Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California > Los Angeles
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-02-2016, 08:25 AM
 
5,681 posts, read 5,159,715 times
Reputation: 5154

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Howiester View Post
I don't think you should compare the end locations of a freeway to justify the expansion. All I know and have seen is that Pasadena and South Pas are overrun by street traffic during rush hour, which really affects quality of life there.
But where is that street traffic heading? That's the question - will the extension unload those particular streets?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-02-2016, 09:30 AM
 
Location: Idaho
6,357 posts, read 7,768,830 times
Reputation: 14183
"Why hasn't this happened yet?"

Lack of 'political will' at the state level of government.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-03-2016, 06:19 PM
 
Location: So Ca
26,731 posts, read 26,812,827 times
Reputation: 24795
Huge opposition from the surrounding cities that don't want the freeway extension. And it's been going on for years.
Divide and Conquer on the 710 Big Dig | Streetsblog Los Angeles
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-03-2016, 07:10 PM
 
73 posts, read 56,967 times
Reputation: 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by YoungTraveler2011 View Post

how about less money to these abominations:



and more money to fixing our handicapped highways?
Because the people that live in South pas have a lot more money than you do.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-03-2016, 07:33 PM
 
Location: So Ca
26,731 posts, read 26,812,827 times
Reputation: 24795
Why the SR-710 (Tunnel) is a Bad Idea:
Home Page
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-04-2016, 01:52 AM
 
601 posts, read 755,868 times
Reputation: 604
It's never gonna happen.

It'd be nice if they finished the 110, but extending the 710 is totally unnecessary. The 110 is right next to it!

What would be much better would be a rail line that connected the interior of the SGV to the rest of the LA metro.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-04-2016, 10:00 AM
 
5,681 posts, read 5,159,715 times
Reputation: 5154
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpaceMonkyPunks View Post
What would be much better would be a rail line that connected the interior of the SGV to the rest of the LA metro.
Isn't that what the Gold Line ostensibly does?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-04-2016, 10:12 AM
 
73 posts, read 56,967 times
Reputation: 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by highlanderfil View Post
Isn't that what the Gold Line ostensibly does?
There's no freeways going N/S connecting the 210 and the 10 between the 2/5 and the 605.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-04-2016, 09:50 PM
 
601 posts, read 755,868 times
Reputation: 604
Quote:
Originally Posted by highlanderfil View Post
Isn't that what the Gold Line ostensibly does?
Barely...not really. It hugs the 210 and 110 to Union station, then cuts into east Los Angeles a tiny bit. Good for Pasadena and the foothills, but it provides no access at all for central SGV - Alhambra, San Gabriel, Monterey Park/Rosemead/etc.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-05-2016, 01:12 AM
 
Location: Gilbert, Arizona
2,940 posts, read 1,813,027 times
Reputation: 1940
Quote:
Originally Posted by YoungTraveler2011 View Post

how about less money to these abominations:



and more money to fixing our handicapped highways?
Honestly, I hope it doesn't get built.

Considering that the original freeway master plan of the LA area was about 60% completed, where will you find the money to build the rest of the 40% envisioned (which includes those freeway gaps in the pic). Freeway projects are expensive. There's no area to build or widen freeways in LA without buying significant chunks of land. It's not financially feasible for the city to do so anyways. Too many cars already exist on the freeways as is today, a few miles of extra road won't help it one bit, it will be just as congested, if not more over time.

Need to find a better solution, like mass transit to get people out of their cars.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California > Los Angeles

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top