Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Mapmikey]

May have found photographic proof that US 66 was de-posted from Santa Monica Blvd after AASHO took notice.

This is 1935 - there are spades visible in both directions:  https://digitallibrary.usc.edu/asset-management/2A3BF1BHRTW?WS=SearchResults

Here is the same location in Sept 1937, it appears the spade shield is now a US shield - https://digitallibrary.usc.edu/asset-management/2A3BF1BHN25?WS=SearchResults

[TheStranger]

May have found photographic proof that US 66 was de-posted from Santa Monica Blvd after AASHO took notice.

This is 1935 - there are spades visible in both directions:  https://digitallibrary.usc.edu/asset-management/2A3BF1BHRTW?WS=SearchResults

Here is the same location in Sept 1937, it appears the spade shield is now a US shield - https://digitallibrary.usc.edu/asset-management/2A3BF1BHN25?WS=SearchResults

I have known for a while that the 1934-1936 designation for Santa Monica Boulevard (as is the 1964-present, depending on one how interprets route relinquishments) is Route 2. This is likely proof of 2 being signed in the field in that time period, before 66 was made official west of downtown Los Angeles.

What is tricky (and the main topic of this thread) - were those spade shields put up on poles that had formerly held 66 signs from 1931-1934?  Hard to tell.

[Max Rockatansky]

When I get an opportunity over the weekend I’ll add the two above photos to the blog. 

[Mapmikey]

When I get an opportunity over the weekend I’ll add the two above photos to the blog. 

I think I can also narrow down something else on your very thorough examinaion of Los Angeles US routes:

You have this passage:
Much of the early US Route system around Los Angeles was heavily altered after 1933.  Sometime between late 1934/early 1935 the route of US 101 was realigned through downtown Los Angeles via Sunset Boulevard and Macy Street.  This in turn truncated US 66 from 7th Street to US 101 at Sunset Boulevard

If you take a look at page 19 of the 2/8/34 LA council minutes, it describes the route of LSR 2 using Sunset and Macy, with no mention of 7th St.  At the end of that list, the newer state route also don't use 7th which is corroborated by the 1935 map of state routes which you have excerpted a little further down in the discussion.

[mrsman]

I thought that I snipped the AASHTO documents being and posted on Gribblenation, turns out I did:

https://www.facebook.com/72868503020/posts/10157782941838021/?d=n

I kind of like the idea of bypassing Pasadena mostly by way of Huntington to downtown Los Angeles.

I do too.  If traffic between San Bernardino County and LA used Huntington, they could avoid some of the curvy hilly routes that connect Pasadena to Los Angeles. 

One thing that is interesting is that the gribblenation article listed one of the early US 66 alignments as using Fair Oaks-Huntington-Mission-Brooklyn.  If that routing were still the routing of US 66 when the map with the red, blue ,and yellow lines was made (in the AASHO - DOH correspondence referenced in the article), then the main 66 and the Huntington Dr bypass would intersect at Fair Oaks-Huntington.  Perhaps, if 66 were still running Fair Oaks-Huntington at the time of th 1931 correspondence, a 66 alt would have met AASHO's requirements of main routes and alt routes rejoining and would have actually been signed.

The history of US routes in the early period around LA is so complicated.  The routes kept getting moved around every couple of years.  I wonder how people could possibly give directions.

[Max Rockatansky]

I thought that I snipped the AASHTO documents being and posted on Gribblenation, turns out I did:

https://www.facebook.com/72868503020/posts/10157782941838021/?d=n

I kind of like the idea of bypassing Pasadena mostly by way of Huntington to downtown Los Angeles.

I do too.  If traffic between San Bernardino County and LA used Huntington, they could avoid some of the curvy hilly routes that connect Pasadena to Los Angeles. 

One thing that is interesting is that the gribblenation article listed one of the early US 66 alignments as using Fair Oaks-Huntington-Mission-Brooklyn.  If that routing were still the routing of US 66 when the map with the red, blue ,and yellow lines was made (in the AASHO - DOH correspondence referenced in the article), then the main 66 and the Huntington Dr bypass would intersect at Fair Oaks-Huntington.  Perhaps, if 66 were still running Fair Oaks-Huntington at the time of th 1931 correspondence, a 66 alt would have met AASHO's requirements of main routes and alt routes rejoining and would have actually been signed.

The history of US routes in the early period around LA is so complicated.  The routes kept getting moved around every couple of years.  I wonder how people could possibly give directions.

That alignment for sure was part of the National Old Trails Road.  The NOTR even had a terminus at 7th and Broadway which makes me think that’s why people believe US 66 ended there:

https://archive.org/details/nationaloldtrail00autorich/page/n7/mode/1up?view=theater

Pertaining to the early US Route madness in L.A. it wasn’t much better with US 99 either in its original corridor:

https://www.gribblenation.org/2022/01/the-1926-1934-los-angeles-redlands.html?m=1

All this US Route wonkiness seemingly played a huge roll in why the DOH was allowed to pick up urban mileage beginning in 1933.  The blurb by the Pasadena Chamber of Commerce pertaining to the Colorado Street Extension in 1932 really highlights the issue for me.

[skluth]

I thought that I snipped the AASHTO documents being and posted on Gribblenation, turns out I did:

https://www.facebook.com/72868503020/posts/10157782941838021/?d=n

I kind of like the idea of bypassing Pasadena mostly by way of Huntington to downtown Los Angeles.

I do too.  If traffic between San Bernardino County and LA used Huntington, they could avoid some of the curvy hilly routes that connect Pasadena to Los Angeles. 

I usually leave central LA using Huntington or Valley Blvd and connecting roads to Arrow Highway or Foothill to avoid the freeways during rush hour. It's about as fast as using the freeways at rush hour, more interesting, and less stressful. This is especially true on Fridays.

[mrsman]

I thought that I snipped the AASHTO documents being and posted on Gribblenation, turns out I did:

https://www.facebook.com/72868503020/posts/10157782941838021/?d=n

I kind of like the idea of bypassing Pasadena mostly by way of Huntington to downtown Los Angeles.

I do too.  If traffic between San Bernardino County and LA used Huntington, they could avoid some of the curvy hilly routes that connect Pasadena to Los Angeles. 

I usually leave central LA using Huntington or Valley Blvd and connecting roads to Arrow Highway or Foothill to avoid the freeways during rush hour. It's about as fast as using the freeways at rush hour, more interesting, and less stressful. This is especially true on Fridays.

The old routings are for the most part all still there, even if the main traffic corridors are now along the freeways.  The pre-freeway corridors that were once state highways often have certain features that make them superior to an average street.  They are likely wider, may have a median, may parallel a railroad (so there would be fewer cross streets) and may be more direct.  They are great alternates when the freeways were busy.

As a kid, my uncle lived generally in the Pomona/La Verne/Upland area [moved a few times].  Back in the 1980's the Foothill Freeway terminated in La Verne, so to reach his house, we'd often have to use Foothill Blvd (old 66) to reach the areas that weren't yet transversed by freeway.  This was less common, when they moved to Upland, as I-10 went there.  Occasionally, my father would entertain me on the way back by driving along the old 66 instead of the freeways, given my interest in the historic roads.  So the stretch of Foothill/Alosta/Colorado between Pasadena and Upland were at least somewhat familiar.  Even as late as the 1980's, there were small portions that had a bit of a rural feel. 

Once in Pasadena, my father would always take the freeways the rest of the way toward Hollywood/West Hollywood, where we lived, given that the old 66 routings were too circuitous and would take too long to trasverse Downtown on city streets with lights.  But as our home was only 3 blocks from Santa Monica Blvd, we'd certainly use parts of 66 on an almost daily basis.

Arrow Highway is really a gem of a route through the area as well.  While I do not believe it was ever a state highway, I'm sure it was a known route that seemed to be even more "straight as an arrow" to L.A. from the Inland Empire than either Foothill/66 or Valley/60-70-99.  As you've stated, it's still a good shortcut, even today.

[Max Rockatansky]

I used to use Foothill Boulevard quite often when I-210 was backed up to get to Pasadena.  I always thought it was funny I was putting along on the Colorado Street Extension when the Foothill Freeway traffic was stopped heading into Pasadena.  Cajon Boulevard, Sierra Highway and The Old Road are former US Route segments I’ve found a lot of utility in over the years.

[ClassicHasClass]

Another vote for Arrow Hwy/Rte. Very handy.

[Max Rockatansky]

A question for the group that was posed to me this morning that I don’t have a full answer…

Pertaining to the terminus of US 66 at US 99/San Fernando Road via Fletcher Drive (to Gassell Park) in the 1931 AASHTO minutes does anyone know exactly how that route got there from Colorado Boulevard?  The 1931 map in the blog (photo 17) from the AASHTO minutes seems to indicate the routing was partially on what is now Eagle Rock Boulevard but apparently not all the way to Colorado Boulevard.  I’m to understand Eagle Rock Boulevard as it is configured today took shape in 1933 or 1934.  From what I’m seeing on USGS maps at the time the possible missing link is likely Ellenwood Drive between Fletcher Drive and Colorado.  Would anyone be able to provide some insight into the timeframe of when modern Eagle Rock Boulevard took shape or if I’m the right track with Ellenwood Drive?

[Max Rockatansky]

It appears that I might be overthinking this and it is Fletcher Drive through Gassell Park that I should be looking at.  I noticed Gassell Avenue/Eagle Rock Boulevard is present close to the form it is seen today on the 1928 USGS Map of Los Angeles but not Fletcher Drive.  Perhaps the question that I should asking is if anyone knows when Fletcher Drive was constructed from San Fernando Road east through Gassell Park to Gassell Avenue/Eagle Rock Boulevard?

https://ngmdb.usgs.gov/topoview/viewer/#15/34.1086/-118.2330

FWIW I noting in blog Photo 28 that the Los Angeles City Council does acknowledge Fletcher Drive connecting to Eagle Rock Boulevard (and Gassell Avenue being reassigned as Eagle Rock Boulevard) on January 12th, 1931.

[Mapmikey]

It appears that I might be overthinking this and it is Fletcher Drive through Gassell Park that I should be looking at.  I noticed Gassell Avenue/Eagle Rock Boulevard is present close to the form it is seen today on the 1928 USGS Map of Los Angeles but not Fletcher Drive.  Perhaps the question that I should asking is if anyone knows when Fletcher Drive was constructed from San Fernando Road east through Gassell Park to Gassell Avenue/Eagle Rock Boulevard?

https://ngmdb.usgs.gov/topoview/viewer/#15/34.1086/-118.2330

FWIW I noting in blog Photo 28 that the Los Angeles City Council does acknowledge Fletcher Drive connecting to Eagle Rock Boulevard (and Gassell Avenue being reassigned as Eagle Rock Boulevard) on January 12th, 1931.

The extension planning is mentioned in an LA Times article from 7/29/26 - https://www.newspapers.com/image/380314112/?terms=%22fletcher%20drive%22%20%22eagle%20rock%22&match=1

It appears to have been completed 1/26/29, see 5th item here - https://www.newspapers.com/search/#query=%22fletcher+drive+between%22&t=4312&dr_year=1929-1929

[Max Rockatansky]

It appears that I might be overthinking this and it is Fletcher Drive through Gassell Park that I should be looking at.  I noticed Gassell Avenue/Eagle Rock Boulevard is present close to the form it is seen today on the 1928 USGS Map of Los Angeles but not Fletcher Drive.  Perhaps the question that I should asking is if anyone knows when Fletcher Drive was constructed from San Fernando Road east through Gassell Park to Gassell Avenue/Eagle Rock Boulevard?

https://ngmdb.usgs.gov/topoview/viewer/#15/34.1086/-118.2330

FWIW I noting in blog Photo 28 that the Los Angeles City Council does acknowledge Fletcher Drive connecting to Eagle Rock Boulevard (and Gassell Avenue being reassigned as Eagle Rock Boulevard) on January 12th, 1931.

The extension planning is mentioned in an LA Times article from 7/29/26 - https://www.newspapers.com/image/380314112/?terms=%22fletcher%20drive%22%20%22eagle%20rock%22&match=1

It appears to have been completed 1/26/29, see 5th item here - https://www.newspapers.com/search/#query=%22fletcher+drive+between%22&t=4312&dr_year=1929-1929

Greatly appreciated.  As an aside, I plan on cleaning up the timeline so it is more simplified in this blog.  I’ve been talking to some California Historic Route 66 people regarding 7th and Broadway.  Apparently 7th and Broadway was inherited from the National Old Trails Road terminus in downtown Los Angeles and the ACSC had records of 66 also being there circa 1928-1930 (not clear if this was actually signed as 66).  For reference the only ACSC Map with the NOTR or 66 I could find was from 1916:

https://archive.org/details/nationaloldtrail00autorich/page/n2/mode/1up?view=theater

[Mapmikey]

Keep in mind from Reply #61 that no US routes were signed within the City of Los Angeles until Feb 1930 and then only US 101 and part of US 99 were signed at that time...US 66 was intentionally not signed by the Feb 1930 action.

[Max Rockatansky]

Keep in mind from Reply #61 that no US routes were signed within the City of Los Angeles until Feb 1930 and then only US 101 and part of US 99 were signed at that time...US 66 was intentionally not signed by the Feb 1930 action.

Exactly, which suggests to me that what the ACSC had going on with 7th and Broadway was just an “on paper” thing and probably was field signed as the NOTR.  The initial instance of any of mention of US 66 (and US 99) was that whole Santa Monica deal where they asked for permission to pay the ACSC to sign 66 to their city limit.  The AASHO and CHC caught wind of it by April 1931 (as seen in the AASHTO minutes) and had the ACSC cut 66 back to San Fernando Road and Fletcher Drive.  The AASHO and CHC both seemed willing to accept San Fernando Road/Fletcher Drive as the signed terminus even no official request to move their had been submitted to the AASHO Executive Committee.

[Max Rockatansky]

Blew up the blog:

-  I added the additional Los Angeles City Council Minutes regarding the signage of early US 66 in Los Angeles.
-  I refined what was in the AASHTO Database regarding early US 66 endpoint signage.
-  I added what the California Historic Route 66 Association had to say.
-  I added what was in the CHPW for the Arroyo Seco Parkway.

https://www.gribblenation.org/2019/06/the-arroyo-seco-parkway-and-early.html

To that end, I feel that I state the opinion of the California Historic Route 66 Association.  Essentially their stance is that the terminus points of US 66 is untraceable prior to 1934.  I'm to understand that their president has ACSC records which show the early terminus of US 66 overlayed on paper over what was the NOTR to 7th Street and Broadway.  I certainly think with the Los Angeles City Council Minutes coupled with the AASHTO Database there is enough evidence to say that US 66 was never actually signed to 7th Street and Broadway. 

To that end I tend to disagree with the assessment of the California Historic Route 66 Association that the signage to San Fernadno Road and Fletcher Drive shouldn't count as a western terminus.  Yes, the AASHO never officially approved San Fernando Road and Fletcher Drive but they certainly were aware of it after the whole signage to Santa Monica fiasco.  I don't really see in the AASHTO Database the AASHO really having a ton of input as to where terminus points of early US Routes were signed, that generally seemed to be left up to the discretion of the State Highway Departments.  To that end, if the California State Highway Engineer and AASHO weren't contesting San Fernando Road and Fletcher Drive then I would that it counts as a western terminus of US 66.

Now, there is still an open question as to how US 66 got from San Fernando Road/Fletcher Drive between late 1931-1934.  To that end I don't have a full answer but it likely has something to do with the Legislature allowing maintenance of urban State Highways starting in 1933.  To that end, if anyone has anything pertaining to the 1931-34 era with the western terminus of US 66 please share.  I don't plan on widely distributing this blog outside of AAroads for awhile to allow additional evidence for the 1931-34 era to emerge.

[mrsman]

All of the above gets more interesting as more of the historic information come to light.  In many ways, cities knew that being on a signed US route would be "good for business" and thus encouraged the routings to come their way.  (The Santa Monica saga that you allude to comes to mind as a good example.)

One really interesting thing about much of this is that what was good for Santa Monica (and perhaps Hollywood) would be terrible for Downtown Los Angeles.  A 66 routing from Pasadena to Fletcher/San Fernando would overshoot Downtown LA and would mean a significant amount of backtracking for any travel between Pasadena and Downtown LA.  Fair Oaks/Huntington or Pasadena Ave (the part of Figueroa in Eagle Rock was once part of Pasadena Ave and the roadway led to Broadway before the completion of the Figueroa street tunnels) would still be the main ways of connecting Pasadena to LA, and each had some history of being a 66 routing.  Who would possibly use Fletcher to get from Pasadena to Downtown LA?

When designing any new routing, particularly in an urban environment where several main streets were already laid out, one has to decide what areas will be connected and what areas will be bypassed.  This is all the more true when discussion of rerouting is also at play.  Coming in from Arcadia, one could bypass Pasadena by taking Huntington or connect to Pasadena by staying on a Foothill or Colorado routing.  From Pasadena, once could bypass LA by taking Fletcher or connect to LA via Pasadena Ave or Fair Oaks.  The above saga seems to indicate that AASHO was strongly against bypassing LA, because that was the key destination for the western end of US 66.  People were headed to LA not merely the Pacific Ocean.  US 66 could be extended to Santa Monica (and it eventually was) but not at the expense of LA.

For 99, LA was not the terminus, but still an important route along the way.  Connecting from San Fernando (and the Central Valley) to San Bernardino (and the Desert areas on the way to Calexico) would add a lot of distance if 99 were routed through LA.  So long as 99 ran along the 66-Foothill route, 99 avoided central LA.  It was only the introduction of Aliso-Garvey as a primary route to the east that allowed for a retoute of 99 to better serve central LA.  FWIW, it seems that in AASHO's eyes, Downtown LA was negotiable for 99, but critical for 66.  So while Fletcher was signed for 66 for a few years, it didn't remain there for long.