Count for 710 freeway gap study starts

[cpzilliacus]

La Cañada Valley Sun: Count for 710 freeway gap study starts - Data collection is part of plan for environmental impact report for the 710.

With traffic roaring in their ears and diesel fumes mixing with the warm spring air, four people settled into canvas chairs on the Gould Avenue overpass above the Foothill (210) Freeway this week, their gaze focused unwaveringly on the roadway below.

The four were collecting data for a Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transit Authority study of local traffic patterns. The data will go into the environmental impact report for the 710 gap.

[bulkyorled]

I believe I saw the people standing up there that day. Didn't think anything of it though. I honestly hope they do it. If not they need to unsign the 710 over there. I feel it looks stupid when there isn't anything of the 710 over there really. Unless I've missed it I've seen 2 carpool lane signs that say 710/210 and then the over and under crossing signs say 710 too. The bit that's suppose to be the 710 is just a massive ditch and the exits for Fair Oaks, California Bl and Del Mar.
I always found it a bit hard to explore that particular spot what with one way streets and such
Post Merge: May 20, 2012, 08:19:00 PM
That's on the Pasadena end naturally

[blawp]

They should sign Fremont Ave as Temp. 710.

[kendancy66]

They should sign Fremont Ave as Temp. 710.

It would especially help if they signed the North direction left turn from Fremont to Columbia St and then right turn to Pasadena Ave, and the South direction left turn from Pasadena Ave to Columbia St and then right turn on Fremont.  They only have signage on the south direction on Pasadena Ave to turn right to get to CA-110   

[Interstate Trav]

They should sign Fremont Ave as Temp. 710.

Wouldn't South Pasadena get upset at this?  As they won't let the 710 get built.

[kendancy66]

They should sign Fremont Ave as Temp. 710.

Wouldn't South Pasadena get upset at this?  As they won't let the 710 get built.

Who cares if they get upset.  Route signage is for the general public benefit.  Would they rather have motorist getting lost.

[blawp]

I was driving on the Northbound 5 yesterday from Orange County. I was going to Pasadena, and wondered what would happen if I actually followed the Pasadena control city for the NB 710 exit, so I took off on NB 710. There was a BGS reassurance for 710 Pasadena after I got on the freeway, and then I saw a BGS that said "Pasadena, Second Exit," i.e., Westbound 10. I couldn't believe that they gave Pasadena as a control city for Westbound 10! It's just gonna lead you back to the NB 5, where you started from!
Post Merge: May 20, 2012, 10:29:12 PM
Actually, now that I look at the GSV, they sign eastbound 10 for Pasadena. I wonder where one would go from there. 605?

[kendancy66]

Actually, now that I look at the GSV, they sign eastbound 10 for Pasadena. I wonder where one would go from there. 605?

They are definetly messin' with your mind there.

Let's look at the alternatives.

Closest interstate in that direction is I-605.  But that really dumps you too far east of Pasadena in Arcadia.  You can backtrack to I-210 to get back to Pasadena however, but a very inefficient routing.

Closest state route is 19.  A little closer to Pasadena,  but still pretty far east of downtown.

Atlantic Blvd, even closer, but is confusing because street changes names to Los Robles, and has no numeric routing signage.

I think this is a much easier routing from there:

I-10 West to I-5 North to CA-110 North.  This is the closest all "Freeway" connection (if you can call Arroyo Seco Parkway, aka Pasdena Freeway, a freeway) one can make from there to downtown Pasadena

or

Valley Blvd to Fremont blah blah blah (Going this way makes the NIMBYS upset)

[andy3175]

Blawp .... please note that the picture you referenced is not GSV; it's from AARoads. Here's the relevant links:

https://www.aaroads.com/california/i-710nc_ca.html

https://www.aaroads.com/california/images710/i-710_nb_exit_022_02.jpg

Please credit properly.

Thanks,
Andy

[blawp]

Say you're an idiot, unassuming motorist. You follow the control cities signs blindly...I wonder if Pasadena has any control city signage on the Eastbound 10 coming from the 710....

[bulkyorled]

This sign must have had an error made on it or it's a 30 year old sign, because this still has CA 7 on it haha. Its in East LA. Im pretty sure it was changed in the early 80s from 7 to 710 yes? Either way its been wrong for nearly 30 years  

Its kinda hard to tell, its a CA Route Spade with a 7, at the onramp for 710 North at Ford Bl/Floral Dr.
It's still there but the sign was burnt out. Just thought I'd mention it while on the topic of the 710.

You would think the county would have done something about it cause no doubt the county put that sign up since East LA is unincorporated its not common that they do their own signage like that. Or at least not to my knowledge. But then again more than half their illuminated signs are burnt out or have been replaced now with reflective ones

[kendancy66]

Say you're an idiot, unassuming motorist. You follow the control cities signs blindly...I wonder if Pasadena has any control city signage on the Eastbound 10 coming from the 710....

I looked on Google Street View.  I didn't see anything at Fremont, or Atlantic exits on I-10 East.  I also noticed that the signage is a lot newer than the sign in question at I-710 I-10 exit.  I wonder if older signage of that same vintage would have indicated Pasadena though.  I also looked for next ? exits signage, and only saw Alhambra and Monterey Park, next 4 exits.

[blawp]

Yeah. I looked too and saw nothing except for a sign at the end of the Fremont Ave off ramp for South Pasadena (which is obviously different).

[DTComposer]

The signage to Pasadena, such as it is, is at Rosemead Blvd. (CA-19):

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=san+gabriel,+ca&ll=34.071994,-118.081945&spn=0.000424,0.000561&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-a&hnear=San+Gabriel,+Los+Angeles,+California&gl=us&t=k&deg=90&z=21&layer=c&cbll=34.071994,-118.081945&panoid=dB7ZYVDyKW8p7xSsLYla3A&cbp=12,116.49,,0,7.52

[Alex]

This sign must have had an error made on it or it's a 30 year old sign, because this still has CA 7 on it haha. Its in East LA. Im pretty sure it was changed in the early 80s from 7 to 710 yes? Either way its been wrong for nearly 30 years  

Its kinda hard to tell, its a CA Route Spade with a 7, at the onramp for 710 North at Ford Bl/Floral Dr.
It's still there but the sign was burnt out. Just thought I'd mention it while on the topic of the 710.

You would think the county would have done something about it cause no doubt the county put that sign up since East LA is unincorporated its not common that they do their own signage like that. Or at least not to my knowledge. But then again more than half their illuminated signs are burnt out or have been replaced now with reflective ones

Saw that assembly back in 2004, it appears no one has noticed it nor cared to correct it over the past several years. Jake has a better photo on the shield gallery:

[bulkyorled]

This sign must have had an error made on it or it's a 30 year old sign, because this still has CA 7 on it haha. Its in East LA. Im pretty sure it was changed in the early 80s from 7 to 710 yes? Either way its been wrong for nearly 30 years 

Its kinda hard to tell, its a CA Route Spade with a 7, at the onramp for 710 North at Ford Bl/Floral Dr.
It's still there but the sign was burnt out. Just thought I'd mention it while on the topic of the 710.

You would think the county would have done something about it cause no doubt the county put that sign up since East LA is unincorporated its not common that they do their own signage like that. Or at least not to my knowledge. But then again more than half their illuminated signs are burnt out or have been replaced now with reflective ones

Saw that assembly back in 2004, it appears no one has noticed it nor cared to correct it over the past several years. Jake has a better photo on the shield gallery:

ah thanks for that.
I'm just curious how old the thing is. I cant imagine East LA having had the illuminated signs since it was CA 7 honestly. But hey who knows. Couldn't have been just a coincidence. I can't even tell if its plugged in anymore or what the poor things story is.

[blawp]

Really? It was CA 7 up until the mid 70s I think and illuminated signs have been ubiquitous since the 60s I would imagine.

[TheStranger]

Really? It was CA 7 up until the mid 70s I think and illuminated signs have been ubiquitous since the 60s I would imagine.

Route 7 became I-710 in 1984 (same time that Route 17 between San Jose and Oakland became I-880 and Route 17 between Richmond and San Rafael became I-580).

[Bigmikelakers]

So, is this it? Are we really going to see the 710 extension happen? Or are some wealthy residents in South Pasadena and San Marino going to put some money together to hire a lawyer to get a judge to block it on environmental grounds because it may endanger some rare snail? These NIMBY's crack me up. As long as you have money you can block any kind of project that is needed for the entire region as a whole. To bad the poor residents of South LA, Watts, Lynwood, Paramount, and Inglewood didn't have the money or power to block the construction of the 105 Freeway.

Just build the highway please. I want to see it in my lifetime.

[bulkyorled]

Really? It was CA 7 up until the mid 70s I think and illuminated signs have been ubiquitous since the 60s I would imagine.

I gathered that most cities that have them got them sometime in the 80's. At any rate the ones that are in unincorporated cities generally don't have a choice in what gets put up thats why they all have the same signage. I have another thread about it in the Traffic Control forum. But since East LA is that way, I believe it woulda been put up in the 80s sometime. Plus the panel is in excellent condition for being such an oldy moldy even if it was older. Even if its a year older than the number change that's all it woulda taken to have it still be wrong I guess.
If you can find prove that its older please share it though!

To bad the poor residents of South LA, Watts, Lynwood, Paramount, and Inglewood didn't have the money or power to block the construction of the 105 Freeway.

At least in that case it ripped out some yucky area, not a hell of a lot but be that as it may I'd rather see the 105 than more trash over there. All I got on this is at least the area where the 710 should be isnt all shitty. But I wouldn't be upset to see it blow through the El Sereno, Alhambra and Monterrey Park area...

[blawp]

Most of Alhambra is pretty decent...

[Interstate Trav]

They should sign Fremont Ave as Temp. 710.

Wouldn't South Pasadena get upset at this?  As they won't let the 710 get built.

Who cares if they get upset.  Route signage is for the general public benefit.  Would they rather have motorist getting lost.

I think South Pasadena would rather people get lost.  I'm a supporter of building the 710, and I wasn't defending South Pasadena, but I think they don't want any signs for the 710 in anyway shape or form. 

[blawp]

Fremont Ave. - Temp. 710 TRUCK ROUTE. lOl

[Interstate Trav]

Fremont Ave. - Temp. 710 TRUCK ROUTE. lOl

That would get South Pasadena Mad. lol  There would be protests in the streets, probably trying to block truck traffic.

[kendancy66]

They should sign Fremont Ave as Temp. 710.

Wouldn't South Pasadena get upset at this?  As they won't let the 710 get built.

Who cares if they get upset.  Route signage is for the general public benefit.  Would they rather have motorist getting lost.

I think South Pasadena would rather people get lost.  I'm a supporter of building the 710, and I wasn't defending South Pasadena, but I think they don't want any signs for the 710 in anyway shape or form.

If I was in charge, I would give South Pasadena two choices,  Better through route signage from 710 to 210 or I will tear down all the houses on the CalTrans owned rights of way.