What's the deal with the signing of the Harbor Freeway in downtown LA? Caltrans has the entire route between I-5 and I-10 signed as Interstate 110—not as it should be (CA 110). It seems pretty simple to me: It's Interstate 110 south of I-10; it's California 110 north of I-10. So why is it signed as an Interstate in overheads and guide signs all the way back to Interstate 5 (more than two miles from the end of the Interstate designation)? How can Caltrans screw this up so royally?
Interestingly, about a month ago, a reassurance shield went up on the Harbor Freeway right after the Harbor Freeway interchange. The shield was for CA 110. About a week later, it was replaced with an I-110 shield.
Adding to the confusion is the fact that the signs on the surface streets in downtown LA direct traffic to CA 110.
Weird.
this happens with routes 15 and 210 as well. simple answer: CA is just not very organized with regard to this.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on April 15, 2013, 03:40:39 PM
this happens with routes 15 and 210 as well. simple answer: CA is just not very organized with regard to this.
Aren't they basically the same route to CalTrans, I-110 and CA-110?
Quote from: mcmc on April 15, 2013, 03:32:21 PM
What's the deal with the signing of the Harbor Freeway in downtown LA? Caltrans has the entire route between I-5 and I-10 signed as Interstate 110—not as it should be (CA 110). It seems pretty simple to me: It's Interstate 110 south of I-10; it's California 110 north of I-10. So why is it signed as an Interstate in overheads and guide signs all the way back to Interstate 5 (more than two miles from the end of the Interstate designation)? How can Caltrans screw this up so royally?
Interestingly, about a month ago, a reassurance shield went up on the Harbor Freeway right after the Harbor Freeway interchange. The shield was for CA 110. About a week later, it was replaced with an I-110 shield.
Adding to the confusion is the fact that the signs on the surface streets in downtown LA direct traffic to CA 110.
Weird.
CA-110 or I-110... I, quite frankly, don't see what the big deal is. It's the same route number for the Harbor Freeway except one segment gets pretty red, white and blue shields while the other gets the green miner's spade. If Caltrans put up I-110 shields on exit signs along I-5, I suspect that was done to aid navigation to I-110 from I-5. I suppose a more proper way of signing the exit would be to put "CA-110 TO I-110" on the overhead signs but since the route number is the same it might confuse some drivers.
Quote from: Brandon on April 15, 2013, 05:35:25 PM
Aren't they basically the same route to CalTrans, I-110 and CA-110?
Yes. As far as Caltrans is concerned, both CA-110 and I-110 are known as "Route 110".
I only saw SR-110 signs north of the Four Level and that was Saturday. I can't say south of there as I haven't traveled that stretch in a while.
I think they have it right, at least along 110 itself. Northbound, it begins to appear as CA-110 on pull-through signs approaching I-10. Southbound, it appears as CA-110 up to the pull-throughs at the four-level, then it appears on pull-throughs as I-110.
This is consistent with pull-throughs that approach other number/status changes: for example, on CA-17 northbound, pull-throughs begin signing for I-880 well in advance of the actual number change.
You could quibble about CA-110 vs. I-110 on signage on US-101 approaching the four-level, but I think it makes sense in a "less confusion for the motoring public" way even if it's not entirely to-the-book accurate.
That all said, I don't recall what the reassurance markers say, or if there are even any posted on that part of the freeway.
Quote from: DTComposer on April 16, 2013, 11:10:13 AM
This is consistent with pull-throughs that approach other number/status changes: for example, on CA-17 northbound, pull-throughs begin signing for I-880 well in advance of the actual number change.
Depends on what your definition of "well in advance" is. I-880 starts showing up on pull through signs about a mile and a half south of I-280. CA-17 makes its first appearance on pull through signs less than half a mile north of I-280. IIRC, the southbound freeway entrance assemblies on Stevens Creek Blvd sport CA-17 shields.
This is something I've wondered for years: is the Harbor Freeway entirely I-110 (thus making the southbound I-110 signs from the Four-Level correct), or is it partially "I-110" and partially "Route 110"?
To me the type-of-road change should be perfectly aligned with the name change, which might be Caltrans' logic, but I can see that being superseded by whatever is the actual FHWA designation for the interstate. Having said that, I have gotten the impression many of the I-110 signs south of US 101/the Four Level all date back from the changeover from Route 11 to I-110/Route 110 in the early 80s.
Approaching the Four-Level from southbound US 101, the ramp for the Harbor Freeway has been signed for I-110 for years - the recent retroreflective replacement retained the Interstate shield.
Every map I've ever seen shows I-110 from I-10 south to San Pedro and CA 110 for the rest north of I-10. All of the guides at the 10/110 interchange seem to agree with this–and I think the sign on 101 is a mistake. I always thought the I-110/CA 110 division was intentional so that this odd spur route would extend in only one direction from its parent, I-10. But if that was the intent, they didn't number the exits properly. And just a few miles away, 710 violates the "one direction" spur guideline.
Quote from: TheStranger on April 16, 2013, 06:14:49 PM
This is something I've wondered for years: is the Harbor Freeway entirely I-110 (thus making the southbound I-110 signs from the Four-Level correct), or is it partially "I-110" and partially "Route 110"?
Google Maps gets this quite right; see how the 110 is labeled around Alpine Street:
http://goo.gl/maps/TyVkY
It's the Arroyo Seco Parkway at or slightly north of Alpine Street, and the Harbor Freeway south of Alpine Street. The Harbor Freeway is CA 110 from I-10 to about Alpine Street. Recently, a decorative sign went up around this area on the 110 northbound announcing the beginning of the Parkway.
Quote from: TheStranger on April 16, 2013, 06:14:49 PM
This is something I've wondered for years: is the Harbor Freeway entirely I-110 (thus making the southbound I-110 signs from the Four-Level correct), or is it partially "I-110" and partially "Route 110"?
To me the type-of-road change should be perfectly aligned with the name change, which might be Caltrans' logic, but I can see that being superseded by whatever is the actual FHWA designation for the interstate. Having said that, I have gotten the impression many of the I-110 signs south of US 101/the Four Level all date back from the changeover from Route 11 to I-110/Route 110 in the early 80s.
Approaching the Four-Level from southbound US 101, the ramp for the Harbor Freeway has been signed for I-110 for years - the recent retroreflective replacement retained the Interstate shield.
You are right in that the freeway naming pre-dates the current numbering. There are three different designations:
South of I-10: Harbor Freeway, I-110
Between I-10 and US-101: Harbor Freeway, CA-110
North of US-101: Arroyo Seco Parkway (nee Pasadena Freeway), CA-110
Freeway names vs. numbers are not consistent throughout Southern California:
US-101 is the Ventura Freeway up until CA-134. Then it becomes the Hollywood Freeway (which comes in from CA-170, while the Ventura Freeway continues on CA-134). Then at the Four-Level, the Hollywood Freeway ends, and US-101 continues on the Santa Ana Freeway (which later goes onto I-5).
Quote from: mcmc on April 17, 2013, 09:51:06 AM
Google Maps gets this quite right; see how the 110 is labeled around Alpine Street:
http://goo.gl/maps/TyVkY
I think this is a Google Maps quirk; I've never seen anything other than the Four-Level used as the changing point from Harbor to Arroyo Seco.
Quote from: briantroutman on April 16, 2013, 11:06:46 PM
Every map I've ever seen shows I-110 from I-10 south to San Pedro and CA 110 for the rest north of I-10. All of the guides at the 10/110 interchange seem to agree with this–and I think the sign on 101 is a mistake. I always thought the I-110/CA 110 division was intentional so that this odd spur route would extend in only one direction from its parent, I-10. But if that was the intent, they didn't number the exits properly. And just a few miles away, 710 violates the "one direction" spur guideline.
1. Exit numbering wouldn't matter as there is no number change at the I-10 junction. (This differs from the Route 17/I-880 switch in San Jose.)
2. All of the pullthroughs on the southbound Harbor Freeway (from its northern terminus at US 101) are for Interstate 110, save for a few on local access ramps. This seems to have been in place for a while - regardless of FHWA definitions, maps, etc.
Originally both the Harbor and Pasadena Freeways were signed as CA-11. However at some point Caltrans was planning the Harbor Freeway elevated HOV lanes project. In order to receive federal funding for the project, the route needed to be on the federal highway system. Obviously, naming it I-11 would not work so in 1981, they chose I-110. In order to keep continuity and reduce confusion, the Pasadena portion was signed as CA-110.
As stated on the CA Highways, since 1952 the Harbor Freeway begins at the Hollywood Freeway interchange. http://www.cahighways.org/105-112.html#110. Therefore the signage between the Hollywood and Santa Monica freeways should technically all be signed as I-110. Hence the proper signs at the SB Hollywod Freeway transition at the 110. https://www.aaroads.com/california/images100/us-101_sb_exit_003b_07.jpg
As far as the recently completed project in Downtown LA, this is a classic example of Caltrans District 7 not thinking at all about signage. There are many many examples within this project and countless more throughout the District. I will highlight one for now.
One glaring example is on the southbound side at the Olypmic Blvd exit (exit 22A). Originally the 8th St on ramp entered the freeway as an auxiliary lane and it also became the exit only lane for Olympic Blvd. The original signs for Exit 22A were correct in showing the yellow exit only tabs. https://www.aaroads.com/california/images110/ca-110_sb_exit_022a_06.jpg
However ther new project widened the freeway and changed the auxiliary lane into a new general use lane WITHOUT the exit only lane. But since D7 doesn't think they just replaced the sign 1 for 1. The new sign looks exactly like the old one but is incorrectly showing an exit only.
I don't know who checks their plans over ther but they need some help. Extremely frustrating.
Quote from: AndyMax25 on July 31, 2013, 06:53:39 PM
As stated on the CA Highways, since 1952 the Harbor Freeway begins at the Hollywood Freeway interchange. http://www.cahighways.org/105-112.html#110. Therefore the signage between the Hollywood and Santa Monica freeways should technically all be signed as I-110.
Huh? What does the name of the freeway changing have to do with the route classification?
Quote from: DTComposer on April 17, 2013, 10:33:31 AM
You are right in that the freeway naming pre-dates the current numbering. There are three different designations:
South of I-10: Harbor Freeway, I-110
Between I-10 and US-101: Harbor Freeway, CA-110
North of US-101: Arroyo Seco Parkway (nee Pasadena Freeway), CA-110
My apologies, NE2 and DTComposer are correct. In 1968, the interstate designation was only applied for the segment south of the Santa Monica Freeway Interchange for the purpose of the HOV project.
Still CT has done a horrible job of signage in the Downtown area.
Check out this pic I took soon after some new signs were installed. This is the the WB I-10 transition to the 110. You can see how the sign says South towards Downtown when it is obviously supposed to be North. Who approves these things??? I don't understand how the Caltrans crew designed it, received the sign, inspected it, and actually installed it.
The same thing happened at the SB I-405 transition to I-10 with new signs. If you look closely the WEST sign is an overlay. The new sign said EAST Los Angeles and EAST Santa Monica.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fla.curbed.com%2Fuploads%2F2006_11_110interchangesign.jpg&hash=9cc13e31bd3d0357ed559b40b096fd8c2364c550)
It seems that less confusion would result if I-110 were extended northward to the 5/110 interchange, given that this section of road seems to be essentially signed for I-110 anyway. However, that would hinge on whether the section of freeway between I-10 and I-5 technically meets interstate standards (my recollection is that if it doesn't, it comes close, though the height of the tunnels may cause a problem).
Quote from: Urban Prairie Schooner on August 01, 2013, 09:03:53 AM
It seems that less confusion would result if I-110 were extended northward to the 5/110 interchange, given that this section of road seems to be essentially signed for I-110 anyway. However, that would hinge on whether the section of freeway between I-10 and I-5 technically meets interstate standards (my recollection is that if it doesn't, it comes close, though the height of the tunnels may cause a problem).
It absolutely does not (left exits and all, tunnels).
Having said that...
To reiterate what I noted earlier in the thread: southbound Harbor Freeway from the Four-Level to San Pedro always seems to have been signed as I-110, while northbound Harbor Freeway becomes signed for state Route 110 from I-10 north to US 101.
Kinda going with AndyMax's assertion, having the Harbor be designated all "Interstate" and the Arroyo Seco/Pasadena as "state route" (since it has a truck restriction) would be the simplest way to eventually handle this, as it seems like the southbound Harbor freeway is already set up like this. Or at the very least, even if the Harbor Freeway between 101 and 10 isn't part of the official Interstate despite southbound signage, have it signed consistently either as State Route 110 or I-110 in BOTH directions no matter what.
Quote from: TheStranger on August 01, 2013, 11:16:11 AM
It absolutely does not (left exits and all, tunnels).
Having said that...
To reiterate what I noted earlier in the thread: southbound Harbor Freeway from the Four-Level to San Pedro always seems to have been signed as I-110, while northbound Harbor Freeway becomes signed for state Route 110 from I-10 north to US 101.
Kinda going with AndyMax's assertion, having the Harbor be designated all "Interstate" and the Arroyo Seco/Pasadena as "state route" (since it has a truck restriction) would be the simplest way to eventually handle this, as it seems like the southbound Harbor freeway is already set up like this. Or at the very least, even if the Harbor Freeway between 101 and 10 isn't part of the official Interstate despite southbound signage, have it signed consistently either as State Route 110 or I-110 in BOTH directions no matter what.
I forgot about the left exits. Having seen the opening credits of "Duel" I should know better. :banghead:
Seems like the optimal solution would be to sign at least SB as "CA 110 to I-110" consistently.
Quote from: Urban Prairie Schooner link=topic=9265.msg236715#msg236715
Seems like the optimal solution would be to sign at least SB as "CA 110 to I-110" consistently.
Given California's lack of route number duplication, I actually don't ever see that happening. (That policy does however result in the ambiguity over the downtown section that this entire thread is about)
Quote from: NE2 on July 31, 2013, 10:37:00 PM
Quote from: AndyMax25 on July 31, 2013, 06:53:39 PM
As stated on the CA Highways, since 1952 the Harbor Freeway begins at the Hollywood Freeway interchange. http://www.cahighways.org/105-112.html#110. Therefore the signage between the Hollywood and Santa Monica freeways should technically all be signed as I-110.
Huh? What does the name of the freeway changing have to do with the route classification?
Last I looked, jack shit.
The Four Level Interchange has always been the ground zero for the LA freeway system.
If you follow any BGS with "Los Angeles" in it, you will eventually be taken on to the Four Level Interchange, if you keep following "Los Angeles", regardless of the highway number.
With regard to freeway names, the four level divides Harbor from the Pasadena/Arroyo Seco, and it also divides Hollywood from the Santa Ana on the 101. But the route designations do not necessarily terminate there.
In the US highway days, US 101 Hollywood-Santa Ana, US 6 and CA 11 were Harbor-Pasadena, and US 66 Hollywood-Pasadena. Even though US 6 was on both sides of the interchange, the transition from southbound US 101 was signed as US 66 Pasadena, US 6 San Pedro. So there is some historic precedent for inaccurate signing here.
With regard to today's signage, even if not technically correct, I would prefer if I-110 were signed in both directions from US 101. This keeps the divisions simple:
I-110, Harbor Freeway, Trucks Allowed
CA-110, Arroyo Seco Freeway, Trucks Prohibited.
Also, with regard to some of the newer signage on the 101, I do applaud the correct information "US 101 to I-5, I-10, CA-60", but I do wish that the sign would also incorporate the old Control Cities Santa Ana - San Bernardino (and if there's room they can add Pomona).
Quote from: mrsman on August 04, 2013, 08:40:35 AM
With regard to today's signage, even if not technically correct, I would prefer if I-110 were signed in both directions from US 101. This keeps the divisions simple:
I-110, Harbor Freeway, Trucks Allowed
CA-110, Arroyo Seco Freeway, Trucks Prohibited.
This is basically how it's signed now from 101 to southbound 110. My preference is for I-110 to be officially extended to US 101 to cover northbound signage and to make that simple delineation (trucks allowed on Interstate but not on non-Interstate segment), as opposed to it being southbound I-110/northbound Route 110 between 101 and 10 based on the divergent signage.
Quote from: AndyMax25 on August 01, 2013, 12:47:28 AM
Quote from: DTComposer on April 17, 2013, 10:33:31 AM
You are right in that the freeway naming pre-dates the current numbering. There are three different designations:
South of I-10: Harbor Freeway, I-110
Between I-10 and US-101: Harbor Freeway, CA-110
North of US-101: Arroyo Seco Parkway (nee Pasadena Freeway), CA-110
My apologies, NE2 and DTComposer are correct. In 1968, the interstate designation was only applied for the segment south of the Santa Monica Freeway Interchange for the purpose of the HOV project.
Still CT has done a horrible job of signage in the Downtown area.
Check out this pic I took soon after some new signs were installed. This is the the WB I-10 transition to the 110. You can see how the sign says South towards Downtown when it is obviously supposed to be North. Who approves these things??? I don't understand how the Caltrans crew designed it, received the sign, inspected it, and actually installed it.
The same thing happened at the SB I-405 transition to I-10 with new signs. If you look closely the WEST sign is an overlay. The new sign said EAST Los Angeles and EAST Santa Monica.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fla.curbed.com%2Fuploads%2F2006_11_110interchangesign.jpg&hash=9cc13e31bd3d0357ed559b40b096fd8c2364c550)
Jesus Christ!! :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :no: :no: :no: :pan: :pan: How much
pakalolo (Hawaiian for "pot") are they smoking over there at Caltrans?!
I think Caltrans incorrectly signed the route just to watch the heads of sign geeks explode! Does it really matter to most drivers, after all, it is just "the 110" CA or Interstate not really important.
Quote from: Urban Prairie Schooner on August 01, 2013, 07:56:36 PM
Seems like the optimal solution would be to sign at least SB as "CA 110 to I-110" consistently.
LOL...On the SB 110 at the 5, the overhead signs mention both CA 110 and US 101 for some odd reason.
Quote from: JustDrive on August 10, 2013, 10:49:53 AM
LOL...On the SB 110 at the 5, the overhead signs mention both CA 110 and US 101 for some odd reason.
It's CalTrans' long-standing logic of not always putting up a "TO" sign when it is warranted, even if implied. With one, that would make way more sense.
Interestingly, in recent years, 101 on the southbound Santa Ana Freeway a few miles away has had its signage change from either "101/5" or "5 - Santa Ana" to the more accurate "101 TO 5/10/60".
Quote from: TheStranger on August 10, 2013, 02:36:40 PM
Quote from: JustDrive on August 10, 2013, 10:49:53 AM
LOL...On the SB 110 at the 5, the overhead signs mention both CA 110 and US 101 for some odd reason.
It's CalTrans' long-standing logic of not always putting up a "TO" sign when it is warranted, even if implied. With one, that would make way more sense.
Interestingly, in recent years, 101 on the southbound Santa Ana Freeway a few miles away has had its signage change from either "101/5" or "5 - Santa Ana" to the more accurate "101 TO 5/10/60".
Northbound 110 at the Four Level also has "101 south TO 5 SOUTH 10 EAST 60." Not to mention the "North 5" on the overhead sign next to the "North 110"
Quote from: TheStranger on August 10, 2013, 02:36:40 PM
Quote from: JustDrive on August 10, 2013, 10:49:53 AM
LOL...On the SB 110 at the 5, the overhead signs mention both CA 110 and US 101 for some odd reason.
It's CalTrans' long-standing logic of not always putting up a "TO" sign when it is warranted, even if implied. With one, that would make way more sense.
Interestingly, in recent years, 101 on the southbound Santa Ana Freeway a few miles away has had its signage change from either "101/5" or "5 - Santa Ana" to the more accurate "101 TO 5/10/60".
I'm so glad those signs went up on northbound 110. I've always hated the signs on that freeway identifying SB US 101 as I-5, since you can also get on I-10 and CA 60 heading that way. They still exist going south on the 110, and there's still one that exists northbound.
Quote from: mrsman on August 04, 2013, 08:40:35 AMWith regard to freeway names, the four level divides Harbor from the Pasadena/Arroyo Seco, and it also divides Hollywood from the Santa Ana on the 101.
Actually, that is not strictly true. The Four Level may well be the dividing point between the Harbor Freeway and Arroyo Seco Parkway, but the actual dividing line between the Hollywood and Santa Ana Freeways (as shown on Hollywood and Santa Ana Freeway construction plan set title sheets) is the Spring Street overcrossing, half a mile to the east. Caltrans did not keep things simple in this case.
It's sort of expected, as I-110 and CA 110 can get away with coexisting, since they share the same freeway. Remember, no duplicate routes of any kind can exist in CA, except for the reason cited above; CA 15 in San Diego is signed that way because it's basically a future upgrade into I-15.
Quote from: J N Winkler on August 19, 2013, 12:36:26 PM
Quote from: mrsman on August 04, 2013, 08:40:35 AMWith regard to freeway names, the four level divides Harbor from the Pasadena/Arroyo Seco, and it also divides Hollywood from the Santa Ana on the 101.
Actually, that is not strictly true. The Four Level may well be the dividing point between the Harbor Freeway and Arroyo Seco Parkway, but the actual dividing line between the Hollywood and Santa Ana Freeways (as shown on Hollywood and Santa Ana Freeway construction plan set title sheets) is the Spring Street overcrossing, half a mile to the east. Caltrans did not keep things simple in this case.
Didn't that change over the years? (It makes sense this was originally the case, since the Hollywood & Santa Ana freeways predated the four-level by some months.)
Daniel Faigin's California Highways site (www.cahighways.org) also states that Route 110's interchange with US 101 as the "dividing line" between the Santa Ana and Hollywood freeways.
QuoteThe segment of US 101 from the Route 5/Route 10/Route 60/US 101 to the "four-level" interchange (i.e., the Route 110/US 101 interchange) is named the "Santa Ana Freeway".
:
:
Officially, the segment of US-101 from Route 110 to Route 134 is named the "Hollywood Freeway".
Quote from: TheStranger on August 19, 2013, 03:08:32 PMDidn't that change over the years? (It makes sense this was originally the case, since the Hollywood & Santa Ana freeways predated the four-level by some months.)
Quote from: myosh_tino on August 19, 2013, 03:21:43 PMDaniel Faigin's California Highways site (www.cahighways.org) also states that Route 110's interchange with US 101 as the "dividing line" between the Santa Ana and Hollywood freeways.
The centerline of Spring Street as the divider between the Hollywood and Santa Ana Freeways is pretty well attested. This (W.L. Fahey, "17 Contracts: Hollywood Freeway Construction Under Way is Extensive and Varied,"
CHPW, May-June 1951, p. 17) is typical:
QuoteThe Hollywood Freeway has been referred to as the backbone of the Los Angeles Metropolitan Freeway System. It is a part of U.S. Highway 101, which through the Los Angeles Civic Center is called the "Santa Ana Freeway" from the center line of Spring Street easterly, while from this point westerly it has been given the glamorous title of "Hollywood Freeway."
In regard to what Faigin says, it falls within a section of his US 101 profile that deals with memorial highway and interchange designations, so it is possible a memorial designation of some kind is being talked about. But Spring Street was definitely the easterly and southerly endpoint at the time the Hollywood Freeway was constructed, and remained so for as long as Caltrans continued to reference freeway names in route segment descriptions on plan set title sheets. (The practice was abandoned sometime in the late 1950's or early 1960's.)
My understanding is that the Four Level structure itself was essentially complete before many of the ramps and connecting roadways were ready to open. The dates I have are 1949 for Four Level structure plans, 1954 for full opening of structure and connecting roadways, and 1952 for completion of Hollywood Freeway to the Spring Street terminus. The article quoted above includes an aerial photo showing eastbound traffic moving along the top of the Four Level (which carries the Hollywood Freeway) and being detoured onto Temple Street because only the overcrossings and some of the heavy grading had been completed further to the east.
Quote from: J N Winkler on August 19, 2013, 08:15:03 PM
Quote from: myosh_tino on August 19, 2013, 03:21:43 PMDaniel Faigin's California Highways site (www.cahighways.org) also states that Route 110's interchange with US 101 as the "dividing line" between the Santa Ana and Hollywood freeways.
The centerline of Spring Street as the divider between the Hollywood and Santa Ana Freeways is pretty well attested. This (W.L. Fahey, "17 Contracts: Hollywood Freeway Construction Under Way is Extensive and Varied," CHPW, May-June 1951, p. 17) is typical:
While Spring Street may have been the original dividing line, I found a 2008 document from Caltrans (http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/tsip/hseb/products/Named_Freeways.pdf) that confirms Daniel Faigin and TheStranger's contention that the dividing line is now Route 110.
Quote from: myosh_tino on August 20, 2013, 12:21:38 PMWhile Spring Street may have been the original dividing line, I found a 2008 document from Caltrans (http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/tsip/hseb/products/Named_Freeways.pdf) that confirms Daniel Faigin and TheStranger's contention that the dividing line is now Route 110.
You are talking about the listing on page 79 out of 219 in the PDF, right?
I have reservations about its reliability. Yes, it is official in origin, but it is a digest, which introduces the possibility of compilation error. The first part consists of a tabular listing in which the space allocated for each segment terminus identification is the size of a postage stamp. The basis for the Hollywood Freeway name is given as "By Location," without a reference to an Assembly concurrent resolution or Commission action (as for the Riverside Freeway listed on the same page--commission action on October 22, 1957 in that case). The eastern terminus is given as "I-110 4-level Interchange," and isn't the whole point of this thread that I-110 doesn't extend to the Four Level?
The explanation for the "Hollywood Freeway" name is given as follows (page 182 of 219 in the PDF):
QuotePortions of Route 101 and Route 170 are named for their location near Hollywood in Los Angeles County.
I suspect that this listing was compiled by someone (possibly an intern) who did not refer to
CHPW or as-built construction plans and thus was not aware that "Hollywood Freeway" was not only a customary usage (which seems to be the basis on which it has been included in this list), but also a length of relocated US 101 with (at least) a definite eastern terminus other than at the Four Level.
Quote from: J N Winkler on August 20, 2013, 03:28:15 PM
The eastern terminus is given as "I-110 4-level Interchange," and isn't the whole point of this thread that I-110 doesn't extend to the Four Level?
Here's another way of looking at that question: Does CalTrans's definition of "I-110" agree with FHWA's? After all, we already have the case of FHWA I-305 in Sacramento not corresponding to actual signage/route definition here, and signed I-80 in SF continuing to US 101 even though (I have always guessed this was a clerical error) the section from 101 to 4th Street has not been officially part of the Interstate system since 1968.
Quote from: TheStranger on August 20, 2013, 04:15:34 PMthe section from 101 to 4th Street has not been officially part of the Interstate system since 1968.
that actually makes sense from a navigational perspective. why sign the route as "TO 80" when a) such signage would just confuse drivers, and b) the road is pretty comparable in quality to other interstates grandfathered into the system in the 1950s-60s.
if we're gonna start demoting things from receiving interstate signage, I'd start with 238. not because of the silly number, but because route continuity doesn't demand it: it can just as easily be signed as "to 580" and "to 880", comparable to CA-259 down south, as that's what drivers are taking it for anyway.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on August 20, 2013, 04:19:43 PM
Quote from: TheStranger on August 20, 2013, 04:15:34 PMthe section from 101 to 4th Street has not been officially part of the Interstate system since 1968.
that actually makes sense from a navigational perspective. why sign the route as "TO 80" when a) such signage would just confuse drivers, and b) the road is pretty comparable in quality to other interstates grandfathered into the system in the 1950s-60s.
ESPECIALLY since it had been signed as an Interstate from the beginning. No reason to demote it over a funding technicality.
(And to this extent why I've always felt the most elegant solution for the Harbor Freeway in downtown LA is to just have I-110 signage northbound to 101, to match what has signed southbound for decades)
I always thought the I-80 situation had to do with the special meaning "TO" has for Caltrans: i.e., a route indication traditionally reserved for use to indicate the way to a freeway from a surface street or highway. I would imagine something similar is going on with the Harbor Freeway since it sounds like the apparently wrongly placed I-110 shields are being used solely with pull-through meaning.
Quote from: J N Winkler on August 20, 2013, 06:27:11 PM
I always thought the I-80 situation had to do with the special meaning "TO" has for Caltrans: i.e., a route indication traditionally reserved for use to indicate the way to a freeway from a surface street or highway.
Nope, I-80 pull-throughs all the way going eastbound. Westbound, it was signed as I-80/US 101 in the 1980s (implied TO for US 101), then as just "US 101 San Jose" for a good while after that (I think after the furthest extent of the Central Freeway was razed), until the addition of exit numbers in the last five years clarified - somewhat - that westbound 80 after the Bay Bridge is not "US 101".
Why do some of these highways even exist? why not just sign it all as i-110 or i-15? there are several examples of this all over california
Quote from: silverback1065 on August 29, 2013, 12:10:27 AM
why not just sign it all as i-110?
Because Interstate standards.
(https://www.aaroads.com/california/images110/ca-110_nb_exit_029_04.jpg)
do they plan on updating these roads to interstate standards?
Nope. In the case of the Arroyo Seco Parkway, which is shown in the picture NE2 posted, was called the Pasadena Freeway for 55 years before the original name was reinstated several years ago, and has had historic-landmark status for close to 15 years, upgrades to modern standards would totally destroy the historic features.
In the case of other California freeways which are more nearly Interstate-compatible, application of Interstate shields is in theory an option, but has little navigational value and would involve the creation of new two-digit routes (or anomalies like I-238) since the supply of spare three-digit designations is almost tapped out.
Quote from: J N Winkler on August 29, 2013, 10:38:54 AMupgrades to modern standards would totally destroy the historic features.
yes, like taking down all the early 1960s signs to replace them with retroreflective ones that say "Parkway". because, apparently, California is swimming in cash.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on August 29, 2013, 12:26:30 PM
Quote from: J N Winkler on August 29, 2013, 10:38:54 AMupgrades to modern standards would totally destroy the historic features.
yes, like taking down all the early 1960s signs to replace them with retroreflective ones that say "Parkway". because, apparently, California is swimming in cash.
What's so historic about it?
Quote from: silverback1065 on August 29, 2013, 02:36:44 PM
What's so historic about it?
I believe one of the signs taken down (101 southbound approaching 110) was the last sign with 66 under a patch.
among other things.
Sounds like a weak excuse to me, but after looking at it, it is definitely not up to interstate code, I'm sure it would be very expensive to upgrade.
I think he's asking what's historic about the road. Use the Goog.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arroyo_Seco_Parkway
Quote from: NE2 on August 29, 2013, 03:27:07 PM
I think he's asking what's historic about the road. Use the Goog.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arroyo_Seco_Parkway
o ok that's a good reason then! I didn't know that about that highway. Were there ever any plans to connect it to i-210?
Quote from: silverback1065 on August 29, 2013, 04:16:00 PM
Quote from: NE2 on August 29, 2013, 03:27:07 PM
I think he's asking what's historic about the road. Use the Goog.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arroyo_Seco_Parkway
o ok that's a good reason then! I didn't know that about that highway. Were there ever any plans to connect it to i-210?
Not 210 directly, but to the still-unbuilt 710 tunnel (which would then connect to the 210/134 junction) - that interchange however has been removed in the most recent plans for that freeway.
Here's a couple of photos to add to the mix.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/10794876525/in/set-72157637545399534 - local signage in San Pedro for "Route 110 north." State Route 110 has NEVER actually run north from the nearby 47/110 interchange; prior to the mid-2000s it did exist southward along Gaffey Street from 47/110 to 9th Street. But the freeway segment past Route 47 has always been either US 6/Route 11 or I-110.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/10795006074/in/set-72157637545399534 This is the first time I've seen a northbound I-110 reassurance shield NORTH of I-10! For that matter, this may be the only trailblazer for 110 north between I-10 and the Four-Level. It is very new as it was not on the Google Street View of this segment of the Harbor Freeway (note also that the Figueroa Street sign was replaced recently too) -
https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Figueroa+%26+9th&hl=en&ll=34.04351,-118.272306&spn=0.002524,0.002387&sll=37.269174,-119.306607&sspn=13.95558,19.555664&t=h&hq=Figueroa+%26+9th&z=19&layer=c&cbll=34.04351,-118.272306&panoid=WzFg87Wh8B2uQ7bBOthRvA&cbp=12,44.03,,1,-1.77
With that, it seems to be a case where CalTrans's and FHWA's definitions of I-110 are slightly different (with CalTrans considering all of the Harbor Freeway as Interstate, but FHWA only acknowledging the segment south of the Santa Monica Freeway), much like the difference in FHWA and CalTrans concepts of I-80 that I mentioned earlier in the thread.
The official California State Highway Log shows that the interstate designation for Route 110 ends at the junction with I-10. It is classified as a Federal Aid secondary route north of I-10, so it does not have an interstate designation and is officially CA-110.
Because the majority of the Harbor Freeway is designated as I-110, it would make some sense from a motoring public benefit to use the I-110 designation on any signs indicating Harbor Freeway, even though the portion of the Harbor Freeway north of I-10 is officially CA-110.
Quote from: jrouse on November 13, 2013, 04:35:19 PM
The official California State Highway Log shows that the interstate designation for Route 110 ends at the junction with I-10. It is classified as a Federal Aid secondary route north of I-10, so it does not have an interstate designation and is officially CA-110.
Is this true as well for the section of I-80 between US 101 and the Bay Bridge that FHWA has not considered an interstate route since 1968?
Quote from: jrouse on November 13, 2013, 04:35:19 PM
Because the majority of the Harbor Freeway is designated as I-110, it would make some sense from a motoring public benefit to use the I-110 designation on any signs indicating Harbor Freeway, even though the portion of the Harbor Freeway north of I-10 is officially CA-110.
With CalTrans reaffirming southbound Harbor Freeway in its entirety as "Interstate 110" in signage...it seems this distinction is actually even more useful now - having the interstate associated with the route that DOES allow trucks on it, and the state route with the much older parkway that does not, i.e.:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/10794870756/in/set-72157637545399534
http://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/10795089553/in/set-72157637545399534
All of the pull-throughs from the Four-Level southward, as noted earlier, are marked for I-110...
http://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/10795091973/in/set-72157637545399534 (marked on both the mainline pullthrough and the local exits pullthrough)
However, a couple of these State Route 110 overheads exist. Given the number change from 11 to 110 occurred in 1981, I am curious when these shield replacements were installed (as opposed to the pre-retroreflective I-110 southbound signs) -
http://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/10794976934/in/set-72157637545399534
---
My take has always been pretty simple on this: if I-110 is to be signed southbound from US 101 onwards, it should be signed north of I-10 on the northbound direction until the Four-Level, for consistency.
Route 80 is also not designated as Interstate 80 past the former junction with the Embarcadero Freeway. According to the State Highway Log, it was designated as Federal Aid Primary Route 480 from that point to the junction with 101.
It should be pointed out that with the establishment of the National Highway System, the Federal Aid Urban, Federal Aid Secondary, and Federal Aid Primary numbering systems were done away with; the Interstate System is a component of the National Highway System. I think the only numbers now used are the official legislative route numbers.
One can quickly and easily see where Interstate designations begin and end by looking at the California Road System maps, found at http://dot.ca.gov/hq/tsip/hseb/crs_maps/index.php.
Some observations from the CRS maps:
The I-80 designation ends at roughly the eastern end of the Bay Bridge/former Embarcadero Freeway junction.
The I-110 designation ends at I-10.
Interestingly, the section of Route 50 that is on the Interstate system as I-305 designation is not shown as Interstate on the CRS maps. It is instead shown as "other" and is signed as CA-50?!? Not sure what is going on here. According to the State Highway Log, Route 50 is designated as I-305 from the junction with I-80 in West Sacramento up to the junction with CA-99/Business 80 in Sacramento (total length is 5.63 miles).
Quote from: jrouse on November 14, 2013, 11:05:13 AM
One can quickly and easily see where Interstate designations begin and end by looking at the California Road System maps, found at http://dot.ca.gov/hq/tsip/hseb/crs_maps/index.php.
Some observations from the CRS maps:
The I-80 designation ends at roughly the eastern end of the Bay Bridge/former Embarcadero Freeway junction.
Interesting side effect of I-80 not being an "interstate" west of the bridge:
Does this allow for the grandfathering of the left-exit ramps that date back to the US 40/50 era at 5th Street? They were reconstructed - but in place - a few years ago.
Quote from: jrouse
The I-110 designation ends at I-10.
Interestingly, the section of Route 50 that is on the Interstate system as I-305 designation is not shown as Interstate on the CRS maps. It is instead shown as "other" and is signed as CA-50?!? Not sure what is going on here. According to the State Highway Log, Route 50 is designated as I-305 from the junction with I-80 in West Sacramento up to the junction with CA-99/Business 80 in Sacramento (total length is 5.63 miles).
This map from the CRS doesn't even acknowledge the WX segment of the Capital City Freeway as an interstate:
http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/tsip/hseb/crs_map/07j.pdf
Lately I've been under the impression that hidden I-305 applies to not only US 50 from I-80 to Route 99, but Route 51 from Route 99 to E Street. (The latter was built as I-80/US 99E in the late 1950s/early 1960s and is up to interstate standards, unlike the segment north of there; it would fit in with the increased official FHWA length of 305 that I've seen at places like Kurumi's website) But that isn't even marked as an interstate on this PDF.
The difference between legislation/internal designations and in-the-field signage is nothing new out here though; I remember in an earlier thread discussing the mid-1950s signage of US 70 east beginning on southbound US 101 at the Four-Level, which may have been in similar fashion to the famous Ankrom modifications of the northbound 110 signs there to acknowledge the upcoming I-5 exit:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/24431382@N03/5006703733/in/photolist-8CqEAa-8CtMxh-aGzHpT-bySMBh-d4FHCU-d4G3P3-ezQLfN-7R8ji5-dzvWVR-bR9seK-b34CNF-abxKrv-7Z2L6S-b34CZa-gm7z1G-8wedpJ-eZXiQ9-eZXkRw-eZXewJ-eZGRVz-eZXmBA-eZGNfa-eZGWXt-eZXfy5-eZXaPW-eZXfco-eZXbhb-eZXqxh-eZXbR7-eZGVrx-eZXjqy-eZGSo6-eZXkoS-eZX5sf-eZX4xG-eZX9U3-eZGQ24-eZXjNG-eZGNDa-eZGVZH-eZXq4N-eZGWpe-cxKaGs-9tsFPq-bKtmgv-hd2toQ-8LU3D4-eZX7Bb-eZXi27-eZGXWt-eZX3Kq
Didn't know until now that 305 was in the state highway log either...
Quote from: TheStranger on November 14, 2013, 11:35:57 AM
The difference between legislation/internal designations and in-the-field signage is nothing new out here though; I remember in an earlier thread discussing the mid-1950s signage of US 70 east beginning on southbound US 101 at the Four-Level, which may have been in similar fashion to the famous Ankrom modifications of the northbound 110 signs there to acknowledge the upcoming I-5 exit:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/24431382@N03/5006703733/
The left sign does say San Bernardino Freeway, so it's logical to put the number of the freeway there. (I suppose by that point they may have been planning to move US 60 to the Pomona Freeway.)
As for I-305: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/national_highway_system/nhs_maps/northern_california/sacramento_ca.pdf
I refuse to believe that SR 51 is not even on the NHS. FHWA almost certainly screwed this up.
Quote from: NE2 on November 14, 2013, 11:48:05 AM
Quote from: TheStranger on November 14, 2013, 11:35:57 AM
The difference between legislation/internal designations and in-the-field signage is nothing new out here though; I remember in an earlier thread discussing the mid-1950s signage of US 70 east beginning on southbound US 101 at the Four-Level, which may have been in similar fashion to the famous Ankrom modifications of the northbound 110 signs there to acknowledge the upcoming I-5 exit:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/24431382@N03/5006703733/
The left sign does say San Bernardino Freeway, so it's logical to put the number of the freeway there. (I suppose by that point they may have been planning to move US 60 to the Pomona Freeway.)
Yeah, I was figuring THAT might be the very first example of the infamous implied "TO" that California is so fond of using. (Which makes the actual use of TO on a concurrency the route actually is running, Route 99 in Sacramento, baffling in comparison)
Quote from: NE2 on November 14, 2013, 11:48:05 AM
As for I-305: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/national_highway_system/nhs_maps/northern_california/sacramento_ca.pdf
I refuse to believe that SR 51 is not even on the NHS. FHWA almost certainly screwed this up.
Also notable: 99 and 50 each get the red line for "other NHS routes" but 51 is somehow entirely local? (Maybe that is the case, but it's something that surprises me)
The Los Angeles FHWA map also brings some interesting pieces of info:
http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/national_highway_system/nhs_maps/southern_california/losangeles_ca.pdf
- As expected, 110 is not acknowledged as an interstate by FHWA north of 10. The Harbor Freeway's north end is listed as Other NHS Route...but the Arroyo Seco Parkway is marked as entirely local.
- The future 710 tunnel is marked as Other NHS Route, along with what is currently State Route 210 east of Glendora.
- Route 47 in its ENTIRETY! (including the corridor along Alameda north of Route 91 that is presently _not_ state highway) is marked as Other NHS Route.
- The southernmost part of the Glendale Freeway (between I-5 and Glendale Boulevard) is marked as entirely local, while the rest is Other NHS Route.
- The most intriguing to me, and the most relevant to the earlier discussions of I-80 and I-110, are the following two tidbits:
1. The segment of signed I-10 (the San Bernardino Freeway spur/former US 60/70/99) between 101 and 5 is NOT marked as Interstate OR as even "Other NHS Route". It is considered entirely local, even though it connects between an interstate and US 101 (Other STRAHNET Route).
2. What is signed as I-710 between Route 47 and Route 1 is marked as "Major STRAHNET Connector" and NOT interstate, even though it has finally been completed as full freeway out to 47/103 in the last few years. While 1 to 210 is the official definition of the route as listed at Faigin's page - http://cahighways.org/466-740.html#710 - it also notes that the segment from 47/103 to 1 would be added to the route once completed. That southernmost segment seems to have always been signed as I-710 (and didn't exist when the route was Route 7 or previously Route 15).
Is this even a state route yet, or has the definition not been updated to acknowledge the following:
QuoteThe legislative description of Route 710 includes a portion between Route 1 and the northern end of Harbor Scenic Drive, a portion of Harbor Scenic Drive to Ocean Blvd, a portion of Ocean Blvd west of its intersection with Harbor Scenic Drive to its junction with Seaside Blvd, and a portion of Seaside Blvd from the junction with Ocean Blvd to Route 47. This will apparently be signed as part of the route after planned port-related improvements by the cities of Long Beach and Los Angeles. The segment from Ocean Blvd to Route 1 is non-chargeable 139(b) milage.
So signed 710 south of Route 1 could either be "state route 710", or an unnumbered city-built and city-maintained freeway that FHWA acknowledges as STRAHNET route 710. Hmm.
- Imperial Highway west of I-105 is given a "Other NHS Route" marking even though it is not part of the definition for 105 nor has it ever been state highway. Map error, or something new?
----
The San Francisco map offers similar oddities, some of which have already been mentioned.
http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/national_highway_system/nhs_maps/northern_california/sanfrancisco_ca.pdf
Most notable though is the marking of US 101 along the now demolished portion of the Central Freeway between Market Street and Turk Street.
Quote from: TheStranger on November 14, 2013, 12:40:35 PM
1. The segment of signed I-10 (the San Bernardino Freeway spur/former US 60/70/99) between 101 and 5 is NOT marked as Interstate OR as even "Other NHS Route". It is considered entirely local, even though it connects between an interstate and US 101 (Other STRAHNET Route).
This spur used to be old Interstate 110. I'm actually surprised they never gave it a new number. US 101 from this spur to Interstate 5 was old Interstate 105.
Quote from: TheStranger on November 14, 2013, 12:40:35 PM2. What is signed as I-710 between Route 47 and Route 1 is marked as "Major STRAHNET Connector" and NOT interstate, even though it has finally been completed as full freeway out to 47/103 in the last few years. While 1 to 210 is the official definition of the route as listed at Faigin's page - http://cahighways.org/466-740.html#710 - it also notes that the segment from 47/103 to 1 would be added to the route once completed. That southernmost segment seems to have always been signed as I-710 (and didn't exist when the route was Route 7 or previously Route 15).
Is this even a state route yet, or has the definition not been updated to acknowledge the following:
QuoteThe legislative description of Route 710 includes a portion between Route 1 and the northern end of Harbor Scenic Drive, a portion of Harbor Scenic Drive to Ocean Blvd, a portion of Ocean Blvd west of its intersection with Harbor Scenic Drive to its junction with Seaside Blvd, and a portion of Seaside Blvd from the junction with Ocean Blvd to Route 47. This will apparently be signed as part of the route after planned port-related improvements by the cities of Long Beach and Los Angeles. The segment from Ocean Blvd to Route 1 is non-chargeable 139(b) milage.
So signed 710 south of Route 1 could either be "state route 710", or an unnumbered city-built and city-maintained freeway that FHWA acknowledges as STRAHNET route 710. Hmm.
Long Beach handed control of the Long Beach Freeway south of CA 1 to CalTrans in exchange for the state's relinquishment of CA 103U on August 25, 2000.
It looks like that subletter in the definition of Route 710 no longer applies, and CalTrans has adopted the rest of Ocean Blvd to CA 47. They plan to upgrade that section of freeway.
Quote from: TheStranger on November 14, 2013, 12:40:35 PM- Imperial Highway west of I-105 is given a "Other NHS Route" marking even though it is not part of the definition for 105 nor has it ever been state highway. Map error, or something new?
Imperial Hwy from Pershing Drive to I-105 is an unconstructed portion of Route 105 that CalTrans probably won't ever construct.
Quote from: emory on November 15, 2013, 02:44:44 AM
Quote from: TheStranger on November 14, 2013, 12:40:35 PM
1. The segment of signed I-10 (the San Bernardino Freeway spur/former US 60/70/99) between 101 and 5 is NOT marked as Interstate OR as even "Other NHS Route". It is considered entirely local, even though it connects between an interstate and US 101 (Other STRAHNET Route).
This spur used to be old Interstate 110. I'm actually surprised they never gave it a new number. US 101 from this spur to Interstate 5 was old Interstate 105.
When the routes connecting I-5 with the San Bernardino Split (the old US 60/70/99 and today's southernmost portion of 101) were taken out of the Interstate system in 1968, I always interpreted that as a funding mechanism to get more milage for today's 105 (tied into the removal of 80 west of the Bay Bridge as interstate milage, the elimination of 480 from the system, and other cancellations).
Not sure the 1964 110 and 105 were ever signed either, as short as they were. The San Bernardino Freeway spur seems wide enough to be Interstate standard, but that portion of the Santa Ana Freeway between it and 5 has never been (and doesn't seem like it will ever be expanded).
Quote from: emory on November 15, 2013, 02:44:44 AM
Quote from: TheStranger on November 14, 2013, 12:40:35 PM2. What is signed as I-710 between Route 47 and Route 1 is marked as "Major STRAHNET Connector" and NOT interstate, even though it has finally been completed as full freeway out to 47/103 in the last few years. While 1 to 210 is the official definition of the route as listed at Faigin's page - http://cahighways.org/466-740.html#710 - it also notes that the segment from 47/103 to 1 would be added to the route once completed. That southernmost segment seems to have always been signed as I-710 (and didn't exist when the route was Route 7 or previously Route 15).
Is this even a state route yet, or has the definition not been updated to acknowledge the following:
QuoteThe legislative description of Route 710 includes a portion between Route 1 and the northern end of Harbor Scenic Drive, a portion of Harbor Scenic Drive to Ocean Blvd, a portion of Ocean Blvd west of its intersection with Harbor Scenic Drive to its junction with Seaside Blvd, and a portion of Seaside Blvd from the junction with Ocean Blvd to Route 47. This will apparently be signed as part of the route after planned port-related improvements by the cities of Long Beach and Los Angeles. The segment from Ocean Blvd to Route 1 is non-chargeable 139(b) milage.
So signed 710 south of Route 1 could either be "state route 710", or an unnumbered city-built and city-maintained freeway that FHWA acknowledges as STRAHNET route 710. Hmm.
Long Beach handed control of the Long Beach Freeway south of CA 1 to CalTrans in exchange for the state's relinquishment of CA 103U on August 25, 2000.
It looks like that subletter in the definition of Route 710 no longer applies, and CalTrans has adopted the rest of Ocean Blvd to CA 47. They plan to upgrade that section of freeway.
Now that signed 710 is full freeway between Ocean Boulevard and 47/103...is the reconstruction of the Desmond Bridge the final step in officially adding it to the route definition?
This is a great thread that demonstrates how the information available about several topics conflict, especially as related to Interstate/SR 80 west of the SF Bay Bridge, I-305's eastern terminus (or existence), and I-110's northern terminus. It seems signage is not consistently labeling the true endpoints of these routes, and the true routing may not be consistently listed on source documents (such as I-305, which I think Caltrans only grudgingly acknowledges). I love how we all dig into the details on this and look for consistency on documents produced by people who aren't road enthusiasts and don't share the same need for consistency on these points (I suspect the employees are more typically interested in the road quality and driveability).
I for one would prefer if I-305 was legislatively defined by the state of California, if for no other reason than to clarify its end points and to explain clearly that it was created from the remains of Interstate-standard I-80 when it was relocated to former I-880 across the top of Sacramento. The FHWA history site implies that I-305 extends northeast beyond the US 50/CA 99 interchange, and the mileage totals back that up (5 vs. 8 miles). Why the FHWA and/or Caltrans maps don't match the mileage on the Interstate Route Log and Finder List is beyond me.
Given the expectation I've had regarding new Interstates anticipated for California over the past 10 years and seeing no action on the part of local MPO's (municipal planning organizations) or Caltrans (specifically with relation to I-210 east, I-15 south, I-110 btwn I-10 and US 101, and I-80 in SF), I believe at this point that Caltrans may not bother with requesting AASHTO permission and will instead erect signs that match their understanding of how motorists perceive the route. I think that's how I-110 signs ended up north of US 101, and I think that's also why CA 210 and CA 15 remain even though they meet Interstate standards (other than the CA 15/94 interchange and the recently upgraded I-215/CA 210 interchange). It will be interesting to see if the recent improvements to I-80 in SF will result in an application to restore that route to Interstate designation via FHWA and AASHTO, even though the motoring public has no idea I-80 does not reach US 101 according to a map on the Caltrans webpage.
Regards,
Andy
Great addition to the thread, Andy. Speaks to a lot of the thoughts that this topic (and the other situations mentioned) brings up, i.e. the differences between what is official/legislated and what is in the field.
Quote from: andy3175 on November 15, 2013, 11:13:41 PM
I believe at this point that Caltrans may not bother with requesting AASHTO permission and will instead erect signs that match their understanding of how motorists perceive the route.
In that vein, I'm under the assumption Caltrans erected all the I-710 signage for the newer freeway segment between 47/103 and Ocean Boulevard in Long Beach, even though it was Long Beach that had the route constructed - and even if it isn't officially adopted yet, at least not until the Desmond Bridge reconstruction.
---
EDIT: A late night thought.
What if all those system additions (710 on Terminal Island, 210 east of 57, 15 south of 8) are ALL awaiting 905 being re-signed to interstate, at which point they'd all be submitted at once along with 905? I haven't seen any word that would suggest that 905 would remain a state route permanently, and that freeway is now complete...
The freeway's complete, but you still have that 126 toll road that ends short of it.
Quote from: TheStranger on November 16, 2013, 02:20:02 AM
What if all those system additions (710 on Terminal Island, 210 east of 57, 15 south of 8) are ALL awaiting 905 being re-signed to interstate, at which point they'd all be submitted at once along with 905? I haven't seen any word that would suggest that 905 would remain a state route permanently, and that freeway is now complete...
I have wondered the same over the past several years and have tried to contact Caltrans and some of the local planning organizations (such as SANBAG for SR 210, SANDAG for SR 15 and SR 905, etc.) and have gotten no response. It would be nice if they did have a master plan for such things, but since Caltrans is regionalized through its districts, I don't know if they have gotten with the headquarters in Sacramento to create a plan to convert these routes or not.
Speaking of 710 south, I think you're right that any formal application for I-710's south extension will wait until the Gerald Desmond Bridge is completed. But for drivers (based on signage), I-710 begins at the SR 47 interchange on Terminal Island and extends onto the Long Beach Freeway. Signage to this effect is in place in both directions, and I think it's set that way to ensure the significant truck traffic on the freeway take I-710 to the Port of Long Beach (or Port of LA) rather than end up in downtown Long Beach or at the Queen Mary and cruise ship terminal.
Regards,
Andy
Quote from: andy3175 on November 16, 2013, 10:16:36 AM
Quote from: TheStranger on November 16, 2013, 02:20:02 AM
What if all those system additions (710 on Terminal Island, 210 east of 57, 15 south of 8) are ALL awaiting 905 being re-signed to interstate, at which point they'd all be submitted at once along with 905? I haven't seen any word that would suggest that 905 would remain a state route permanently, and that freeway is now complete...
I have wondered the same over the past several years and have tried to contact Caltrans and some of the local planning organizations (such as SANBAG for SR 210, SANDAG for SR 15 and SR 905, etc.) and have gotten no response. It would be nice if they did have a master plan for such things, but since Caltrans is regionalized through its districts, I don't know if they have gotten with the headquarters in Sacramento to create a plan to convert these routes or not.
If I'm not mistaken, AASHTO rejected a 2002 submission to include 210 east of 57 with the Interstate, because the route was not complete at the time. Given the hit-or-miss approach nationally to this (i.e. how I-73 is signed in segments, while it's taken more years for 49 to finally be accepted north of Louisiana), I wish this had simply been a conditional approval (as opposed to requiring an eventual re-submission) a decade ago.
Quote from: andy3175 on November 16, 2013, 10:16:36 AM
Speaking of 710 south, I think you're right that any formal application for I-710's south extension will wait until the Gerald Desmond Bridge is completed. But for drivers (based on signage), I-710 begins at the SR 47 interchange on Terminal Island and extends onto the Long Beach Freeway. Signage to this effect is in place in both directions, and I think it's set that way to ensure the significant truck traffic on the freeway take I-710 to the Port of Long Beach (or Port of LA) rather than end up in downtown Long Beach or at the Queen Mary and cruise ship terminal.
Regards,
Andy
The 710 situation highlights another weakness of the legislative-based California system, in that now that that segment is complete (and the existing Gerald Desmond Bridge is in place to connect the newer and older portions), the route definition should have already automatically (re)included it.
The 10-west-of-101, 110-north-of-101, and 80-west-of-the-Bay Bridge situations at least are more quibbles in route designation that the legislative routes don't really deal with. This is more related to the recent "decommission in segments" trend (i.e. what has been mentioned in the Route 1 thread) where funding technicalities, not navigation, become the priority with signage (or vice versa in 710's case).
Quote from: TheStranger on November 16, 2013, 02:47:42 PM
The 710 situation highlights another weakness of the legislative-based California system, in that now that that segment is complete (and the existing Gerald Desmond Bridge is in place to connect the newer and older portions), the route definition should have already automatically (re)included it.
It does:
QuoteRoute 710 shall also include that portion of the freeway between Route 1 and the northern end of Harbor Scenic Drive, that portion of Harbor Scenic Drive to Ocean Boulevard, that portion of Ocean Boulevard west of its intersection with Harbor Scenic Drive to its junction with Seaside Boulevard, and that portion of Seaside Boulevard from the junction with Ocean Boulevard to Route 47.
The state codificators have chosen to codify this as a separate paragraph, but they probably could have simply changed the short definition to "Route 710 is from Route 47 to Route 210 in Pasadena."
Quote from: NE2 on November 16, 2013, 04:04:09 PM
The state codificators have chosen to codify this as a separate paragraph, but they probably could have simply changed the short definition to "Route 710 is from Route 47 to Route 210 in Pasadena."
I guess I should clarify what I meant:
The condition (of a 710 freeway extension to 47) exists, but I'm not sure if the definition has been updated except for that addendum paragraph.
Of course, in the 1960s and 1970s, Route 7's definition did include the southern portion already, so having it removed for a few years and then readded is semantic silliness in retrospect.
That addendum also brings up the following: is 710 the only route in California with multiple spurs/prongs at one end?
Quote from: TheStranger on November 16, 2013, 04:39:10 PM
That addendum also brings up the following: is 710 the only route in California with multiple spurs/prongs at one end?
710 doesn't have multiple spurs. Read the description carefully.
Quote from: NE2 on November 16, 2013, 04:47:17 PM
Quote from: TheStranger on November 16, 2013, 04:39:10 PM
That addendum also brings up the following: is 710 the only route in California with multiple spurs/prongs at one end?
710 doesn't have multiple spurs. Read the description carefully.
Alright, I was confused significantly by the second portion of that (as I'm not sure that segment of "Harbor Scenic Drive" between Route 1 and Ocean is signed as such now).
It's much clearer via google street view: while there is a mainline pullthrough for 710 north at the start of Harbor Scenic Drive, 710 is then listed as an exit from it on a next-three-exits overhead after an offramp.
Quote from: NE2 on November 16, 2013, 04:47:17 PM
Quote from: TheStranger on November 16, 2013, 04:39:10 PM
That addendum also brings up the following: is 710 the only route in California with multiple spurs/prongs at one end?
710 doesn't have multiple spurs. Read the description carefully.
Correct, but again the signage is confusing. Heading southbound, I-710 goes only one way: to Terminal Island. Northbound, whenever you start on any of those "spurs," you are shown to be on I-710, almost as if it's the mainline. In reality, those "spurs" are maintained by city of Long Beach as city streets, even though they are freeways and are not truly part of I-710. Most of the city's signage predates when I-710 was extended legislatively to Terminal Island.
Regards,
Andy
Quote from: SSOWorld on November 16, 2013, 07:06:31 AM
The freeway's complete, but you still have that 126 toll road that ends short of it.
And the unconstructed (HA!) segment of the 905 west of I-5.
Quote from: emory on November 18, 2013, 02:50:31 PM
And the unconstructed (HA!) segment of the 905 west of I-5.
Granted, just like unbuilt 380 west of 280, it was never planned to be submitted to the Interstate system (in contrast to both routes' constructed sections).
On the subject of logs, could someone explain the 880 description?
Quote625. (a) Route 880 is from Route 280 in San Jose to Route 80 in
Oakland.
(b) (1) The commission may relinquish to the City of Oakland the
portion of the former right-of-way of Route 880 that is located
between 8th Street and 32nd Street within that city, upon terms and
conditions the commission finds to be in the best interests of the
state, including, but not limited to, a requirement that the
department and the city enter into a cooperative agreement to
improve, at the department's expense, the two parallel adjacent city
streets, including, but not limited to, sidewalks, landscaping, and
street lighting, when improving the portion of right-of-way that is
to be relinquished in accordance with plans to be developed by the
department. The cooperative agreement shall include, but need not to
be limited to, all of the following:
(A) A requirement that, if the commission allocates funds for this
purpose, the improvements include bicycle paths and the associated
roadway improvements and landscaping, including a bicycle path that
closes the gap in the San Francisco Bay Trail Plan.
(B) A requirement that the improvements include removal of
contaminated materials on the department's property.
(C) A requirement that the improvements include erection of a
memorial to the victims of the collapse of the Cypress Freeway
Viaduct and to the heroism of those who responded to that disaster.
(2) A relinquishment under this subdivision shall become effective
immediately following the commission's approval of the terms and
conditions of the relinquishment.
Where is this former right-of-way they're talking about?
Quote from: emory on November 18, 2013, 03:00:54 PM
Where is this former right-of-way they're talking about?
Most likely that is a reference to Mandela Parkway in West Oakland (former Cypress Street, which is former Route 17/Business US 50) which once had the old Cypress Freeway viaduct in its median until the 1989 earthquake.
Here's a photo of the area today, with present 880 in the background, and Mandela Parkway and its wide median (where the Cypress Freeway once existed) towards the fore:
http://urbanhabitat.org/files/images/aeriel%20view%20westoakland_aa10775.preview.jpg
A map of the area in question:
http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/environmental_justice/case_studies/freeway.jpg
Quote from: TheStranger on November 18, 2013, 03:06:33 PM
Quote from: emory on November 18, 2013, 03:00:54 PM
Where is this former right-of-way they're talking about?
Most likely that is a reference to Mandela Parkway in West Oakland (former Cypress Street, which is former Route 17/Business US 50) which once had the old Cypress Freeway viaduct in its median until the 1989 earthquake.
Here's a photo of the area today, with present 880 in the background, and Mandela Parkway and its wide median (where the Cypress Freeway once existed) towards the fore:
http://urbanhabitat.org/files/images/aeriel%20view%20westoakland_aa10775.preview.jpg
A map of the area in question:
http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/environmental_justice/case_studies/freeway.jpg
I'm rather surprised that Caltrans hasn't turned over the old Cypress Viaduct alignment to the city of Oakland. October 17, 2014 will mark the 25th anniversary of the Loma Prieta Earthquake.
Quote from: myosh_tino on November 18, 2013, 03:38:12 PM
I'm rather surprised that Caltrans hasn't turned over the old Cypress Viaduct alignment to the city of Oakland. October 17, 2014 will mark the 25th anniversary of the Loma Prieta Earthquake.
CAHighways notes it occurred back in 2000:
QuoteIn 2000, the portion of the former right-of-way of Route 880 that is located between 8th Street and 32nd Street within the City of Oakland was relinquished to the City of Oakland, providing that certain improvements were made, such as including bicycle paths and the associated roadway improvements and landscaping (including a bicycle path that closes the gap in the San Francisco Bay Trail Plan)
Could be another case, like 710 south of Route 1, where a condition for either adoption or relinquishment has been achieved, but the route definition has yet to be updated.
An interesting set of photos I took this weekend: while for years I've known that the mainline of southbound 110 between US 101 at the Four-Level and I-10 has been signed as Interstate 110, the local-access lanes have always been a bit more mixed between I-110 and state Route 110 signage (compare http://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/12063306855/ to http://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/12063311165/ and http://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/12064202266/ ).
But approaching Staples Center and I-10, things really get funky on the local-access section:
Sign #1: I-110 http://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/12064206266/
Sign #2: Route 110 http://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/12064207826/
Sign #3: Route 110 http://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/12063621413/ (note that the Adams Boulevard exit listed here occurs south of I-10)
Signs #4 and #5: I-110 http://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/12064211016/ and http://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/12064212256/
At the Four-Level, all signage from 101 identifies the Harbor Freeway southbound entirely as I-110 Freeway and the Arroyo Seco Parkway (Pasadena Freeway) as Route 110 Parkway, i.e. http://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/12064185326/ and http://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/12063601893/ and http://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/12063607283/
This actually does make a difference, as a counter to this post much earlier in the thread:
Quote from: CASIGNSDoes it really matter to most drivers, after all, it is just "the 110" CA or Interstate not really important.
Seems to me the idea of the de facto signage shift from state route to Interstate at 101 is to mark that I-110/Harbor Freeway is accessible to trucks, but NOT Route 110/Arroyo Seco Parkway. Of course, this would work much better if the northbound Harbor Freeway was more consistently signed as part of the interstate, and if the local lanes on the southbound segment had matching Interstate-only signage similar to the southbound through lanes.
---
There is also one new Interstate 110 sign pointing to the northbound Harbor Freeway in downtown, which I didn't catch back in November:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/12027515353/
Here's another one. Hard to see, but the best view I can get from GSV. Out in Barstow on I-15 Business heading towards I-15, there's a sign directing motorists to CA 15.
https://www.google.com/maps/preview#!q=394+L+St&data=!1m8!1m3!1d3!2d-117.056418!3d34.888337!2m2!1f213.4!2f86.25!4f75!2m9!1e1!2m4!1si-XWeEgNBhwE1tp2E6hMNQ!2e0!9m1!6sL+Street!5m2!1si-XWeEgNBhwE1tp2E6hMNQ!2e0!4m15!2m14!1m13!1s0x80c47c0abb2ca12b%3A0x2cca0f93401a24c5!3m8!1m3!1d3!2d-117.056418!3d34.888337!3m2!1i1600!2i1075!4f75!4m2!3d34.8897524!4d-117.0568139&fid=5
Quote from: emory on January 21, 2014, 05:56:15 PM
Here's another one. Hard to see, but the best view I can get from GSV. Out in Barstow on I-15 Business heading towards I-15, there's a sign directing motorists to CA 15.
https://www.google.com/maps/preview#!q=394+L+St&data=!1m8!1m3!1d3!2d-117.056418!3d34.888337!2m2!1f213.4!2f86.25!4f75!2m9!1e1!2m4!1si-XWeEgNBhwE1tp2E6hMNQ!2e0!9m1!6sL+Street!5m2!1si-XWeEgNBhwE1tp2E6hMNQ!2e0!4m15!2m14!1m13!1s0x80c47c0abb2ca12b%3A0x2cca0f93401a24c5!3m8!1m3!1d3!2d-117.056418!3d34.888337!3m2!1i1600!2i1075!4f75!4m2!3d34.8897524!4d-117.0568139&fid=5
Perfect corollary to this, at 32nd Street and Norman Scott Road in San Diego along the south terminus of what is currently Route 15 but is slated to become I-15:
https://www.google.com/maps/preview#!data=!1m8!1m3!1d3!2d-117.125328!3d32.687348!2m2!1f353.52!2f100.22!4f75!2m9!1e1!2m4!1svrQqC09QDyAcQTQDuFMYHw!2e0!9m1!6sSouth+32nd+Street!5m2!1svrQqC09QDyAcQTQDuFMYHw!2e0&fid=5
Two I-15 shields! Seems to have been up for quite some time - I remember seeing the larger one as far back as 1998 when I traveled down the San Diego Trolley line to San Ysidro - even though 15 was only completed as a full freeway between I-8 and I-5 a few years ago.
Quote from: TheStranger on January 21, 2014, 04:38:41 PM
An interesting set of photos I took this weekend: while for years I've known that the mainline of southbound 110 between US 101 at the Four-Level and I-10 has been signed as Interstate 110, the local-access lanes have always been a bit more mixed between I-110 and state Route 110 signage (compare http://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/12063306855/ to http://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/12063311165/ and http://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/12064202266/ ).
But approaching Staples Center and I-10, things really get funky on the local-access section:
Sign #1: I-110 http://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/12064206266/
Sign #2: Route 110 http://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/12064207826/
Sign #3: Route 110 http://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/12063621413/ (note that the Adams Boulevard exit listed here occurs south of I-10)
Signs #4 and #5: I-110 http://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/12064211016/ and http://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/12064212256/
At the Four-Level, all signage from 101 identifies the Harbor Freeway southbound entirely as I-110 Freeway and the Arroyo Seco Parkway (Pasadena Freeway) as Route 110 Parkway, i.e. http://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/12064185326/ and http://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/12063601893/ and http://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/12063607283/
This actually does make a difference, as a counter to this post much earlier in the thread:
Quote from: CASIGNSDoes it really matter to most drivers, after all, it is just "the 110" CA or Interstate not really important.
Seems to me the idea of the de facto signage shift from state route to Interstate at 101 is to mark that I-110/Harbor Freeway is accessible to trucks, but NOT Route 110/Arroyo Seco Parkway. Of course, this would work much better if the northbound Harbor Freeway was more consistently signed as part of the interstate, and if the local lanes on the southbound segment had matching Interstate-only signage similar to the southbound through lanes.
---
There is also one new Interstate 110 sign pointing to the northbound Harbor Freeway in downtown, which I didn't catch back in November:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/12027515353/
You are right. There is a need for consistent signing along this stretch. Once Caltrans decided to sign I-110 from US 101 south, they needed to do that consistently.
One other issue with some of the signs that you took pictures. Where are the control cities?
Quote from: mrsman on January 26, 2014, 08:42:24 AM
You are right. There is a need for consistent signing along this stretch. Once Caltrans decided to sign I-110 from US 101 south, they needed to do that consistently.
And it seems the original pullthrough southbound-as-Interstate 110 signage is 2-3 decades old - certainly enough time to be cohesive for that northern stretch of the Harbor Freeway.
Quote from: mrsman on January 26, 2014, 08:42:24 AM
One other issue with some of the signs that you took pictures. Where are the control cities?
Good question. There's been a transition in recent years as far as the southbound 101 segment of the Santa Ana Freeway is concerned (as acknowledged by sdmichael in another thread) - from the "I-10 San Bernardino/I-5 Santa Ana" signage with no 101 acknolwedgement, to the much more accurate "101 to 10 East/5 South/60 East" signs that exist now. As for 110? The older pullthroughs southbound have the San Pedro appellations; some other signs on that stretch just mention the freeway name (Harbor Freeway).
Quote from: mrsman on January 26, 2014, 08:42:24 AM
You are right. There is a need for consistent signing along this stretch. Once Caltrans decided to sign I-110 from US 101 south, they needed to do that consistently.
That would be nice, but what's good about CalTrans is how they define every route as "Route X" regardless of its shield type. The 210 freeway is the same freeway from CA 210 in San Bernardino to I-210 in Pasadena, so no one's going to be confused. Even the example I cited in Barstow, my immediate assumption was CA 15 = I-15. There's even signs in the northern cities of the San Bernardino valley directing motorists onto "Route 5."
Quote from: emory on January 28, 2014, 07:00:07 PM
That would be nice, but what's good about CalTrans is how they define every route as "Route X" regardless of its shield type. The 210 freeway is the same freeway from CA 210 in San Bernardino to I-210 in Pasadena, so no one's going to be confused. Even the example I cited in Barstow, my immediate assumption was CA 15 = I-15.
In the specific case of 110, I almost feel like the distinction is a little more important - in trying to associate I-110 with "Harbor Freeway" and consequently state route 110 as a no-trucks-allowed Parkway.
Here's one example of a sign that was replaced recently with similar legend to the existing older installation, yet now shows the Interstate/state route separation -
http://www.gbcnet.com/ushighways/us_pix/hollywood_sign.jpg - 1960s as US 6 Harbor Freeway/US 66 Pasadena Freeway
http://www.gbcnet.com/ushighways/us_pix/hollywood_sign_1997.jpg 1997 as Route 110 for both Harbor Freeway & Pasadena Freeway
http://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/12064185326/ approximately 2008-present as I-110 Fwy/Route 110 Pkwy
Never thought that my burgeoning interest in Korean pop music would relate to roadgeeking, but a DETOUR NORTH I-110 sign in downtown Los Angeles at 8th and Broadway is prominently featured at times in the video for 2NE1's "Happy" -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=didptMJxjpE
(2:27, 2:37, 3:26)
Google Street View shows the sign, located right in front of the former Rialto Theater, here:
http://goo.gl/maps/aEQO8
Quote from: TheStranger on January 21, 2014, 04:38:41 PM
An interesting set of photos I took this weekend: while for years I've known that the mainline of southbound 110 between US 101 at the Four-Level and I-10 has been signed as Interstate 110, the local-access lanes have always been a bit more mixed between I-110 and state Route 110 signage (compare http://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/12063306855/ to http://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/12063311165/ and http://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/12064202266/ ).
But approaching Staples Center and I-10, things really get funky on the local-access section:
Sign #1: I-110 http://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/12064206266/
Sign #2: Route 110 http://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/12064207826/
Sign #3: Route 110 http://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/12063621413/ (note that the Adams Boulevard exit listed here occurs south of I-10)
Signs #4 and #5: I-110 http://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/12064211016/ and http://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/12064212256/
At the Four-Level, all signage from 101 identifies the Harbor Freeway southbound entirely as I-110 Freeway and the Arroyo Seco Parkway (Pasadena Freeway) as Route 110 Parkway, i.e. http://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/12064185326/ and http://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/12063601893/ and http://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/12063607283/
Here are some more pictures of the same area mentioned by TheStranger
Regarding the lack of control cities. All 4 images show a clear gap where the control city names should go (the original sings had them of course); Santa Monica for I-10 West and San Bernardino for I-10 East. District 7 made a decision to remove control cities from the overhead guide signs but they did not bother to redesign these particular signs, they just put up the new ones without them. However, even this policy decision was not carried out consistently as you can see San Pedro is shown on the first image. Thankfully, to my understanding, they have since changed their mind on this policy. I will try to contact them to see if they are willing to put up the city names as overlays.
Please correct me if I am wrong, but I think this thread has noted that traditionally, the name change (Harbor Freeway/Arroyo Seco Parkway) occurs at the Four Level Interchange (101/110) while the route designation (CA 110/I-110) occurs at the Santa Monica Freeway (I-10) interchange. Inconsistent old and new signage has made it difficult to determine if this is the case.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fstpeterandstpaul.org%2Fimages%2Fimg_8885.jpg&hash=69f009b89fd6451271b8ecb901f72df2423738b9)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fstpeterandstpaul.org%2Fimages%2Fimg_8886.jpg&hash=732f48d17bcba2b53ba7f37ed0307af9e4b51dc0)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fstpeterandstpaul.org%2Fimages%2Fimg_8887.jpg&hash=1ac2909c3fe6a15419d0208038d0d24bd04341ca)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fstpeterandstpaul.org%2Fimages%2F110_s_transition.jpg&hash=e8179a4220b56d8ca44704443b74dade90141bce)
Quote from: AndyMax25 on May 28, 2015, 12:15:00 AM
Please correct me if I am wrong, but I think this thread has noted that traditionally, the name change (Harbor Freeway/Arroyo Seco Parkway) occurs at the Four Level Interchange (101/110) while the route designation (CA 110/I-110) occurs at the Santa Monica Freeway (I-10) interchange. Inconsistent old and new signage has made it difficult to determine if this is the case.
On a historic basis, both the name and designation changes have occurred at the Four-Level (with US 66 transitioning from the Hollywood Freeway to the Arroyo Seco Parkway there, and US 99 switching over from the Arroyo Seco Parkway to the Santa Ana Freeway briefly) with Route 11 and US 6 continuing on from either side of the stack. (Was the truck restriction on the parkway in existence when the Four-Level opened?)
Based on the photos I've posted (and that you and others have), I think the signage goes something like this:
Southbound: I-110 signs begin at the Four-Level interchange, Route 110 signs continue sporadically until the Santa Monica Freeway
Northbound: The last I-110 trailblazer northbound is right before the 9th street exit; the first Route 110 pullthroughs occur past Adams: https://www.google.com/maps/@34.029338,-118.274281,3a,22.9y,358.42h,92.71t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sMLtcdBmrCtpMnCbDQ8XQ3w!2e0!6m1!1e1
Here's a good example of where BOTH designations are used on an onramp sign on a section that is clearly I-110, at 37th and Hope:
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.01706,-118.28006,3a,22.2y,70.08h,82.45t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sOe-yEOVGC7hUu1gNwclChQ!2e0!6m1!1e1
Quote from: CASIGNS on August 09, 2013, 11:52:14 PM
I think Caltrans incorrectly signed the route just to watch the heads of sign geeks explode! Does it really matter to most drivers, after all, it is just "the 110" CA or Interstate not really important.
I remember reading once that one of the reasons for Interstate 238 was the "brand name recognition" it brings. A lot of motorists recognize the interstate shield and thus understand that it's an "important highway" that will get them to where they want to go. Perhaps, then, that logic can be applied to the frequent misapplication of I-110 shields in places where it's really supposed to be CA-110 shields. The idea that motorists feel more comfortable on an interstate than a state highway. Who knows.
Quote from: Quillz on May 28, 2015, 12:49:35 PM
Perhaps, then, that logic can be applied to the frequent misapplication of I-110 shields in places where it's really supposed to be CA-110 shields. The idea that motorists feel more comfortable on an interstate than a state highway. Who knows.
I think more simply that the Interstate shield being used on all the Harbor Freeway serves an important purpose: reemphasizing that trucks are indeed allowed on that portion of 110 (as opposed to the state route). And while there is that no-trucks portion of the MacArthur Freeway/580, for the most part the correlation is pretty standard.
Interesting to note that there's a CA 110 sign at the gore point at the I-10 west ramp, considering all the other previous overhead signs have an interstate shield on them.
Quote from: JustDrive on May 28, 2015, 07:34:36 PM
Interesting to note that there's a CA 110 sign at the gore point at the I-10 west ramp, considering all the other previous overhead signs have an interstate shield on them.
Southbound past the Four-Level, I've noticed that the local lanes generally have Route 110 shields on the overhead signage, while the through lanes have signs for the Interstate designation. That might explain why things get a little bit muddied at I-10 .
Quote from: TheStranger on May 28, 2015, 01:53:40 PM
Quote from: Quillz on May 28, 2015, 12:49:35 PM
Perhaps, then, that logic can be applied to the frequent misapplication of I-110 shields in places where it's really supposed to be CA-110 shields. The idea that motorists feel more comfortable on an interstate than a state highway. Who knows.
I think more simply that the Interstate shield being used on all the Harbor Freeway serves an important purpose: reemphasizing that trucks are indeed allowed on that portion of 110 (as opposed to the state route). And while there is that no-trucks portion of the MacArthur Freeway/580, for the most part the correlation is pretty standard.
I agree. Technically,I-110/CA-110 break is at the 10 freeway. But it would be much easier for everyone involved if the freeway were signed consistenly as I-110 every point south of the 101, because the entire Harbor Freeway would be designation separate from the Arroyo Seco (where there is a truck restriction).
The trick is getting all the signs changed along the freeways (including I-10 and US 101) and on the surface streets downtown.
Thank god CA is very good about not duplicating highway numbers. Imagine if there were another 110 along a different corridor in a way that some other states do (example: I-68 and MD-68 being two completely separate highways).
Quote from: mrsman on May 31, 2015, 08:46:12 AM
I agree. Technically,I-110/CA-110 break is at the 10 freeway. But it would be much easier for everyone involved if the freeway were signed consistenly as I-110 every point south of the 101, because the entire Harbor Freeway would be designation separate from the Arroyo Seco (where there is a truck restriction).
The trick is getting all the signs changed along the freeways (including I-10 and US 101) and on the surface streets downtown.
Summed up my feelings perfectly! Really, what would need to be changed are some overheads on downtown streets (approaching Figueroa) and the pull-throughs northbound for maybe one or two more miles (as the state route shield should start appearing northbound the closer you get to the Four-Level).
And given there's a newer State Route 110 sign (installed by the Port of Los Angeles) near an onramp in San Pedro, the confusion isn't limited to downtown.
Why would there be a CA 110 sign on any onramp of the Harbor south of I-10? I'm perfectly fine with CA 110 bookending I-110, but the southern CA 110 doesn't apply to a freeway facility, just the at grade south of it.
Quote from: Bickendan on June 01, 2015, 12:08:27 PM
Why would there be a CA 110 sign on any onramp of the Harbor south of I-10? I'm perfectly fine with CA 110 bookending I-110, but the southern CA 110 doesn't apply to a freeway facility, just the at grade south of it.
That's EXACTLY what I wonder too. Might be a mixup from when the state route continued down Gaffey Street but the sign is newer than that!
(And of course, a few posts up is this state Route 110 sign near Exposition: https://www.google.com/maps/@34.01706,-118.28006,3a,22.2y,70.08h,82.45t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sOe-yEOVGC7hUu1gNwclChQ!2e0!6m1!1e1 )
Quote from: TheStranger on June 01, 2015, 11:59:21 AM
Quote from: mrsman on May 31, 2015, 08:46:12 AM
I agree. Technically,I-110/CA-110 break is at the 10 freeway. But it would be much easier for everyone involved if the freeway were signed consistenly as I-110 every point south of the 101, because the entire Harbor Freeway would be designation separate from the Arroyo Seco (where there is a truck restriction).
The trick is getting all the signs changed along the freeways (including I-10 and US 101) and on the surface streets downtown.
Summed up my feelings perfectly! Really, what would need to be changed are some overheads on downtown streets (approaching Figueroa) and the pull-throughs northbound for maybe one or two more miles (as the state route shield should start appearing northbound the closer you get to the Four-Level).
And given there's a newer State Route 110 sign (installed by the Port of Los Angeles) near an onramp in San Pedro, the confusion isn't limited to downtown.
To be very specific, I would say that on southbound 110, all pull-through signs should be CA-110 until you reach the exit for the 101 at the Four Level Interchange. Then, all pull-throughs should be I-110. All signage from surface street on-ramps north of US 101 should be CA-110 and south of US 101 should be I-110. The exits from US 101 to the southbound 110 should be I-110 exclusively.
For northbound 110, all pull-through signage should be I-110 until you reach the Downtown exits (9th Street exit). Then, the signage should read CA-110. All signage from surface street on-ramps north of and including 8th Street should be CA-110 and south of that point, including 11th Street should be I-110. Basically, the approach is that if you are on the freeway south of the Downtown exits, you are definitely on the Harbor Freeway, but if you enter it in downtown, you are technically on the Harbor Freeway,but for all intents and purposes there are no Harbor Freeway exits that you come across, just transition ramps to the Pasadena, Hollywood, or Santa Ana Freeways.
Quote from: mrsman on June 02, 2015, 12:06:02 AM
To be very specific, I would say that on southbound 110, all pull-through signs should be CA-110 until you reach the exit for the 101 at the Four Level Interchange. Then, all pull-throughs should be I-110. All signage from surface street on-ramps north of US 101 should be CA-110 and south of US 101 should be I-110. The exits from US 101 to the southbound 110 should be I-110 exclusively.
Overall I think the pullthrough suggestions you have here are in place (but not yet the onramp signage) -
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Arroyo+Seco+Pkwy,+Los+Angeles,+CA/@34.064894,-118.24532,3a,75y,242.89h,90t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s4N_tVOdXTWhGXZkuPjtXKA!2e0!4m2!3m1!1s0x80c2c4236edb172d:0xd57acf743cab8ddd!6m1!1e1 Route 110 southbound signage along the Arroyo Seco (Pasadena) segment right before the Four-Level
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.063302,-118.248154,3a,75y,255.38h,77.47t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1se0j-MrFgXMvpGjyHTPp2HQ!2e0!6m1!1e1 looks to be the final Route 110 trailblazer before crossing under US 101
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.060742,-118.251031,3a,75y,237.16h,94.23t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1spv6IGR4sqZKoegS8_gDyLg!2e0!6m1!1e1 the very first I-110 pullthrough, just south of the Four-Level
Quote from: mrsman on June 02, 2015, 12:06:02 AM
For northbound 110, all pull-through signage should be I-110 until you reach the Downtown exits (9th Street exit). Then, the signage should read CA-110. All signage from surface street on-ramps north of and including 8th Street should be CA-110 and south of that point, including 11th Street should be I-110. Basically, the approach is that if you are on the freeway south of the Downtown exits, you are definitely on the Harbor Freeway, but if you enter it in downtown, you are technically on the Harbor Freeway,but for all intents and purposes there are no Harbor Freeway exits that you come across, just transition ramps to the Pasadena, Hollywood, or Santa Ana Freeways.
There's one trailblazer for I-110 northbound right before the 9th Street exit, which I think is indeed the furthest north it is currently signed in that direction:
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.04391,-118.271994,3a,18.8y,95.13h,84.07t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1svb5RKvkpvrRh0gH62xkffg!2e0!6m1!1e1
Here's a "To I-110 Freeway" sign on Pico near the convention center (which is north of I-10) -
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.042735,-118.272676,3a,23.1y,150.94h,91.23t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sj_x3YLyRcKhgp7ra0FBFGw!2e0!6m1!1e1
Yes, a lot of what I suggested is in place. But we need to be sure that all signage is consistent: Pullthrough signs, trailblazers on the freeway, little white signs at bridges and underpasses, freeway entrance signs, BGS style signs from surface streets, signs put in place by LADOT, etc.
In short, we don't want to see this:
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.04584,-118.271077,3a,75y,102.49h,67.71t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sMgVXcuxfdRGPNrsEU9GmMA!2e0
But this is OK:
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.046279,-118.270774,3a,75y,212.78h,76.22t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sn5jqFmPX-qm9mK2L3ck1gA!2e0
Another way to think of it is in relation to control cities. If you sign 110 southbound with a control of Downtown LA or LA, CA-110. But if you sign it with a control of San Pedro, I-110. If you sign 110 northbound with a control of Downtown LA or LA I-110, but if you sign it with Pasadena CA-110.
If you are north of the 101, CA-110. If you are south of the 10, I-110. But if you are between both freeways, I-110 south and CA-110 north.
Not to steer this thread too far off topic, but does anyone know why they sign Gaffey Street at the southern end of the 110 with an Interstate shield?
Quote from: Occidental Tourist on June 04, 2015, 08:32:31 PM
Not to steer this thread too far off topic, but does anyone know why they sign Gaffey Street at the southern end of the 110 with an Interstate shield?
It may simply be that Gaffey Street is the control destination of I-110 (now that state route 110 no longer exists south of the end of the freeway).
At this point then, CA 110_South (Gaffey St) no longer exists, leaving just CA 110_North (Arroyo Seco Parkway)?
Quote from: TheStranger on June 05, 2015, 12:00:32 PM
Quote from: Occidental Tourist on June 04, 2015, 08:32:31 PM
Not to steer this thread too far off topic, but does anyone know why they sign Gaffey Street at the southern end of the 110 with an Interstate shield?
It may simply be that Gaffey Street is the control destination of I-110 (now that state route 110 no longer exists south of the end of the freeway).
The signs in question say I-110/Gaffey Street/San Pedro, so I think Gaffey is being used as the roadway name that takes you to the control destination of San Pedro, rather than the control itself.
All the I-110 shields on the BGS's are covering up CA-11 shields, so I think it was more likely just an error during the number change - the instructions were probably "all the CA-11 shields south of I-10 get replaced with I-110 shields" without regard to the short stretch of CA-11/110 on Gaffey Street itself.
The newer signs are just copies of the signs they replaced - without regard to correcting/updating any errors.
That said, how well was 110 ever signed on Gaffey itself, whether CA or I shields?
Quote from: Bickendan on June 05, 2015, 01:05:03 PM
At this point then, CA 110_South (Gaffey St) no longer exists, leaving just CA 110_North (Arroyo Seco Parkway)?
As of 2009, 110 starts at CA-47, so Gaffey is completely off the state system.
Quote from: DTComposer on June 05, 2015, 01:09:24 PM
Quote from: TheStranger on June 05, 2015, 12:00:32 PM
Quote from: Occidental Tourist on June 04, 2015, 08:32:31 PM
Not to steer this thread too far off topic, but does anyone know why they sign Gaffey Street at the southern end of the 110 with an Interstate shield?
It may simply be that Gaffey Street is the control destination of I-110 (now that state route 110 no longer exists south of the end of the freeway).
The signs in question say I-110/Gaffey Street/San Pedro, so I think Gaffey is being used as the roadway name that takes you to the control destination of San Pedro, rather than the control itself.
Some precedent for this (albeit accidental) - the 1980s-era pullthrough for 280 north in San Francisco northeast of US 101 lists "Sixth Street" as the control city, even though 6th is not officially part of any numbered route (despite the fact it provides part of the link to I-80 that the unbuilt freeway section was supposed to have supplanted).
These are the specific signs I'm thinking of:
(https://www.aaroads.com/california/images110/i-110_sb_exit_000_01.jpg)
(https://www.aaroads.com/california/images110/i-110_sb_exit_000_02.jpg)
Edit: The original links got pulled down, so I'll use Andy's helpful links below
I have some alternate/slightly better pictures of the south end from 2004 at this link: https://www.aaroads.com/california/i-110sb_ca.html. March 2015 imagery from Google (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.748987,-118.291003,3a,75y,182.73h,86.39t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1si2SP0s9QLUfAn1DrgpYX4g!2e0!6m1!1e1) indicates the signs have not changed since then.
For what it's worth the I-110 and CA 110 signage was correct on the Harbor Freeway when I drove it yesterday. The first CA 110 signs don't appear until the final approach to I-10 northbound on I-110:
https://www.flickr.com/gp/151828809@N08/443k4F
Sorry for the old thread revival, I did use to notice the inconsistency on southbound CA 110 when I worked in the area circa 2010-13.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 03, 2022, 04:31:07 PM
For what it's worth the I-110 and CA 110 signage was correct on the Harbor Freeway when I drove it yesterday. The first CA 110 signs don't appear until the final approach to I-10 northbound on I-110:
https://www.flickr.com/gp/151828809@N08/443k4F
Sorry for the old thread revival, I did use to notice the inconsistency on southbound CA 110 when I worked in the area circa 2010-13.
Are you saying the new reflective signs corrected the issues of the old button copy? I'm surprised at the competence!
Quote from: Alps on January 04, 2022, 11:08:13 AM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 03, 2022, 04:31:07 PM
For what it's worth the I-110 and CA 110 signage was correct on the Harbor Freeway when I drove it yesterday. The first CA 110 signs don't appear until the final approach to I-10 northbound on I-110:
https://www.flickr.com/gp/151828809@N08/443k4F
Sorry for the old thread revival, I did use to notice the inconsistency on southbound CA 110 when I worked in the area circa 2010-13.
Are you saying the new reflective signs corrected the issues of the old button copy? I'm surprised at the competence!
The Arroyo Seco, yes it did. It's now crystal clear from the Four Level Interchange how to get to the Golden State Freeway segment of northbound I-5.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 03, 2022, 04:31:07 PM
For what it's worth the I-110 and CA 110 signage was correct on the Harbor Freeway when I drove it yesterday. The first CA 110 signs don't appear until the final approach to I-10 northbound on I-110:
https://www.flickr.com/gp/151828809@N08/443k4F
Sorry for the old thread revival, I did use to notice the inconsistency on southbound CA 110 when I worked in the area circa 2010-13.
The change of signage in Wilmington to use Harry Bridges Blvd. instead of C Street is kinda (homophonically) amusing on the signs where they didn't have enough room, so it says "Harry Bridges 1¼ miles."
Don't think it's there anymore, but eight and a half years ago my friend and I got this photo of an Interstate 110 shield on northbound Harbor Freeway in downtown LA, a mile or so past I-10.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/2850/10795006074_789a9ae739_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/hrVedo)DSC_4269 (https://flic.kr/p/hrVedo) by Chris Sampang (https://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/), on Flickr
North I-110 detour sign in downtown LA (on surface streets), February 2014
(https://live.staticflickr.com/2830/12027515353_57f11fbb0a_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/jjQahn)DSC_5829 (https://flic.kr/p/jjQahn) by Chris Sampang (https://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/), on Flickr
We will continue to see some levels of inconsistencies with regard to this issue for the forseeable future. Officially, it is I-110 south of I-10 and CA-110 north of I-10 and truck restricted north of US 101 and truck permitted south of US 101, and the freeway is known as the Arroyo Seco north of US 101 and the Harbor Freeway south of US 101. Since so many people associate the truck permitted Harbor Freeway as I-110, you will continue to see signs referring to the Harbor between US 101 and I-10 as (incorrectly) I-110 because that is the common association.
This is especially true for southbound 110. Southbound CA-110 in the Downtown area does eventually lead to I-110.
It is really not a big problem because CA does not repeat highway numbers. The whole thing is part of "the 110."