inclined (so I can't show it very well), but if I were to redesign this sign with APL (arrow per lane), I would have it as follows: Left to right:

NORTH I-5 / Sacramento / 2 miles /NO TRUCKS/(Left Arrow)
NORTH CA-110 / Pasadena  / NO TRUCKS/ (2 straight arrows)
GORE
NORTH US 101 / Hollywood / TRUCK RTE / (Straight Arrow)
(Straight and Right Arrow)
SOUTH US 101 TO SOUTH I-5 EAST I-10 EAST CA-60 / Santa Ana/ San Bernardino/ TRUCK RTE / (Right Arrow)

If I'm not mistaken, part of the rationale on the sign layout was message loading...I think I read here they try to limit to twenty elements per sign assembly. While I would love to see the control cities reinstated, your sign would have 32 elements, which would make it a little hard to parse out at freeway speeds.

Of course, how often is that stretch of 110 truly at freeway speeds?....

[mrsman]

If I'm not mistaken, part of the rationale on the sign layout was message loading...I think I read here they try to limit to twenty elements per sign assembly. While I would love to see the control cities reinstated, your sign would have 32 elements, which would make it a little hard to parse out at freeway speeds.

Of course, how often is that stretch of 110 truly at freeway speeds?....

Yes, message loading could be a problem, but sometimes with complicated interchanges, there are a lot of messages that need to be conveyed. 

Another idea to reduce message loading would be to replace the rightmost sign as follows:
SOUTH US 101 Santa Ana/ San Bernardino/ TRUCK RTE / (Right Arrow).

(Yes, IMO the control cities are more important than the highway numbers of the highways that you'll reach 2 miles east of here.)

Of course, somewhere before there can be a roadside green sign saying: 
I-10 EAST San Bernardino
I-5 SOUTH Santa Ana
CA-60 EAST Pomona
USE US 101 SOUTH.

Currently, as there is a mix of old and new signage, all of the messages that should be conveyed are conveyed.  But I see the writing on the wall.  As far as Caltrans Dist 7 is concerned, freeway names and control cities can be dumped into the dustbin of history.  But it's wrong because freeway names and control cities are helpful to the driving public.

Yet, even I agree that at this particular location freeway names are redundant if the control cities are included.  Harbor Freeway to San Pedro (the Harbor), Pasadena Freeway (Arroyo Seco Parkway) to Pasadena, Hollywood Freeway to Hollywood, Santa Ana Freeway to Santa Ana. 

[Brian556]

In both Texas and Florida, I have seen examples of BGS signage that lacks control cities for no good reason.

https://maps.google.com/maps?ll=33.255834,-97.17124&spn=0.000018,0.012392&t=h&z=17&layer=c&cbll=33.255818,-97.171367&panoid=7r1ChtYbBxlmow7L7_dZSg&cbp=12,280.16,,0,0

[agentsteel53]

that 101 shield looks awesome now.

[SignBridge]

I liked the old signs better. Especially the one for 5/Santa Ana 10/San Bernadino. That format was especially intuitive and easy to understand. The new sign is definitely sign salad, and is more difficult to read.

Stick to basics and follow the MUTCD. Route shield/Compass Direction/Control City.    (No freeway names) Any other info should be on supplemental signs.

I'm having a hard time understanding why Texas and Calif. DOT's sometimes don't follow those simple concepts. 

[andy3175]

I liked the old signs better. Especially the one for 5/Santa Ana 10/San Bernadino. That format was especially intuitive and easy to understand. The new sign is definitely sign salad, and is more difficult to read.

Stick to basics and follow the MUTCD. Route shield/Compass Direction/Control City.    (No freeway names) Any other info should be on supplemental signs.

I'm having a hard time understanding why Texas and Calif. DOT's sometimes don't follow those simple concepts. 

Have to disagree with you here. For years I could never figure out where, exactly, US 101 met I-5 and I-10. The older version of this sign implied that I-5 and I-10 both made it to the Four-Level interchange, when in reality both routes were further downstream of that point. US 101 really continued south of there, and when the new signs were installed, it marked a much clearer understanding that the Four Level is just 101 and 110, and if I want 5-10-60 I can follow 101 south. It used to seem like every freeway interchange around downtown would go to 5 or 10; now with the new signs, it is easier to figure out which freeway is exactly 5 and/or 10.

P.S. that new 101 sign is as close to sign salad as you'll find anywhere in California. In this context it seems acceptable given the confluence of so many routes in one general area. I've seen other places (such as North Carolina) with as many as six signed routes on one sign assembly.

[SignBridge]

Well Andy, you make a valid point too. Suppose the old sign would have had the word TO added before each line? Or another possibility would be for it to say 101 SOUTH TO above the other two lines. But I like having the route and destination shown together.

[myosh_tino]

Well Andy, you make a valid point too. Suppose the old sign would have had the word TO added before each line? Or another possibility would be for it to say 101 SOUTH TO above the other two lines. But I like having the route and destination shown together.

And that can't happen because overhead guide signs have a maximum height of 120 inches.  There's no way to fit 101 SOUTH TO/I-5 Santa Ana/I-10 San Bernardino/ \/ TRUCK RTE \/ on a single panel.  I think the best solution is this one I posted on the Road-Related Illustrations board...

[SignBridge]

V-e-r-y  I-n-t-e-r-e-s-t-i-n-g...........Myosh, I like your treatment of the 5/North exit. To make it currently MUTCD compliant you could move the yellow-boxed word EXIT to the top of the exit number box and just have 2 MILES on the bottom line.

Your having one sign for the two directions on the 101 is interesting too. You could modify that into an overhead-arrow per lane sign, again to comply with the current Manual. Reason being you can't have 2 down arrows over one-lane anymore, though I have no problem with that arrangement.

[mrsman]

V-e-r-y  I-n-t-e-r-e-s-t-i-n-g...........Myosh, I like your treatment of the 5/North exit. To make it currently MUTCD compliant you could move the yellow-boxed word exit to the top of the exit number box and just have 2 MILES on the bottom line.

Your having one sign for the two directions on the 101 is interesting too. You could modify that into an overhead-arrow per lane sign, again to comply with the current Manual. Reason being you can't have 2 down arrows over one-lane anymore, though I have no problem with that arrangement.

SignBridge, I suggest that you look over some of the more recent posts (Dec 9 and later) on "Redesign THis" in the Road-Related Illustrations forum.  Click below.

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=9539.1700

Several of the commenters have posted ideas for this sign.  Myosh had taken my idea to resolve this with APLs in a way that you might appreciate.  But all of the recommedations are better than the current sign.

[andy3175]

Well Andy, you make a valid point too. Suppose the old sign would have had the word TO added before each line? Or another possibility would be for it to say 101 SOUTH TO above the other two lines. But I like having the route and destination shown together.

And that can't happen because overhead guide signs have a maximum height of 120 inches.  There's no way to fit 101 SOUTH TO/I-5 Santa Ana/I-10 San Bernardino/ \/ TRUCK RTE \/ on a single panel.  I think the best solution is this one I posted on the Road-Related Illustrations board...

Nice sign concept! I think that APL is difficult due to the limited sign heights in California. There has been a move in recently installed signs to call 110 north "Parkway" and to diminish the Pasadena control city and Pasadena Freeway name recently. What do you think about having the 110 sign say something about the Arroyo Seco Parkway, similar to how it's been signed on I-5 at 110? At least we can all agree it is state route 110 (not Interstate 110) north of the Four-Level Interchange.