The history of US Route 101 in Los Angeles

[cahwyguy]

Tom (Max R) didn't seem to post this blog when he posted it: https://www.gribblenation.org/2023/07/the-history-of-us-route-101-in-los.html

He starts off:

Since the inception of the US Route System the history of US Route 101 has been significantly tied to the city of Los Angeles.  The original surface alignment of US Route 101 was signed in Los Angeles during 1930 following Boyle Avenue, Plesant Avenue, Macy Street, Main Street, Sunset Boulevard, Cahuenga Boulevard and Ventura Boulevard.  From 1940 through 1960 US Route 101 in Los Angeles would be shifted gradually to the Hollywood Freeway, Santa Ana Freeway and Ventura Freeway.   US Route 101 was truncated from the Mexican Border to Interstate 5 in Los Angeles along the Santa Ana Freeway during 1963.  Featured as the blog cover is the Cahuenga Pass Freeway (now Hollywood Freeway) during 1940 approaching Cahuenga Boulevard and Highland Avenue.

I'm working on my highway pages, and I had something different. The AARoads page on the route (https://www.aaroads.com/california/us-101hd_ca.html) says:

Intersection of Whittier Boulevard, Washington Boulevard, Santa Fe Springs Rd., and Pinkerton Avenue , Whittier to the corner of Cahuenga Boulevard and Sunset Boulevard, Hollywood: This is quite a lengthy stretch of this route, but it is one that was, upon designation as a through route, almost immediately slated for bypassing, as it traversed a number of suburban "downtown" commercial areas which, when significant through traffic began to use the route which was originally signed (with the original Auto Club of Southern California [ACSC]-designed and deployed shields) in 1924, realized that this type of traffic, while promising point-of-sale boosts to local businesses, carried with it a high level of costs in addition to benefits in the form of congestion(particularly in regards to the narrow two-lane facilities common then) and increased collision and pedestrian incidents. It was, so to speak, a matter of "be careful what you ask for, as you might actually get it!" to the various cities (Whittier and Montebello among the more vociferous complainers in this instance) along the route -- as they, through their state representatives, had long pushed for the U.S. 101 routing through their communities.

But plans were made almost immediately to move the thoroughfare -- not too far, at least not where they would be of little or no value to the cities through which it passed. Thus plans were well in place by 1929 to relocate U.S. 101 to a parallel route -- but one close enough to provide traveler close access to the city centers. The original route turned north at the multi-way intersection in Whittier on Pinkerton Avenue , extending about one mile to Beverly Boulevard It turned west on Beverly Boulevard, which almost immediately veered northwest on a rather sharp curve (incidentally, the original 1920's-era jointed-concrete pavement, typical of urban state highway construction in that era, is still present on that roadway today, expanded by an amalgalm of more concrete to the outside and occasional stretches of asphalt) which followed the contour of the Puente Hills to the north. Beverly Boulevard and U.S. 101 continued northwest, crossing the San Gabriel river into the north end of Pico Rivera before crossing into Montebello at the Rio Hondo crossing. The land between the river channels was uninhabitable floodplain before the construction of the Whittier Narrows Dam in the mid-1930's; that floodplain was bisected by the north-south Sign Route 19/SLR 168 (aka Rosemead Boulevard).

Immediately after crossing the Rio Hondo the route rose through the bluff on the west side of the river channel into downtown Montebello; it was the main east-west arterial through the central city. The generally west-northwest trajectory of the route continued well into East Los Angeles (unincorporated but developed as an early Latino cultural center even in that time) where it merged with east-west 3rd Street just west of the intersection with Atlantic Boulevard (Sign Route 15/SLR 167). It turned due west on 3rd St. until the Los Angeles city line at Indiana St., at which point the street trajectories became WNW to ESE, matching those in downtown Los Angeles. While 3rd Street turned in this direction, U.S. 101 continued west on 3rd Place to 4th Street, turning WNW onto that arterial. This extended across Boyle Heights and down the bluff fronting the east bank of the Los Angeles River. 4th street, as today, arched southwest then west again to cross the river. After descending to ground level (this bridge also passed over the original Santa Fe passenger station complex, located on the west bank of the Los Angeles River), the roadway split into a couplet; 4th Place, heading northwest with westbound traffic, and 4th Street, heading due west.

The route turned north on the first major arterial, Alameda Street. The routing on Alameda Street was short -- one block for westbound and two for eastbound (because of the 4th St. route split a few blocks to the east); this was a major traffic "headache", as the original Central Station, serving passenger traffic for both the Union Pacific and Southern Pacific railroads, was located on the west side of Alameda Street between 6th and 7th streets. Alameda was a divided street, with a single-track line of the Southern Pacific down the middle; this was the main Southern Pacific passenger "lead track" to the station, used by all Southern Pacific passenger trains (Union Pacific Railroad trains entered from the south); in the 1920s, about 36 Southern Pacific Railroad trains per day used this track, causing severe backups that were exacerbated when through U.S. 101 traffic was routed along Alameda St. north of the station (this downtown problem was not solved until 1939, when the present Union Station in the northeast corner of downtown was opened). U.S. 101 turned west from Alameda St. onto 2nd Street, which traversed downtown before traveling through a tunnel under Bunker Hill.

While in downtown, U.S. 101 intersected U.S. 60 at Main Street and U.S. 66 at Broadway, two blocks west. Broadway also served as northward Sign Route 11/SLR 165; this route turned west to go through the tunnel with U.S. 101, turning south on Figueroa St. at the other side of the tunnel. U.S. 101 continued west along 2nd Street, which crossed over Glendale Boulevard and the Pacific Electric Glendale interurban line on a wooden bridge (replaced with the present concrete structure in 1930); at that point 2nd Street became another iteration of Beverly Boulevard The route continued on that arterial until Virgil Avenue in the Silverlake neighborhood between downtown and Hollywood. Beverly Boulevard merged with Silver Lake Boulevard and turned due west at this multi-point intersection, while U.S. 101 turned due north on Virgil Avenue It continued on Virgil until Santa Monica Boulevard in East Hollywood, which was also Sign Route 2 and SLR 162. That route extended east toward Eagle Rock and Glendale; U.S. 101 turned west to multiplex with that route to Cahuenga Boulevard in Hollywood. It then turned north on Cahuenga Boulevard to Sunset Boulevard, where the 1934 rerouting rejoined the original alignment.

This is very different. I'm having trouble reconciling these two. I fear that the original AARoads item came from the recollections of Scott Parker (sparker), who hasn't posted for almost two years, and whom I fear is deceased.  I am having trouble mapping the AARoads text.

Thoughts?

[Quillz]

What I have been curious about is where did 101 go west of the SF Valley? There are frontage roads such as Mureau, Agoura, Hampshire, Thousand Oaks, Hillcrest, Portrero. All of these will eventually get from the SF Valley to the Camarillo area. Or is the modern freeway just a widened Ventura Boulevard? (There are also many instances of Ventura Boulevard between Camarillo and Oxnard that serve as frontage roads).

[cahwyguy]

What I have been curious about is where did 101 go west of the SF Valley? There are frontage roads such as Mureau, Agoura, Hampshire, Thousand Oaks, Hillcrest, Portrero. All of these will eventually get from the SF Valley to the Camarillo area. Or is the modern freeway just a widened Ventura Boulevard? (There are also many instances of Ventura Boulevard between Camarillo and Oxnard that serve as frontage roads).

I think some ran along Camarillo Road, Agoura Road, and what became Thousand Oaks Blvd, as well as the various Ventura Blvds.

[Max Rockatansky]

What I have been curious about is where did 101 go west of the SF Valley? There are frontage roads such as Mureau, Agoura, Hampshire, Thousand Oaks, Hillcrest, Portrero. All of these will eventually get from the SF Valley to the Camarillo area. Or is the modern freeway just a widened Ventura Boulevard? (There are also many instances of Ventura Boulevard between Camarillo and Oxnard that serve as frontage roads).

I think some ran along Camarillo Road, Agoura Road, and what became Thousand Oaks Blvd, as well as the various Ventura Blvds.

Part of me is dreading digging into those very topics given how much of a beast this one was to research.  The corridor of San Fernando Valley-Oxnard is all I have left to have a complete set of blogs for mainline US 101 between San Juan Capistrano and Gilroy.

[cahwyguy]

Part of me is dreading digging into those very topics given how much of a beast this one was to research.  The corridor of San Fernando Valley-Oxnard is all I have left to have a complete set of blogs for mainline US 101 between San Juan Capistrano and Gilroy.

Don't worry. We've still got reconciliation of what was in LA to figure out first. We just have to get it done by the time we get up to those episodes in the podcast. I think there's enough time (see also my comments on Route 245, which actually relate to this as well).

[Quillz]

What I have been curious about is where did 101 go west of the SF Valley? There are frontage roads such as Mureau, Agoura, Hampshire, Thousand Oaks, Hillcrest, Portrero. All of these will eventually get from the SF Valley to the Camarillo area. Or is the modern freeway just a widened Ventura Boulevard? (There are also many instances of Ventura Boulevard between Camarillo and Oxnard that serve as frontage roads).

I think some ran along Camarillo Road, Agoura Road, and what became Thousand Oaks Blvd, as well as the various Ventura Blvds.

What throws me off is I can't find a single good map of the SF Valley from roughly the 30s-50s. Presently, Ventura turns slightly northwest past Woodlake to terminate at Valley Circle/Mulholland Drive. Given this is two lanes and there is nothing except a couple small buildings, I suspect this was added after the freeway conversion was complete and that Ventura probably continued due west past Woodlake. That whole interchange was completely rebuilt in 1993-94 so any traces of the "old" Ventura are long gone.

[GaryA]

What I have been curious about is where did 101 go west of the SF Valley? There are frontage roads such as Mureau, Agoura, Hampshire, Thousand Oaks, Hillcrest, Portrero. All of these will eventually get from the SF Valley to the Camarillo area. Or is the modern freeway just a widened Ventura Boulevard? (There are also many instances of Ventura Boulevard between Camarillo and Oxnard that serve as frontage roads).

I think some ran along Camarillo Road, Agoura Road, and what became Thousand Oaks Blvd, as well as the various Ventura Blvds.

What throws me off is I can't find a single good map of the SF Valley from roughly the 30s-50s. Presently, Ventura turns slightly northwest past Woodlake to terminate at Valley Circle/Mulholland Drive. Given this is two lanes and there is nothing except a couple small buildings, I suspect this was added after the freeway conversion was complete and that Ventura probably continued due west past Woodlake. That whole interchange was completely rebuilt in 1993-94 so any traces of the "old" Ventura are long gone.

Long Valley Road, which becomes the ramp from Valley Circle to northbound US 101 gives me a definite feeling of "I think this used to be part of the old road, and possibly the merge with what was then the end of the freeway".  But this is just speculation, and on second thought, given the proximity of Old Town Calabasas, being the original Ventura Blvd doesn't seem too likely.

[Occidental Tourist]

From historicaerials, it appears that where Ventura Blvd curently ends near Valley Circle/Mullholland and Calabasas Road begins, this is the original routing, using a connection between the two that was paved over by the current freeway at that point. It continued west along Calabasas Road until that road's current end.  The rest of the route followed the current Ventura Freeway footprint from the end of Calabasas Road until Agoura Road just after Las Virgenes. 

Thereafter, it dipped back and forth between the current freeway route and current Agoura Road until just west of Liberty Canyon, where it picked up Agoura Road entirely and followed it until just before Reyes Adobe.  Then it gradually shifted north along the south side of Lindero Creek onto the current freeway footprint and followed that west until current Westlake Blvd.  West of current Westlake Blvd, it gradually shifted north onto current Thousand Oaks Blvd.  It followed Thousand Oaks Blvd west until Moorpark Blvd, where it shifted back south onto the footprint of the current freeway. West of there, it followed the current freeway footprint all the way to the Conejo Grade and beyond. 

Prior to 1947, it looks like it might have followed a more circuitous route down the Conejo Grade (part of which can still be seen today as an unnamed road connecting to Camarillo Springs Road).  But by '47, the current freeway routing was what was being used by the highway.

[pderocco]

You can see more fragments of that 15ft concrete road east of there. Reminds me of the Ridge Route bits in the Grapevine, or the old US-80 fragments where I-8 descends through In-Ko-Pah Gorge.

[Max Rockatansky]

Regarding the discrepancy between my page and what Sparker wrote for AAroads.  I have it that way because of what the Los Angeles city council said.  The council meeting minutes dated February 5, 1930, noted that none of the US Routes within the city limits were yet signed.  The council did decide during that meeting where they have the ACSC  sign US 101 and much of US 99 (but not US 66).

Here is what I wrote specifically in the body of the blog.  Note, that Photos 10 and 11 are the actual city council meeting minutes snipped:

"Signing of the US Routes within in California did not begin until 1928.  The Los Angeles City Council meeting notes (courtesy MapMikey) from February 5, 1930, explicitly stated that the US Routes were not yet signed within Los Angeles.  The Los Angeles City Council did elect have the Automobile Club of Southern California (ACSC) sign US Route 99 and US Route 101 during the February 5, 1930, meeting but not US Route 66. 

From the southern city limit of Los Angeles at Whittier Boulevard US Route 101 was to be signed following Boyle Avenue, Pleasant Avenue, Macy Street (now Cesar Chavez Avenue), Main Street, Sunset Boulevard and Cahuenga Boulevard.  US Route 101 was to follow Cahuenga Boulevard via Cahuenga Pass to San Fernadno Valley and Ventura Boulevard."

Essentially there was no US 101 signage in Los Angeles until the city council approved a routing for the ACSC to sign.  The route Sparker describe may in fact have been an existing signed through route prior to the creation of the US Route System.  A similar discrepancy has been noted on my end on the terminus of the National Old Trails Road being presumed to also be signed as early US 66 (short version of the story is that wasn't).

Los Angeles was not fast to act on posting US Route signs and there wasn't much the DOH or CHC could do force their (or any city) hand given the state could not actively maintain highways in incorporated areas yet.  Essentially the February 5, 1930, council meeting blew up much of what we thought knew regarding early US Route alignments in Los Angeles. 

[Max Rockatansky]

Worth noting, I haven't quite sorted out the Macy-Main-Sunset transition in early 101 worked or really how it was streamlined into just Macy-Sunset.  Given those roads weren't yet state property I didn't find a satisfactory answer in the CHPWs circa 1930-1933.  Blog Photo 12 is a 1931 era map detailing the then existing alignments of the US Routes in Los Angeles.

Also worth noting, when the 1909 First State Highway Bond Act passed it was before much of San Fernando Valley was annexed by Los Angeles.  This is why LRN 2/US 101 was state maintained in the city limits along Ventura Boulevard north Cahuenga Pass.  Of course, this would be fully resolved come 1933 when the state could start outright just maintaining highways in incorporated cities.

[cahwyguy]

You were asking about old valley maps. If you have time to go to a library and do research: https://library.csun.edu/map-collection/collections/SFV

[Quillz]

Oh wow, I'm a CSUN alumni and completely forgot about their map library. I used it only a few times back in the day. (Specifically was looking at fire/insurance maps of the LA area).

[mrsman]

THere were several alignments of the "coast highway" but they weren't all signed as US 101.

Beverly-2nd (as sparker described it) was definitely the earliest routing of the roadway between Whittier and Hollywood.  At some point, the Bevely routing was pushed down to the (new) Whittier Blvd and as such the new downtown routing was more of a Whittier-7th routing and then when Sunset was completed, it became a Whittier-Boyle-Macy-Sunset routing and then finally, of course, the freeway.

A lot of this with sparker's commentaries on this old thread here:

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=23727.msg2425501#msg2425501

But it's true that forum comments are just comments and not really very official.  Perhaps "original routing" is not quite correct, since there is decent evidence of routings on both Beverly and/or 7th prior to the Sunset routing, albieit of the main highway but not necessarily as "US 101". Perhaps it would be better worded as:

Since 1930, US Route 101 was signed in Los Angeles following Boyle Avenue, Plesant Avenue, Macy Street, Main Street, Sunset Boulevard, Cahuenga Boulevard and Ventura Boulevard. 

This still leaves the possibility of the other routings via 2nd or via 7th for the late 1920's.

[Max Rockatansky]

What I've been hoping to find but thus far had no luck is tracking down an ACSC era map of the Pacific Highway.  The ACSC Map of the NOTR shows the alignment the Auto Trail used in clear detail.  In fact, this would be the source of the "7th and Broadway" mythos that the US 66 fandom ran with for the now debunked original terminus:

https://archive.org/details/nationaloldtrail00autorich?view=theater#page/n3/mode/2up

What likely happened between 1926 and 1930 was that the city of Los Angeles just opted to leave the Auto Trail signage in place.  The early routing of US 99 even lined up with the existing NOTR signage if you look at the Los Angeles city council minutes closely. 

[mrsman]

What I've been hoping to find but thus far had no luck is tracking down an ACSC era map of the Pacific Highway.  The ACSC Map of the NOTR shows the alignment the Auto Trail used in clear detail.  In fact, this would be the source of the "7th and Broadway" mythos that the US 66 fandom ran with for the now debunked original terminus:

https://archive.org/details/nationaloldtrail00autorich?view=theater#page/n3/mode/2up

What likely happened between 1926 and 1930 was that the city of Los Angeles just opted to leave the Auto Trail signage in place.  The early routing of US 99 even lined up with the existing NOTR signage if you look at the Los Angeles city council minutes closely.

Probably right.

Nonetheless, this pic from LA Mag does show that 7th was a major routing along the San Diego Coast Route via Whittier, Santa Ana, Oceanside, and La Jolla.

https://lamag.com/uncategorized/citydig-the-history-of-turning-right-in-los-angeles

So it is not clealy signed as US 101 but it is the way of the Coast Route at the time of this photograph.

[Max Rockatansky]

It makes sense it would be routed that way.  The ACSC Headquarters if I recall correctly was located at 7th and Broadway. 

I did find an ACSC touring map for the Missions.  Not quite the smoking gun I wanted for Pacific Highway, but it has some minimal detail for downtown:

https://archive.org/details/californiasmissi00auto/page/n23/mode/2up?view=theater

[mrsman]

It makes sense it would be routed that way.  The ACSC Headquarters if I recall correctly was located at 7th and Broadway. 

I did find an ACSC touring map for the Missions.  Not quite the smoking gun I wanted for Pacific Highway, but it has some minimal detail for downtown:

https://archive.org/details/californiasmissi00auto/page/n23/mode/2up?view=theater

Wow.

Totally speculative, because the fine print is so small and Downtown LA street alignments have changed a little bit.

My guess is that the endpoint of the bolded highway is at Sunset/Figueroa.

[cahwyguy]

I'll note that some of the earlier routings are also discussed in "Highway 101: The History of El Camino Real (California's Historic Highways, 2)", by Stephen H. Provost. https://www.amazon.com/Highway-101-History-Camino-Real/dp/1610353528/

As noted: We probably need to reconcile all of these, get the AARoads page clarified (it is likely the Sparker's routing was pre-signage, based on  Provost's book). Syncing all this stuff up is difficult.

[Max Rockatansky]

I tend to look at the US Routes as their own entities which may share characteristics with the Auto Trail predecessors but aren't necessarily one for one.  The 66 fandom is a good example of where that led to inaccurate information being passed off as fact for decades.  It sells the Auto Trails short and leads to misinformation with the US Routes.  US Routes not having anything but a paper existence in Los Angeles prior to 1930 might not be the satisfying answer, but it is the correct one. 

[cahwyguy]

I tend to look at the US Routes as their own entities which may share characteristics with the Auto Trail predecessors but aren't necessarily one for one.  The 66 fandom is a good example of where that led to inaccurate information being passed off as fact for decades.  It sells the Auto Trails short and leads to misinformation with the US Routes.  US Routes not having anything but a paper existence in Los Angeles prior to 1930 might not be the satisfying answer, but it is the correct one. 

The problem is that we have so many things referring to the same-ish route that it is hard to figure out where and how to describe them. But we should strive to make them consistent. Right now, the AARoads page isn't, and Provost's book also isn't. So we need to figure out how to describe these really early routings in some way ("the preferred road between X and Y"), even if they aren't at the point of being LRNs yet, let along being US highways.

[Max Rockatansky]

I tend to look at the US Routes as their own entities which may share characteristics with the Auto Trail predecessors but aren't necessarily one for one.  The 66 fandom is a good example of where that led to inaccurate information being passed off as fact for decades.  It sells the Auto Trails short and leads to misinformation with the US Routes.  US Routes not having anything but a paper existence in Los Angeles prior to 1930 might not be the satisfying answer, but it is the correct one. 

The problem is that we have so many things referring to the same-ish route that it is hard to figure out where and how to describe them. But we should strive to make them consistent. Right now, the AARoads page isn't, and Provost's book also isn't. So we need to figure out how to describe these really early routings in some way ("the preferred road between X and Y"), even if they aren't at the point of being LRNs yet, let along being US highways.

My own plan to address this should the information becomes available is probably to do a separate entry for Pacific Highway and El Camino Real in Los Angeles.  What I've found with many of the books on highways (I say this haven't fully read through Provost's book) is that they try to capture something that is easy for the reader (who probably isn't a highway history enthusiast) to understand rather than being that fully accurate answer we want.

[mrsman]

I tend to look at the US Routes as their own entities which may share characteristics with the Auto Trail predecessors but aren't necessarily one for one.  The 66 fandom is a good example of where that led to inaccurate information being passed off as fact for decades.  It sells the Auto Trails short and leads to misinformation with the US Routes.  US Routes not having anything but a paper existence in Los Angeles prior to 1930 might not be the satisfying answer, but it is the correct one. 

The problem is that we have so many things referring to the same-ish route that it is hard to figure out where and how to describe them. But we should strive to make them consistent. Right now, the AARoads page isn't, and Provost's book also isn't. So we need to figure out how to describe these really early routings in some way ("the preferred road between X and Y"), even if they aren't at the point of being LRNs yet, let along being US highways.

My own plan to address this should the information becomes available is probably to do a separate entry for Pacific Highway and El Camino Real in Los Angeles.  What I've found with many of the books on highways (I say this haven't fully read through Provost's book) is that they try to capture something that is easy for the reader (who probably isn't a highway history enthusiast) to understand rather than being that fully accurate answer we want.

Should be interesting to get more information.

ECR runs really close to 101 for a lot of the journey but I've always been curious as to how Mission San Gabriel got connected to Capistrano and San Fernando.  Does not seem that there is an obvioius road for good parts of the joureny, and it certainly diverted from any of the older alignments of 101 that we've discussed above like Whittier Blvd.

But it is all part of one history of CA's main coastal road.  Regardless of what it is called or the specific alignments taken the ECR, Pac Highway, LRN 2, and US 101 all share a history. 

[Max Rockatansky]

A lot of the American ECR is easy to track on a macro level between cities, maps do exist that capture it.  The problem always has been tracking it at the city level.  There is also major differences from the Spanish ECR to the American version which was an early Auto Trail.