CA-2 Glendale Freeway Extension

[noelbotevera]

For over 30 years, the Glendale Freeway has never reached the light of day of being completed to US 101...should the freeway be extended to finish plans started over 30 years ago, or should they do something or nothing with it? Tell me your opinion...my opinion is to finish the brief uncompleted Glendale portion.

[emory]

As someone who uses that route very often, I would love to see it extended to the 101, and I doubt it will ever be completed. There's a lot of people in the freeway's path with a lot of money. They're now building two new apartment complexes right next to the freeway's terminus.

[jakeroot]

Does taking the 5 to the 110 get backed up? I'm not from the area, but it seems like, to access downtown, it wouldn't necessarily be any faster to take the 2 straight to the 101.

[sdmichael]

Work will be done to change the configuration of the present southern terminus of the Glendale Freeway in the next few years. It won't be extended. The original plans, at least one iteration of them, can be found on my site - http://socalregion.com/highways/la_highways/beverly-hills-freeway/ .

[briantroutman]

Does taking the 5 to the 110 get backed up? I'm not from the area, but it seems like, to access downtown, it wouldn't necessarily be any faster to take the 2 straight to the 101.

In Los Angeles, if asking does the (anything) to the (anything) get backed up, you'd be pretty safe to answer "yes" .

But yes, in that example, all directions of I-5 and CA 110 in that area can easily be somewhere between a slow crawl and a parking lot at almost any hour.

[jakeroot]

Does taking the 5 to the 110 get backed up? I'm not from the area, but it seems like, to access downtown, it wouldn't necessarily be any faster to take the 2 straight to the 101.

In Los Angeles, if asking does the (anything) to the (anything) get backed up, you'd be pretty safe to answer "yes" .

But yes, in that example, all directions of I-5 and CA 110 in that area can easily be somewhere between a slow crawl and a parking lot at almost any hour.

I figured. But in that case, I don't think extending the 2 will help, since the traffic on it will be just as bad as taking the 5 to the 110.

[briantroutman]

On its own, no, I don't think it would be of great benefit.

When I lived in Playa del Rey for a while, the problem that I encountered was the lack of NE/SW diagonals. Driving to the area around Griffith Park, Hollywood, Burbank, etc. would typically involve making kind of backwards "C" –heading east on I-10 towards downtown, then CA 110 through the very spine of the central core, and then either US 101 or I-5 northwest heading back out of downtown again.

From what I've read, the cancelled Beverly Hills freeway would have addressed my situation more directly, extending the stub of the Glendale Freeway south and west to eventually connect to I-405.

[mrsman]

Does taking the 5 to the 110 get backed up? I'm not from the area, but it seems like, to access downtown, it wouldn't necessarily be any faster to take the 2 straight to the 101.

In Los Angeles, if asking does the (anything) to the (anything) get backed up, you'd be pretty safe to answer "yes" .

But yes, in that example, all directions of I-5 and CA 110 in that area can easily be somewhere between a slow crawl and a parking lot at almost any hour.

I figured. But in that case, I don't think extending the 2 will help, since the traffic on it will be just as bad as taking the 5 to the 110.

At the current time, traffic in LA is much worse than it used to be.  But back when I lived there in the 80's and 90's one of my best shortcuts that I always used when heading from the area east of Downtown LA (along the 10, the 60, or the 5) to my home in West Hollywood) during busy times in the afternoons was to take the 101 to Spring Street (just the point where traffic began really to back up along the 101).  From Spring Street, turn right on 2nd Street (which has a tunnel to avoid lights along FLower, Hope, Grand, and Olive).  About 1/2 mile west of Downtown, there is a grade separation, where 2nd becomes Glendale Blvd and 1st street becomes Beverly Blvd.  At this point, I'd make the left to continue down Beverly.  But the traffic on Glendale Blvd would move pretty well down Glendale Blvd, especially as it went under Sunset Blvd, with the 2 freeway entrance only another mile ahead.  To reach the northern San Fernando Valley, taking the 2 to the 210 was far better than taking the 5 or the 101/170.

I don't think the reverse is true.  There is a lot of backup where the 2 freeway merges into Glendale Blvd.

[mrsman]

On its own, no, I don't think it would be of great benefit.

When I lived in Playa del Rey for a while, the problem that I encountered was the lack of NE/SW diagonals. Driving to the area around Griffith Park, Hollywood, Burbank, etc. would typically involve making kind of backwards "C" –heading east on I-10 towards downtown, then CA 110 through the very spine of the central core, and then either US 101 or I-5 northwest heading back out of downtown again.

From what I've read, the cancelled Beverly Hills freeway would have addressed my situation more directly, extending the stub of the Glendale Freeway south and west to eventually connect to I-405.

THere aren't many freeway diagonals in that direction, but there are plenty of arterials that fit the bill, namely Venice, Culver, and Santa Monica Blvds.

If I were going from Playa del Rey to Hollywood, instead of 10-110-5, would 10-La Brea or 90-Slauson-La Brea work better? 

For Burbank, maybe continue up the 101 to Barham or even take 405-101-134.  It all depends on the time of day, but surface streets oddly work better at many times of the day.

For the LA Zoo, I'd say that 10-110-5 is probably the best way.

Playa del Rey is also a very quick shot to the 105 thanks to some very fast streets like Pershing Drive.  So if the 10 is backed up, use 105 to 110.