This is the map of CA-249 for Ells Tunnel Freeway in 1969 Edition folded map. Wonder why Ells Tunnel Freeway never being built.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1118.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fk606%2FMoonBabe1213%2F5b7b581e-1252-4ec1-bd5e-e173fc4d2802.jpg&hash=21c6be8f00dcb31002c661483cfacbd74f4b223a)
Here's a link to a 2001 Los Angeles Times article on the Ells Tunnel, originally proposed in the 1950s:
http://articles.latimes.com/2001/jul/29/local/me-27950
I will be willing to bet that cost was the chief factor why it was never built.
Quote from: Concrete Bob on June 24, 2014, 07:44:52 AM
Here's a link to a 2001 Los Angeles Times article on the Ells Tunnel, originally proposed in the 1950s:
http://articles.latimes.com/2001/jul/29/local/me-27950
I will be willing to bet that cost was the chief factor why it was never built.
I remember that article.
Personally, I don't see that tunnel being built, at least not within my lifetime. Cost, environmental regulations and the fact that La Canada Flintridge would balk at another freeway bulldozed through the community would definitely be inhibiting factors. We're lucky the town ultimately let them push the 210 through.
Quote from: hm insulators on June 24, 2014, 04:01:17 PM
Personally, I don't see that tunnel being built, at least not within my lifetime. Cost, environmental regulations and the fact that La Canada Flintridge would balk at another freeway bulldozed through the community would definitely be inhibiting factors. We're lucky the town ultimately let them push the 210 through.
The route would barely skirt La Canada Flintridge before reaching 210 - but it's the tunnel itself, which would require much more of a toll than the still-proposed 710 gap closure, that seems most daunting.
Really, 249 and the unfinished 710 segment seem to be two parts of this north-south corridor, of which the former really isn't anywhere as useful without the latter. (It would provide access into the San Gabriel Valley and Orange County from the Antelope Valley without forcing drivers to go through downtown Los Angeles)
And who knows when (or even if the 710 will ever go through! It's amazing how one tiny community (South Pasadena) can just so thoroughly goof up the entire freeway system. :pan: And it's been that way as far back as I can remember, and I'm on the wrong side of the Big Five-Oh! :no:
Quote from: TheStranger on June 24, 2014, 04:06:42 PM
Quote from: hm insulators on June 24, 2014, 04:01:17 PM
Personally, I don't see that tunnel being built, at least not within my lifetime. Cost, environmental regulations and the fact that La Canada Flintridge would balk at another freeway bulldozed through the community would definitely be inhibiting factors. We're lucky the town ultimately let them push the 210 through.
The route would barely skirt La Canada Flintridge before reaching 210 - but it's the tunnel itself, which would require much more of a toll than the still-proposed 710 gap closure, that seems most daunting.
Really, 249 and the unfinished 710 segment seem to be two parts of this north-south corridor, of which the former really isn't anywhere as useful without the latter. (It would provide access into the San Gabriel Valley and Orange County from the Antelope Valley without forcing drivers to go through downtown Los Angeles)
I think the more heavily used corridor might be CA-249 to CA-2 and then to I-5/CA-110/Downtown/Hollywood/etc. Antelope Valley commuters could avoid I-5 in Santa Clarita, Burbank, etc. - so while those areas might see some congestion relief, it could make I-5 between CA-2 and CA-110 even more of a major choke point than it is already.
Quote from: DTComposer on June 24, 2014, 07:41:54 PM
Quote from: TheStranger on June 24, 2014, 04:06:42 PM
Quote from: hm insulators on June 24, 2014, 04:01:17 PM
Personally, I don't see that tunnel being built, at least not within my lifetime. Cost, environmental regulations and the fact that La Canada Flintridge would balk at another freeway bulldozed through the community would definitely be inhibiting factors. We're lucky the town ultimately let them push the 210 through.
The route would barely skirt La Canada Flintridge before reaching 210 - but it's the tunnel itself, which would require much more of a toll than the still-proposed 710 gap closure, that seems most daunting.
Really, 249 and the unfinished 710 segment seem to be two parts of this north-south corridor, of which the former really isn't anywhere as useful without the latter. (It would provide access into the San Gabriel Valley and Orange County from the Antelope Valley without forcing drivers to go through downtown Los Angeles)
I think the more heavily used corridor might be CA-249 to CA-2 and then to I-5/CA-110/Downtown/Hollywood/etc. Antelope Valley commuters could avoid I-5 in Santa Clarita, Burbank, etc. - so while those areas might see some congestion relief, it could make I-5 between CA-2 and CA-110 even more of a major choke point than it is already.
At the same time...with 110's truck restriction north of the Four-Level, I could imagine that if 249 and 710 were both in existence, 249/210/710 to Monterey Park, then 10 west into downtown would become a viable alternate to using 5 through the East Los Angeles Interchange. (kinda like how the existing 710 to Monterey Park from 5 north allows one to bypass the interchange using 710 north and 10 west)
Geologically, this project would be doomed from the start. The San Gabriel Mountains are composed of mostly weak rock that is prone to rockfalls and debris flows. While it may be feasible from an engineering standpoint, it may not be practical from a geological standpoint. Look to Hwy 39, Bridge/Road to Nowhere, Angeles Crest Hwy, and pretty much any other road for some of the problems with maintenance. Even with all that, build it to what end? To better the commutes for those in the Antelope Valley? Development there is not sustainable and is a poor model to continue with "easier" access.