California Highways

California Highways

Routes 466 through 740

powered by FreeFind

California Highways Home Page
State Highway Routes
Numbered County Highways
State Highway Types
Interstate Types and History
Highway Numbering Conventions
State Highway Renumberings
State Highway Chronology
Maps Trails and Roads Related WWW Links Site Change Log Sources and Credits

Click here for a key to the symbols used. "LRN" refers to the Pre-1964 Legislative Route Number. "US" refers to a US Shield signed route. "I" refers to an Eisenhower Interstate signed route. "Route" usually indicates a state shield signed route, but said route may be signed as US or I. Previous Federal Aid (pre-1992) categories: Federal Aid Interstate (FAI); Federal Aid Primary (FAP); Federal Aid Urban (FAU); and Federal Aid Secondary (FAS). Current Functional Classifications (used for aid purposes): Principal Arterial (PA); Minor Arterial (MA); Collector (Col); Rural Minor Collector/Local Road (RMC/LR). Note that ISTEA repealed the previous Federal-Aid System, effective in 1992, and established the functional classification system for all public roads.


466 · 480 · 505 · 580 · 605 · 680 · 710 · 740

US Highway Shield X-Ed Out

Former US Highway 466


No current routing.


Pre 1964 Signage History

Until July 1, 1964, the following route was signed as US 466:

  1. Present-day Route 41 between Route 1 and US 101 3 mi S of Paso Robles. This was LRN 125, defined in 1933.

  2. Present-day Route 46 between US 101 near Paso Robles and present-day Route 99 near Famoso via Cholame Pass. Between Shandon and Cholame, the route was cosigned as Route 41/US 466. This segment was LRN 33, defined in 1915.

  3. Present-day Route 58 between Bakersfield and Barstow. This was LRN 58, defined in 1919.

  4. Present-day I-15 (former US 91) between Barstow and the Nevada state line. This was LRN 31, defined in 1925.

Additionally, LRN 141 was the planned rerouting for US 466 to bypass downtown Bakersfield (back when LRN 4/US 99 (and US 399) was on the Route 204/Business Route 99 alignment) back in 1933; this rerouting only occured in the 1960s however with the construction of the freeways which are now Route 58 and Route 58/Route 99 (explaining why the definition of the route is from LRN 4 to LRN 4: from Brundage at Route 204 to the current Route 99/Route 58/Route 178 interchange at Rosedale Highway/24th Street, where Oak Street ends). Looking at the bridge log, the Route 204/Business Route 99 (former LRN 4) freeway in downtown Bakersfield between LRN 141's two termini (current Route 58 and Route 99) was built in stages: the first section, the Union Avenue Y, was finished in 1957, followed by the Truxtun Avenue crossing in 1959. Most of the section north of L Street and the Chester Avenue traffic circle was also built in 1957; so the construction of the LRN 141 (99/58) freeways occured only once CalTrans decided that the old downtown bypass was more suitable for the through routes. The interchanges connecting Business Route 99 with Route 99 were built in 1962 and 1963, as part of the Bakersfield bypass. Thus by 1964, former LRN 141 had been upgraded to freeway between Brundage Lane and Rosedale Highway; however, the portion from Union Avenue (Route 204/Business Route 99) west to Route 99 would not be built until 1976, at which point Route 58 was moved off of former US 466/LRN 58 (Edison Highway) and onto the new freeway, which is part of the Bakersfield-Tehachapi Highway.

One contributor (Rebecca K.) opined that Twenty-Mule Team Road may be a former routing of US 466 through Boron. This is also the claim of AARoads. I am currently looking for a map to confirm.

This route was signed in 1934.


Other WWW Links

Post-1964 Legistlative Route Graphic

Former State Route 480


No current routing.


Post 1964 Signage History

In 1963, Route 480 was defined as "Route 80 at the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge approach in San Francisco to the junction of Route 280, Funston approach, and the approach to the Golden Gate Bridge in the Presidio of San Francisco passing near the intersection of Lombard Street and Van Ness Avenue."

In 1968, Chapter 282 transferred the portion from Route 80 to Route 280 near Harrison Street to Route 280: “Route 80 at the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge approach in San Francisco to the junction of Route 280, Route 280 near Harrison Street in San Francisco to the junction of Route 1, Funston approach, and the approach to the Golden Gate Bridge in the Presidio of San Francisco passing near the intersection of Lombard Street and Van Ness Avenue.”

In 1991, SB 181, Chapter 498 deleted the remainder of Route 480, from Route 280 near Harrison Street in San Francisco to the junction of Route 1, Funston approach, and the approach to the Golden Gate Bridge. The portion from Marina Boulevard to the approach to the Golden Gate Bridge was transferred to Route 101. The last signs for the route were removed in 1997.

Why did these changes occur? In 1955, it was planned to have the US 101/I-480 interchange (and co-signing) begin approximately at the Lombard/Van Ness junction (where the Embarcadero and Central Freeways would have intersected)—this is illustrated in the 1955 Trafficways Map. By 1965, there was a new plan (which was reflected in the 1968 changes) to have a Central Freeway crosstown tunnel from Turk Street to Richardson Avenue, resulting in a much shorter multiplex of Route 480 and US 101 on Doyle Drive only—as illustrated in this 1965 Caltrans Map. This is why it was Route 480 (not US 101) on Doyle Drive (for US 101 exited on Richardson and presumably to the crosstown tunnel).

This route was intended to provide a freeway connection between the Golden Gate and Bay bridges in San Francisco. It was a double-deck roadway design. The 1989 Loma Prieta quake condemned it, and it was later demolished. The route was never liked, and it was doomed in January 1959 when the San Francisco Board of Supervisors Resolution 45-59 passed, which indicated opposition to certain freeway routes. Route 480 is one of the freeways opposed by the city; and was never included in the California Freeway and Expressway System, although it was a part of the Interstate system.

The Embarcadero Freeway (Route 480) ran north along the waterfront for nearly a mile, two thick lines of concrete 70 feet high and 52 feet wide. It started at Folsom Street and ended bluntly at Broadway, running right in front of the historic Ferry Building. The freeway was designed to make a turn inland and head west past Aquatic Park, all the way to the Golden Gate Bridge.

The history of the route is fascinating; read the planning studies in the LINKS section for details. There were some plans to build it as a tube in the bay, or as a very narrow depressed highway, where there was little or no clearance to construct the road.

In 1998, there were brief plans to rebuild the Embacadero Freeway as a brief cut and cover tunnel. The proposal was to only extend to roughtly the point of where the elvated freeway structure was truncated.

Some folks claim to have seen maps where I-480 looped around San Francisco after the Golden Gate Bridge, running S as the Park Presidio and Junipero Serra Freeways. This is unlikely. It is more likely that those freeways were to have been signed as part of Route 1. Note: According to Caltrans, Park-Presidio Boulevard possesses all the attributes of a freeway and was the first such thoroughfare in northern California. It was built through the Presidio of San Francisco as an approach to the Golden Gate Bridge.


Pre 1964 Signage History

Route 480 was LRN 224, defined in 1947.



Although the route no longer exists, the CalTrans bridge log indicates that the route is signed as US 101 between post mile 2.85 and post 5.48. The Fremont St. exit off I-80 W is the former CA 480 exit. There is also a sealed-off CA 480 exit off of I-80 E.

As for what happened to what remains of the old Route 480... it is becoming a farm. Specifically, at the old on/off ramp near Laguna Street in early 2010, a number of urban farmers spread steaming piles of mulch over the edge of the ramps formerly used by cars to enter and exit the elevated Central Freeway spur above Octavia Street, arranging the soil in rows for planting vegetables and filler crops. This has formed the "Hayes Valley Farm".
[Source: SF.Streetsblog.Org, 2/8/2010]



"Golden Gate" Freeway, Embarcadero Freeway.


Interstate Submissions

Interstate Shield Route 480 was approved as chargeable interstate sometime pre-1965; it was deleted as a chargeable route in August 1965 (hence, its signage after that date with a state shield (Route 480), as opposed to an interstate shield). The old Route 480 was demolished between 1991 and 1993.

This route was first proposed as I-110. After 3di numbering conventions were developed, this was proposed as I-380. AASHTO finally approved it as I-480.


Other WWW Links


Scenic Highway

[SHC 263.1] Originally, the entire route. Since deleted.

Interstate Shield

Interstate 505


From Route 80 near Vacaville to Route 5 near Dunnigan.


Suffixed Routings

This was part of I-5W, which started at I-5/I-580 south of Stockton, followed I-580 to I-80 in Oakland, paired with I-80 east until I-505, and then reunited with I-5 where I-505 does now. I-580 and I-505 were signed with their current numbers around 1964 (although they were submitted and approved by AASHTO in 1947). Note that a 1968 map shows no freeway for I-505.


Post 1964 Signage History

In 1963, Route 505 was defined as “Route 80 near Vacaville to Route 5 near Dunnigan”, and it retains its 1963 definition. Before 1972, it was signed as Temporary I-505, and was a two lane road between Vacaville to Dunnigan. The freeway was constructed in sections: the first one between Route 16 and Route 128; the next from I-5 to Route 16; and the final from Route 16 to I-80. The freeway was completed by 1978. Additionally, before 1972, there was actually two sections of constructed freeway: A 2 mile section at the junction of Route 128, and a 1 mile section at Route 16. At this time, the route was unsigned but had freeway status. I-505 freeway was finished in 1977.


Pre 1964 Signage History

This route was LRN 90, defined in 1933. It appears to have been unsigned before 1964.



In April 2007, the CTC considered relinquishment of right of way in the county of Yolo, at County Road 24, consisting of reconstructed and relocated county roads and frontage roads.

The SAFETEA-LU act, enacted in August 2005 as the reauthorization of TEA-21, provided the following expenditures for this route:

  • High Priority Project #35: Replace the structurally unsafe Winters Bridge for vehicles, bicycles and pedestrians between Yolo and Solano Counties. The Sacramento Bee stated that this was the I-505 bridge over Putah Creek Road. However, this could be wrong, as the Winters Bridge is actually in town about 1 mile west of I-505 , and was built somewhere around 1903. It has a few humps and sags, but is still in use. As bicycles and pedestrians cannot use I-505, this is likely in town. The Winters bridge connects Railroad Avenue in town, with Winters Road and Putah Creek Road in Solano County.$1,600,000.



The interchange of I-80 and I-505 in the County of Solano is named the "Lieutenant Colonel James C. Warren Memorial Interchange". It was named in memory of Lieutenant Colonel James C. Warren, who was born in August 1923 into the racially segregated community of Gurly, Alabama.Warren left the region at the age of 15 years, when his mother sent him to Island Park, Illinois, where he attended high school. Enlisting in 1943 to preflight with the Tuskegee Airmen, the all black United States Army Air Force unit that distinguished itself in combat during World War II, Lieutenant Colonel Warren was assigned to Indiana’s Freeman Field, where, after being eliminated from pilot training, he completed navigator training, through which he qualified as both a navigator and a bombardier. Lieutenant Colonel Warren was one of the 101 black officers at Freeman Field in 1945 who were arrested and charged with mutiny because they refused to comply with base regulations excluding black officers from a base officers’ club. The service records of Lieutenant Colonel Warren and the other 100 officers were cleared by the Air Force in 1995, an action that was announced that year during a convention of the Tuskegee Airmen. After serving with the 477th Bombardment Group of the Tuskegee Airmen, Lieutenant Colonel Warren spent 35 years with the United States Air Force, for which he flew 173 combat missions in Korea and Vietnam, earning such esteemed commendations and decorations as the Congressional Gold Medal, Distinguished Flying Cross with two Oak Leaf Clusters, and Air Force Commendation Medal, among numerous others. A University of Nebraska graduate who ultimately became the oldest individual to earn a pilot’s license at the age of 87 years, Lieutenant Colonel Warren distinguished himself through his community leadership and participation in the Nut Tree Airport’s Young Eagles program, as well as his membership with the Jimmy Doolittle Air and Space Museum Foundation, the Kappa Alpha Psi Fraternity, and Tuskegee Airmen Incorporated. Named by Senate Concurrent Resolution (SCR) 24, Res. Chapter 108, Statutes of 2015, on July 16, 2015.




Other WWW Links


Interstate Submissions

Approved as chargeable Interstate on 7/7/1947; Freeway. In August 1957, this was tentatively approved as I-5W. In November 1957, the designation I-7 was proposed as part of the first attempt to give urban routes numbers (there were no 3-digit routes at the time). In April 1958, it was proposed to be designated I-115 as part of the first attempts to assign 3-digit numbers. It was finally approved as I-5W, and later renumbered as I-505.



[SHC 253.1] Entire route. Added to the Freeway and Expressway system in 1959.


Overall statistics for Route 505:

  • Total Length (1995): 33 miles
  • Average Daily Traffic (1992): 8,900 to 20,800
  • Milage Classification: Rural: 30; Sm. Urban: 0; Urbanized: 3.
  • Previous Federal Aid Milage: FAI: 33 mi.
  • Functional Classification: Prin. Arterial: 33 mi.
  • Counties Traversed: Solano, Yolo.

Interstate Shield

Interstate 580

  1. From Route 5 southwest of Vernalis to Route 80 in Oakland via the vicinity of Dublin and Hayward.

    Suffixed Routings

    At one time, this route was signed as I-5W. The I-5W designation was dropped in 1964 (when California regularized route numbers to match legislative definitions, and started dropping all "lettered" alternates to Interstates).


    Post 1964 Signage History

    In 1963, I-580 was defined as "Route 5 southwest of Vernalis to Route 80 near Oakland via the vicinity of Dublin and Hayward."

    In 1984, Chapter 409 extended the route by transfer from Route 17: "(a) Route 5 southwest of Vernalis to Route 80 near Oakland via the vicinity of Dublin and Hayward. (b) Route 80 near Albany to Route 101 near San Rafael via the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge."

    In 1990, Chapter 1187 clarified segment (a): "(a) Route 5 southwest of Vernalis to Route 80 in near Oakland via the vicinity of Dublin and Hayward."


    Pre 1964 Signage History

    US Highway Shield The portion between the I-580/I-205 junction and I-80 was LRN 5, defined in 1909. This was originally US 50. This routing was at one time US 48.

    The portion of this route between I-5 and the I-580/I-205 junction was LRN 110, defined in 1959.

    This includes the original four-lane Altamont Pass Road, which opened on 8/4/1938. On the eastern grade of the Altamont Pass, the eastbound and westbound I-580 lanes follow different alignments. The EB lanes are the original US 50 alignment. Between the I-580/I-205 split and the Business Route 205 split, most of the width of I-205 (both directions) was the old US 50. It was four-lane divided for some time before the Great Renumbering, and that section is quite a bit narrower than I-580. Of course this may not be original 1927 US 50, but it existed before I-580. US-50 (and possibly US-48) headed into Tracy via Grant Line Road and Byron Road. 11th Street in Tracy is still a divided road in some portions and has a number of old state traffic signals, signs, and lamp poles, including some with the original mercury vapor lamps still intact.

    As for the railroad trackage: one of the two lines in the area is the former right-of-way of the Southern Pacific Railroad. These rails were abandoned in 1986 when SP obtained trackage rights over the current ACE route from the Union Pacific Railroad. The SP line, which was constructed in 1869, was actually the final link in the true Transcontinental Railroad. As the ACE Train crosses over, then under, the eastbound and westbound lanes of I-580, there is an abandoned tunnel on the SP right-of-way. The next large cut was actually WP's Tunnel 3. It was daylighted for clearance reasons in the early 1990's.



    Note that there are some portions here that have interesting trailblazers: West I-80 and East I-580 (or East I-80 and West I-580). You can find a picture of this here.

    In December 2011, the CTC authorized relinquishment of right of way in the city of Richmond along Route 580 on Marina Bay Parkway, consisting of collateral facilities.

    In August 2012, the CTC approved SHOPP funding of $18,459,000 on I-580 PM 5.5/6.1 near Richmond, at Scofield Avenue (Bridge #28-140L/R) and at Western Drive (Bridge #28-141R). Outcome/Output: Rehabilitate three bridges by replacing bridge decks to maintain structure integrity and reduce the risk to lives and properties.

    The SAFETEA-LU act, enacted in August 2005 as the reauthorization of TEA-21, provided the following expenditures on or near this route:

    • High Priority Project #1218: Upgrade and reconstruct I-580/Vasco Road Interchange, City of Livermore. $2,000,000.

    • High Priority Project #1371: I-580 Interchange Improvements in Castro Valley. $960,000.

    • High Priority Project #1653: Engineering, right of way and construction of HOV lanes on I-580 in the Livermore Valley. $9,600,000.

    • High Priority Project #3493: Construction at I-580 and Route 84 (Isabel Avenue) Interchange. $2,000,000.

    In 2007, the CTC recommended $72.2M from the Corridor Mobility Improvement Account (CMIA) for an EB HOV Lane from Hacienda to Greenville, and $68M for a WB HOV Lane at the Isabel Ave (Route 84) interchange, and $101.7M for a WB HOV Lane from Greenville to Foothill.

    In May 2007, flames from an exploding gasoline tanker melted the steel underbelly of the I-580 bridge that carried EB traffic from the Bay Bridge to I-580, I-980, and Route 24. The single-vehicle crash occurred on the lower roadway when the tanker, loaded with 8,600 gallons of unleaded gasoline and heading from a refinery in Benicia to a gas station on Hegenberger Road in Oakland, hit a guardrail. Caltrans fast-tracked the repair construction, which was expected to take 5-6 months. However, the contractor (C.C. Myers) actually completed the work in twenty-six days, opening the I-580 bridge on 8:40 PM on May 24, 2007. How was this done? Less than two days after the I-580 connector collapsed, demolition crews removed the mangled section. A day later, Caltrans engineers clambered over the charred section of I-880, drilling concrete core samples, X-raying parts of the structure and dragging chains over the roadway -- all tests to determine the extent of repairs needed. The results came back the next day -- the fourth day after the collapse. I-880 had suffered no serious structural damage to the concrete, Caltrans concluded. The freeway connector could be jacked up and supported with temporary braces while workers used a heat-straightening technique to repair warped steel girders underneath. Contractor ACC West completed the work quickly, and I-880 was reopened to traffic after being closed for just eight days. As for the I-580 overpass, Caltrans officials worked to speed the process by preparing a list of potential contractors it knew could do the work quickly and by streamlining its process, clearing as much red tape as possible. Then they drew up a contract offering a $200,000 bonus -- with a limit of $5 million -- for each day the work was done in less than 50 days and levying a $200,000 penalty for each day after that deadline. The bids were opened and the winner was the fifth bid, from C.C. Myers Inc., which came in at $867,075. The original Caltrans estimate was $5.2 million. Within hours of the bid award, Myers had workers on the site of the maze collapse. Meanwhile, in Lathrop (San Joaquin County), concrete fabrication firm ConFab started building what is essentially a big, rectangular concrete block. The block, filled with steel reinforcement bars and cables, is what's known to road builders as a bent cap -- a 243,750-pound beam that sits atop two columns and supports the frame of the elevated roadway. While the beam was being built, steel was being rushed from Pennsylvania and Texas to Stinger Welding, a steel fabrication firm in Arizona. Carl Douglas, president of Stinger, found in Pennsylvania the nation's only supply of the 2-inch steel plate needed to make the bottom flange of the steel girders. He found the half-inch and 1-inch steel needed for the rest of the girders in Texas. It was loaded onto trucks with two drivers in each rig so they could make the trips with fewer stops. Once the steel reached Arizona, Stinger crews began working two 10-hour shifts daily to get the girders built. Caltrans sent inspectors and engineers -- all authorized to make on-the-spot decisions -- to answer questions and ensure the quality of the fabrication. The first two girders were done on May 14 -- just four days after Stinger started working and seven days into C.C. Myers' contract -- and around noon they were put on trucks bound for the Bay Area. Stinger finished the girders in nine days -- a job that would normally have taken about 45. The first two girders arrived early on May 15 at ABC Painting, an industrial paint shop on the old Mare Island Naval Shipyard in Vallejo. Crews blasted the girders with steel grit to rough them up enough to hold a good coat of paint. Then they applied a zinc primer in "Caltrans gray," a sort of greenish gray. As the girders were painted, the massive concrete bent cap began making its way from Lathrop on an 18-axle truck. The load was so heavy that the truck wasn't permitted on I-580 over the Altamont Pass and had to use rural roads to get to the Tri-Valley. Still, the bent cap arrived about 15 minutes before Caltrans' scheduled 8 p.m. closure May 15 of the I-880 connector for the installation, and had to wait on the side of I-80 in Berkeley. Shortly after 8 p.m., the rig pulled onto the closed I-880 connector and parked at an angle beneath the two I-580 columns that survived the collapse and needed only minor repairs. After the beam was untied and hooked to lifting cables, a pair of cranes raised it at 8:50 p.m. and had it in place by 9 p.m. Crane operators then dropped large steel "pins" into holes in the bent cap and injected grout to secure the connection. After the first four girders were lifted into place, two more arrived each subsequent night, and they were put in place without difficulty. As soon as each pair was secured, workers swarmed the steel beams and started installing the wooden forms and steel-reinforcement bar for the concrete roadway. On a typical job, the contractor would wait until the girders were all installed before preparing for the concrete pour. After curing for 48 hours, the concrete poured on Sunday had already attained the required strength -- 3,500 pounds per square inch -- for the road deck. But Caltrans wanted it to cure -- beneath burlap and plastic blankets to keep it damp -- for at least 96 hours. For this job, C.C. Myers will collect $5 million in bonus money. The job is estimated to have cost the firm $2.5 million.
    (Information obtained from a 5/25/2007 article in the San Francisco Chronicle)

    In October 2008, a segment of HOV lanes in Livermore opened.

    In April 2012, the CTC authorized SHOPP funding on I-580, in Alameda County, 04-Ala-580 R14.6/R21.6 Near Livermore, from 0.1 mile west of Greenville Road to 0.2 mile west of San Ramon-Foothill Road. $13,000,000 to rehabilitate 38.5 lane miles of pavement to improve ride quality, prevent further deterioration of the road surface, minimize the costly roadway repairs, and extend the pavement life.

    In May 2012, the CTC authorized SHOPP funding on I-580, in Alameda County, 04-Ala-580 R8.4/R14.6 Near Livermore, from 0.1 mile west of Greenville Road to 0.2 mile west of San Ramon -Foothill Road. $16,400,000 to rehabilitate 51 lane miles of roadway to improve the ride quality, prevent further deterioration of the road surface, minimize the costly roadway repairs and extend the pavement service life.

    TCRP Project #12.3 is studying improvements for the I-580 Livermore Corridor. In February 2009, the CTC amended the environmental work for the project. Specifically, on July 27, 2007, the CTC approved a resolution that revised the project schedule to show FY2008-09 as the completion date for Environmental portion of the project. At the same time, the CTC approved a resolution that allocated $3,000,000 for a Programmatic Environmental Impact Report (PEIR), which was proposed to be developed by December 2008. The purpose of the PEIR was to support the early acquisition of right of way along I-580 for a future transit corridor. However, the schedule required modification in 2009 as it was dependent on inclusion of a right of way preservation project-known as the “I-580 Transit Corridor”-in the regional transportation plan (RTP) currently being developed by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC). MTC is scheduled to adopt the Final Plan, EIR, and Conformity Analysis for the RTP on March 25, 2009. The amendment changed the completion date for the environmental phase to December 2009.

    Isabel Ave InterchangeThere are plans to add a new interchange as Isabel Avenue in Livermore, but this was deferred in June 2008 because the cost and scope of ED is not consistent with cost and scope of CMIA baseline agreement.. The project is fully programmed for $153 million with Corridor Mobility Improvement Account (CMIA) funds, federal Demonstration funds, and local funds. Construction is estimated to begin in Fiscal Year 2008-09.. There was a similar deferral of a project to construct roadway improvements on I-580 in the city of Livermore that would have extended out to I-205. The project is fully programmed for $154 million with Corridor Mobility Improvement Account (CMIA) funds; State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) funds; State Highway Operation Protection Program (SHOPP) funds; Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) funds; Traffic Congestion Relief Program (TCRP) funds; and local funds. Construction is estimated to begin in Fiscal Year 2007-08.

    Isabel Ave InterchangeSpecifically, the project will construct a new interchange at Isabel Avenue (Route 84) and Route 580 in the city of Livermore. The project will also remove the existing partial interchange at Portola Avenue and I- 580. This new interchange at Isabel Avenue will provide a permanent and more efficient connection between Route 580 and Route 84. These improvements will result in a congestion relief in the Route 580/Route 680 corridors by establishing an alternative route for traffic between the Central/Tri-Valleys and the South Bay areas. In October 2008, the CTC considered amending the project plan to reallocate funding between tasks and to divide the project into three segments. This was due to an increase in right of way (ROW) acquisition costs of $3.1 million, due to the refinement of ROW costs that are now based upon actual appraisals, negotiated property acquisition compensations, and updated utility relocation estimates. This brought the total ROW costs to $24M. Additionally, construction estimates have also increased by $10.9M to $96.6M. That's just for Construction Capital! Construction support is another $8M (but that's a decrease of $8M from the original estimate). The amendment proposed that the work relating to the construction of three foundations for the Isabel Avenue Overcrossing (estimated cost $1.75 million) be transferred from this project to another CMIA project, the Route 580 EB HOV Lane project (PPNO 0112A, Segment 2 [EA 04-290831]). Similarly, widening of the Arroyo Las Positas Bridge (estimated cost $1.70 million) was to be transferred from the Route 580 EB HOV Lane project to the Isabel Avenue interchange project. They also proposed splitting the project into three construction contracts, allowing the City of Livermore to administer construction of the work that is within its own right of way, and thus better deal with traffic controls and circulation impacts on the city roads.

    So, the project will include (a) construction of a new interchange at Isabel Avenue (Route 84) in the Route 580 Corridor, replacing the existing temporary connection at Route 580/Airway Blvd; (b) construction of a new Portola Avenue overpass; (c) construction of eastbound and westbound auxiliary lanes between Isabel Avenue and Airway Boulevard, (d) removal of the partial interchange at Route 580/Portola Ave. for enhanced mainline operational efficiency and safety.; (e) widening and realigning of SR 84 south of Route 580, including relocation of utilities; (f) construction of new local roads necessary for the interchange operation north of Route 580; (g) widening an existing Route 580 bridge over the Arroyo Las Positas creek to accommodate the Route 580 EB HOV Lane project. The Arroyo Las Positas Creek Bridge widening was added from Route 580 EB HOV Lane project. Some foundation work in the median for the Route 580/Isabel Avenue Interchange project was deleted from this project and added to the Route 580 EB HOV Lane project. The three construction contracts are: (04-171311) Widen and realign Route 84 south of I-580, including relocation of utilities; (04-171321) Construct new local roads north of the I-580/Isabel Avenue Interchange, for proper operations of the interchange; and (04-171331) (a) Construct new interchange at I-580 and Isabel Avenue (Route 84) replacing the existing temporary connection at I-580/Airway Blvd; (b) construct a new Portola Avenue overpass; (c) construct eastbound and westbound auxiliary lanes between Isabel Avenue and Airway Boulevard; (d) remove the partial interchange at I-580/Portola Ave. (e) widen an existing I-580 bridge over the Arroyo Las Positas creek to accommodate the I-580 EB HOV project. The first two of these (171311 and 171321) would be done by the City of Livermore; the last by Caltrans.

    In January 2010, it was noted that construction near I-580 and Route 84 was progressing nicely. it's visibly becoming an interchange with approach embankments looking done on both sides. Completion is scheduled for February 2011.

    In October 2011, the CTC recieved a request to amend the CMIA baseline agreements related to a project in this area; specifically, for Segment 1 (Widen and realign State Route 84 south of I-580 interchange and relocate utilities, PPNO 0115E), Segment 2 (Construct new local roads north of the I-580/Isabel Avenue Interchange, PPNO 0115F), and Segment 3 (Construct new interchange at Isabel Avenue and a new Portola Avenue Overcrossing, PPNO 0115B) of the I-580/Isabel Interchange project to: • Transfer a portion of the scope of work from Segment 3 to Segment 1. • Shift $600,000 CMIA and $400,000 local funds in close-out savings from Segment 2 to Segment 1 in order to complete this transferred scope of work.

    In November 2011, Caltrans opened the new I-580/Route 84 ramps and the newly realigned Route 84 south of I-580 that will connect with the new interchange, and closed the westbound I-580 Portola Avenue onramp. The two new onramps will serve as new freeway access from Las Positas College and the businesses north of I-580. Commuters will be able to use the new interchange in lieu of cutting through downtown Livermore. Another project to widen Route 84 south of the interchange between Jack London Boulevard and Vallecitos Road is slated to begin in spring 2012.

    In July 2010 it was reported that a 2.9-mile HOV lane segment opened in Livermore: EB from Airway Boulevard past Portola Road. Upon completion, the entire HOV lane will extend 11 miles from Hacienda Road in Pleasanton to Greenville Road in Livermore. It will eventually be turned into an express toll lane. The first lane segment from east of Portola Road to Greenville Road opened in October 2009. If construction continues as expected, the overall HOV project will open in Fall 2010, about one year ahead. In November 2010, it was reported that the second phase of the 11-mile carpool lane on eastbound I-580 between Pleasanton and Livermore was opened. The carpool lane is expected to ease traffic in the area, which currently sees more than 170,000 vehicles a day. The project cost $49 million, which is $23 million less than what had been budgeted, and was completed a year ahead of schedule. It was mostly funded by Proposition 1B, a $19.9 billion transportation bond that was approved by California voters in 2006. Transportation officials said the project was completed for far less than had been expected because of the highly competitive bidding market among contractors seeking business. The section that opened in November 2010 goes from Hacienda Drive in Pleasanton to Portola Road in Livermore. The first segment, which is from Portola Road to Greenville Road in Livermore, opened in October 2009.

    In February 2013, it was reported that Caltrans plans to convert HOV lanes on I-580 into HOT ("Express" or High Occupancy/Toll) lanes -- specifically, I-580 in both directions between I-680 and Hacienda Road in Livermore. Express lanes work by continuing to allow carpoolers free access to the fast lane but then selling unused capacity to drivers who wouldn't normally qualify to drive in them. Tolls are collected electronically using FasTrak transponders, and electronic systems are used to monitor traffic and set tolls at a rate designed to keep traffic in the lanes flowing at 50 mph or faster. As the lanes get more congested, tolls rise, and as gridlock eases, they drop. Toll rates for the network have not been set yet, but on the existing lanes they have varied from a 30-cent minimum to about $5 or $6.

    In May 2013, the CTC relinquished right of way in the city of Livermore along Route 580 on Kitty Hawk Road and Portola Avenue, consisting of collateral facilities.

    In June 2011, the CTC authorized relinquishment of right of way in the city of Pleasanton along Route 580 between Route 680 and Hopyard Road, consisting of collateral facilities.

    In January 2011, the CTC approved for future consideration of funding a project in Alameda County that will construct a truck climbing lane in the eastbound direction on I-580 from one mile east of North Flynn Road to Greenville Road Undercrossing. The project is programmed in the Trade Corridors Improvement Fund. Construction is estimated to begin in Fiscal Year 2011-12. Total estimated project cost is $63,000,000 for capital and support. The project will mitigate potential impacts to biological resources to a less than significant level. Potential impacts to seven animal species that are listed as threatened or endangered will be mitigated through replacement habitat. In addition, potential impacts to an existing wetland in the project area will be mitigated by restoration of the affected wetland. In October 2012, the CTC amended the schedule due to permitting problems. The new schedule shows construction completing in April 2015.

    In February 2010, the CTC approved allocating $8,000,000 in Traffic Congestion Relief Program (TCRP) funds for the Route 580 project to construct an eastbound HOV lane from Tassjara Road/Santa Rita Road to Vasco Road in Alameda County (TCRP 31).

    In August 2010, the CTC approved amending the CMIA baseline agreements for Segment 1 (Widen and realign SR-84/Isabel Avenue [PPNO 0115E]), Segment 2 (Construct new local roads north of I-580/Isabel Interchange [PPNO 0115F]) and Segment 3 (Construct new interchange at Isabel Avenue [PPNO 0115B]) of the I-580/ Isabel Interchange project to update the project delivery schedule for each project. All three segments received their allocations at the December 2008 Commission meeting. The contracts for Segment 1 and 2 were advertised on December 22, 2008. The Segment 3 was advertised in January 2009. But the bid openings had to be postponed because the Proposition 1B funding was suspended due to financial constraints of the State. For Segment 3, delay in bid opening was also caused by the issuance of three addenda. The contracts for Segment 1 and 2 were awarded in June 2009. The Segment 3 contract was awarded in July 2009. None of the changes affect the close-out dates, although the end of construction for Segment 1 is pushed out two months to March 2012.

    In April 2012, it was reported that construction had started on on a $2.4 million trail segment providing the first off-road trail for people to walk or ride under I-580 in the Tri-Valley area. The new segment will close a 784-foot-long gap between two trails that stop on opposite sides of I-580. On the Dublin side, there is the Alamo Canal Trail, which connects to the Iron Horse Trail leading the way to Martinez. On the Pleasanton side, the Centennial Trail runs parallel to I-680 and a flood-control channel and leads toward central Pleasanton. To build the trail, crews will cut a notch out of the creek bank under the interstate and the BART tracks. Caltrans insisted that the trail have a railing to prevent users from falling into the creek, while Zone 7 Water District officials worried that the railing would trap floating debris and aggravate flood risks during heavy storms. Trail designers came up with a compromise plan for a collapsible rail with posts that can be removed before waters rise. Several agencies -- including Dublin, Pleasanton, the Alameda County Transportation Commission and the regional park district -- contributed funding toward the trail, but the largest allocation was $1 million in federal transportation dollars.

    [PPNO 0112B]The I-580 Westbound HOV Lane — Greenville to Foothill project (PPNO 0112B). In April 2010, the CTC approved for future consideration of funding a project in Alameda County that will construct a westbound HOV lane on a 13.4 mile portion of Route 580 near the city of Dublin. The project is programmed in the Corridor Mobility Improvement Account and includes federal and local funds. Total estimated project cost is $137,886,000 for capital and support. Construction is estimated to begin in Fiscal Year 2011-12. There is a concurrent baseline amendment request to split the project into three contracts. The scope, as described for the preferred alternative, is consistent with the project scope set forth in the proposed project baseline agreement.

    Overall, this project will construct a high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lane from the San Ramon Road/Foothill Road Interchange to the Greenville Road Overhead; widen the inside and outside shoulders sufficiently to accommodate the HOV lane and allow for future conversion of the HOV lane to a high occupancy toll (HOT) lane; widen the existing bridge crossings over Tassajara Creek and Arroyo Las Positas Creek at various locations; and construct various westbound auxiliary lanes. It will also construct a westbound express bus ramp connection from the westbound HOV lane to the Dublin-Pleasanton BART Station; construct soundwalls as identified by the environmental document; and upgrade the drainage system in the freeway median to accommodate the HOV lane. In April 2010, the CTC approved amending the CMIA baseline agreement for the I-580 Westbound HOV Lane – Greenville to Foothill project (PPNO 0112B) to: (1) Update the project scope to eliminate the westbound I-580 express bus off-ramp to the Dublin-Pleasanton Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) Station, funded by 12 million Regional Measure 2 (RM2) funds; add a westbound auxiliary lane at two locations: a) From Vasco Road to First Street and b) From Airway Boulevard to Fallon Road, to be funded by local funds; (2) Update the overall project funding plan; and (3) Split the updated project into three roadway contracts. The westbound express off-ramp to the BART station is being elminated because both the BART and the Livermore Amador Valley Transit Authority opposed the inclusion of these improvements in the project scope on concerns relating to pedestrian safety in the vicinity of the BART Station; this provided a cost savings of $12M. The auxiliary lanes were added to the scope of the overall project for coordination purposes; these lanes were originally a local project. Combining these two auxiliary lanes projects with the HOV lane project for construction will reduce throw-away costs such as roadway drainage improvements, signings, and erosion control measures and also avoid unnecessary disruption to the traveling public.

    The overall project is proposed to be split into three segments.

    • Segment 1 (PPNO 0112B): In Alameda County in Livermore from Greenville Road to just east of Isabel Avenue. Construct a westbound HOV lane from the Greenville Overcrossing to Isabel Avenue Overcrossing. Widen the inside and outside shoulders sufficiently to accommodate the HOV lane and allow for future conversion to a HOT lane. Construct westbound auxiliary lanes from Vasco Road to First Street, from First to North Livermore Avenue, and from North Livermore Avenue to Isabel Avenue. Construct soundwalls as identified by the environmental document. Construct mitigation landscaping. Upgrade the freeway median drainage system in the freeway median to accommodate the HOV lane.

      Segment 2 (PPNO 0112F): In Alameda County in Livermore from just east of Isabel Avenue to just west of San Ramon Road/Foothill Road Interchange. Construct a westbound HOV lane from Isabel Avenue Overcrossing to San Ramon Road/Foothill Road Interchange. Widen the inside and outside shoulders sufficiently to accommodate the HOV lane and allow for future conversion to a HOT lane. Widen existing bridge crossing over Tassajara Creek. Construct westbound auxiliary lanes from Airway Boulevard to Fallon Road. Construct soundwalls as identified by the environmental document. Construct mitigation landscaping. Upgrade the freeway median drainage system in the freeway median to accommodate the HOV lane.

      Segment 3 (PPNO 0112G): In Alameda County in Livermore from just west of First Street Overcrossing to just west of Isabel Avenue Overcrossing. Widen existing bridge crossings over Arroyo Las Positas Creek in the eastbound direction (at two locations).

    In mid-June 2013, A ceremony was held to mark the start of construction on the $145 million new HOV lanes between Greenville Road in Livermore and the Foothill Road over crossing in Dublin and Pleasanton. Completion is expected in late 2014, a year before the lane is to be converted into an express toll lane open to carpools for free and solo drivers for a toll. Contractors also will add an auxiliary lane on I-580 between Isabel Avenue and First Street in Livermore.

    In August 2010, the CTC approved amending the CMIA baseline agreement for Segment 2 (Construct HOV Lane, from Portola to Hacienda [PPNO 0112D]) of the Eastbound I-580 HOV Lane project to update the project delivery schedule, noting that construction started later than originally expected.

    In April 2012, it was reported that construction on the $182 million-dollar HOV lane between Livermore and Dublin is scheduled to begin in August 2012 and be completed in mid-2015. Eastbound commuters -- who have benefited from an 11-mile carpool lane from Hacienda Drive to Greenville since 2009 -- will see the lane transformed into a combination carpool-toll lane. The cost to add the technology for the lane, which was $15 million to build, is $19 million, and it will open at the same time the westbound lane debuts.

    In July 2008, Caltrans opened the I-580 truck bypass, separating slow-moving trucks from cars in the Altamont Pass. Two westbound truck-only lanes run for six miles from Mountain House Parkway to Grant Line Road on the right-hand side. This is part of widening I-205.




    The portion of this route between Route 5 and Route 205 is named the "William Elton 'Brownie' Brown Freeway". It was named by Assembly Concurrent Resolution 74, Chapter 127, in 1985. William Elton "Brownie" Brown, (1912-1995), a lifetime resident of Tracy, served for 6 years as the President of the Highway 33 Association, and was instrumental in having I-5 located on the far west side of the San Joaquin valley, thus saving valuable farm land.

    The portion of this route between Castro Valley and Livermore is named the "Arthur H. Breed Jr. Freeway". Elected to both the California Assembly and Senate between 1935 and 1959, Arthur J. Breed, Jr., was a tireless advocate for the development of a high quality highway system in California. This section was named by Senate Concurrent Resolution 5, Chapter 73 in 1983.

    The portion of this route from Airway Boulevard (eastbound milepost marker 14.98) to North Flynn Road (westbound milepost marker 6.00) in Livermore is named the "CHP Officer John P. Miller Memorial Highway" It was named in memory of California Highway Patrol (CHP) Officer John Paul Miller. Born on January 29, 1975, to Larry and Caroline Miller, in Stockton, California, Officer Miller graduated from Linden High School in Linden, California, in 1994, and attended San Joaquin Delta College in Stockton, California, where he was a respected athlete and earned his Associate of Arts degree. Officer Miller was employed by Cherokee Freight Line of Stockton as a mechanic and delivery driver prior to becoming a California Highway Patrol Officer. Officer Miller was married to his best friend, Stephanie Bianchi, on July 21, 2001, and had two wonderful children, Chandler on March 18, 2003, and Reese on March 14, 2005. Officer Miller continued his education by attending California State University, Sacramento and the University of Phoenix where he graduated with a Bachelor of Arts degree in Business Administration in 2004. Officer Miller entered the California Highway Patrol Academy on September 18, 2006, and upon graduation, was assigned to the Dublin Area Office in April 2007, serving the Dublin area for seven months. On November 16, 2007, Officer Miller was killed in the line of duty while he was attempting to apprehend a drunk driver in the Livermore Valley. As Officer Miller was driving south on North Livermore Avenue, north of I-580, he was involved in a patrol car collision causing fatal injuries. Named by Assembly Concurrent Resolution (ACR) 78, Resolution Chapter 110, on 9/23/2009.

    The portion of this route between Strobridge Avenue and East Castro Valley Boulevard is named the "Sergeant Daniel Sakai Memorial Highway". It was named in memory of Daniel Sakai of Castro Valley. Born April 6, 1973, he grew up in Big Bear in San Bernardino County, where he developed a love for everything outdoors. Daniel Sakai moved to the San Francisco Bay Area to attend the University of California at Berkeley, where he received a degree in 1996 in forestry and natural resources and also worked as a community service officer. After graduating from the university, Daniel Sakai spent a year in Japan teaching English. Daniel Sakai attended the Oakland Police Department Academy, where he met his soulmate and future wife, Jennifer. Daniel Sakai quickly rose to the rank of sergeant of police and served the Oakland Police Department in various roles, including as a patrol officer, canine handler, patrol rifle and academy firearms instructor, and special weapons and tactics (SWAT) team member. Daniel Sakai was described as a "special young man who was clearly a born leader. He was committed to public service and making a difference in other people's lives". He was also described as a "person that everyone looked up to and wanted to be. He had the highest ethics". On March 21, 2009, Sergeant Daniel Sakai was killed, along with another SWAT team member, Sergeant Ervin Romans, when the SWAT team attempted to apprehend a suspect that had earlier in the day shot and killed Sergeant Mark Dunakin and mortally wounded Officer John Hege, both of the Oakland Police Department, during a traffic stop. Named by Assembly Concurrent Resolution (ACR) 79, Resolution Chapter 111, on 9/23/2009.

    The portion of this route from San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge distribution structure (a/k/a "the Maze") in Oakland (Route 80/Route 580/Route 880 interchange) to Route 238 in Hayward/Castro Valley is named the "MacArthur Freeway". It is named for General Douglas MacArthur of WW II and the Korean War, as well as for MacArthur Boulevard which the freeway follows and was named for the general in the 1950's. It was named by Assembly Concurrent Resolution 27, Chapter 156, in 1968. Douglas MacArthur (1880-1964) was a brilliant and controversial five-star U.S. Army General. Strongly dedicated to country and duty, and gifted with superior command ability, MacArthur's military service included important command assignments in the both World Wars and the Korean War. During World War One, MacArthur commanded the 42nd "Rainbow" Division of the Allied Expeditionary Force in France. After the War, MacArthur was superintendant of West Point from 1919-1922. In January of 1930 he was promoted to full General, 4 stars and named the U.S. Army's Chief of Staff. MacArthur retired from the Army in 1937, one year after the President of the Phillipines, Manuel Quezon, appointed him Field Marshall of the Phillipine Army. In 1941 MacArthur was recalled to active duty as the U.S. prepared to enter World War Two. By 1942 MacArthur was Supreme Allied Commander of the Southwest Pacific theater. In January of 1945, MacArthur was promoted to the rank of five star General. On September 2, 1945 on board the USS Missouri in Tokyo Bay, MacArthur accepted Japan's unconditional surrender. In June 1950, with the beginning of the Korean War, MacArthur was appointed the Supreme United Nations commander. However, on April 11, 1951 he was relieved of his command by President Truman. This tunnel had been known as the "Presidio Tunnel". [Information on General MacArthur from]


    Named Structures

    The I-580 overpass at 38th Street in Oakland is named the "Officer James Williams Memorial Overpass". This overpass is named in memory of Oakland Police Officer James Williams, Jr., who died in the line of duty on January 10, 1999. The incident started when a shotgun was discarded onto the freeway by suspects who were fleeing from the police. Officer Williams was helping to locate the weapon and was assisting in its recovery when a sniper began firing at the responding officers from the southwest side of the 38th Avenue I-580 overpass in Oakland. Officer Williams was hit by the sniper's bullets and died of those injuries. Officer Williams had a wife, Sabrina, and three small children: ten-year-old Alexander, five-year-old Aaron, and four-year-old Ariana. He was formerly a police officer in New Orleans, had just graduated from the police academy and was still in training at the time of his death. Named by Assembly Concurrent Resolution 82, Chapter 12, filed 1/28/2000.

    The Keller Avenue Bridge that crosses I-580 in the City of Oakland is officially named the “Sergeant Mark Dunakin, Sergeant Ervin Romans, and Officer John Hege Memorial Bridge”. This structure was named in honor of Sergeant Mark Dunakin, Sergeant Ervin Romans, and Officer John Hege, who proudly served the Oakland Police Department for 18 years, 13 years, and 10 years, respectively. Sergeant Dunakin began his career with the department in May 1991. During his career, he was assigned to several units of the department, including the Patrol Division, the Crime Prevention Unit, the Robbery Section, and the Homicide Unit. In 1999, Dunakin was promoted to the rank of Sergeant of Police. While serving in the Homicide Unit, Dunakin acted as one of the lead investigators of the "Nut Cases" gang, a group that terrorized Oakland in a 10-week crime wave in 2002 and 2003. Dunakin's tireless work paid off when the gang was successfully arrested. Sergeant Ervin Romans started his career with the Oakland Police Department in 1996. Romans' sense of duty and commitment to the department never wavered; in 1999, he received the Medal of Valor, the department's highest honor, for evacuating endangered residents from a fire in West Oakland. Romans' expertise and attention to detail served the City of Oakland well when he become a Departmental Range Master, a position in which he trained hundreds of officers in the ethical and proper use of firearms and less lethal weapons. In 2005, Romans was promoted to the rank of Sergeant of Police. As a sergeant, he supervised one of Oakland's crime reduction teams and served as the entry team leader on the department's Tactical Operations Team. Officer John Hege started his career with the department as a volunteer reserve police officer in 1993. He was hired as a full-time police officer in 1999. Upon graduating from the Oakland Police Academy, he was assigned to the Bureau of Field Operations/ After patrolling the streets of Oakland for 10 years, Hege fulfilled a lifelong dream when he was transferred to the Traffic Operations Section and assigned as a motorcycle officer. Hege gave his heart, soul, and a seemingly limitless amount of time to the Oakland Police Department, yet he always made time for his family and friends. Sergeant Dunakin, Sergeant Romans, and Officer Hege dedicated their lives to the pursuit of safety and justice; andon March 21, 2009, Sergeant Dunakin was shot and killed and Officer Hege was mortally wounded during a traffic stop. Efforts to apprehend the suspect resulted in the death of Sergeant Romans. Named by Assembly Concurrant Resolution (ACR) 146, 8/17/2010, Resolution Chapter 91.


    Commuter Lanes

    TCRP 31There are plans for eastbound and westbound HOV lanes from Tassajara Road/Santa Rita Road to Vasco Road in Alameda County. This is TCRP Project #31, requested by the Alameda County Congestion Management Authority. In August 2005, the CTC considered a TCRP Application Amendment to revise the project scope for Project #31 – Route 580; construct eastbound and westbound HOV lanes from Tassajara Road/Santa Rita Road to Vasco Road in Alameda County. Initially, the overall project was to construct eastbound and westbound HOV lanes on I-580 from west of Tassajara Road in Pleasanton to east of Vasco Road in Livermore. However, the project will now be delivered as two segments; first the eastbound direction using the TCR funds, followed by the westbound direction. The westbound segment will require additional improvements beyond the project limits of the Legislative description and will be delivered with other funds to be determined. In July 2006, the CTC considered an update to the project schedule due to delays in completing the environmental document, previously completed environmental studies have lapsed or expired and are required to be redone. This reschedules Phase 1 of the project to FY 2005/2006.

    In September 2012, the CTC approved an addition $10,000 for this project. These funds will be used for two separate construction contracts: Segment 1 (Greenville to Isabel, PPNO 0112B, 04-2908C); Segment 2 (Isabel to Foothill, PPNO 0112F, 04-2908E).


    Other WWW Links


    Double Fine Zones

    Although not specifically on Route 580, AB 348, Chaptered 9/21/2011 (Statute Chapter 290) designated (until January 1, 2017) the segment of county highway known as Vasco Road, between the Route 580 junction in Alameda County and the Walnut Boulevard intersection in Contra Costa County, as a Safety Enhancement-Double Fine Zone upon the approval of the boards of supervisors of Alameda County and Contra Costa County.


    Scenic Highway

    [SHC 263.8] From Route 5 southwest of Vernalis to Route 80.


    National Trails

    De Anza Auto Route This route is part of the De Anza National Historic Trail.

    Lincoln Highway Sign This was part of the Lincoln Highway.

    Victory Highway Sign This portion of this segment from I-80 (former US 50) to I-205 was part of the coast-to-coast "Victory Highway".


    Interstate Submissions

    Approved as chargeable Interstate on 7/7/1947, later adjusted in 1955 and 1957. In August 1957, this was tentatively approved as I-5W. In November 1957, the designation I-72 was proposed as part of the first attempt to give urban routes numbers (there were no 3-digit routes at the time). The proposal went back to I-5W in August 1958, and it was finally approved as I-5W, and later renumbered as I-580.

    In August 1958, the designation I-580 was proposed by the department for what is now I-680.

  2. From Route 80 near Albany to Route 101 near San Rafael via the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge.

    Post 1964 Signage History

    In 1984, Chapter 409 this segment was added by transfer from Route 17. The segment was originally submitted (1983) to have been I-180; however, state numbering rules changed it to be part of I-580. Before the transfer in 1984, the section from the junction of I-80 and I-580 ("McArthur Freeway" or "the Maze") to the interchange at Hoffman Blvd (approximately 3 miles), was signed as I-80 and Route 17.

    Before the completion of the freeway portion between the Hoffman Blvd/I-80 Interchange to the foot of the San Rafeal Bridge, the Route 17 routing was as follows: Hoffman Blvd, to Cutting Blvd, to Standard Ave, and then to the foot of the Richmond-San Rafael bridge. This was signed as "Temporary I-580" until construction of the freeway I-580 was completed.

    The 4.0-mile Richmond-San Rafael Bridge opened in 1956.


    Pre 1964 Signage History

    The most recent freeway routing of I-580 appears to have been LRN 257, defined in 1959. A previous routing was LRN 69, and the San Pablo surface street routing was LRN 114. Both LRN 69 and LRN 114 were defined in 1933. This was cosigned US 40/US 50.



    In September 2010, the CTC proposed amending the CMIA baseline agreements for Westbound I-580 to Northbound US 101 Connector Improvements project (PPNO 0342M) to • De-allocate $200,000 CMIA savings from Right of Way (R/W). • Reprogram these $200,000 CMIA savings from R/W to Construction. This project is located at theUS 101/I-580 interchange in Marin County. The project scope includes • Widen connector from westbound I-580 to northbound US 101. • Extend Bellam Boulevard off-ramp from westbound I-580. • Modify Bellam Boulevard on-ramp to northbound US 101. • Replace Bellam Boulevard undercrossing on westbound I-580. • Construct associated bicycle and pedestrian improvements along Bellam Boulevard and East Francisco Street in this area. This project, funded 100 percent with CMIA funds, was allocated $13,200,000 CMIA for construction capital in May 2009. When the bids were opened in September 2009, the lowest bid came $2,148,000 below the allocated amount. The project allotment was $11,052,000. These award savings were subsequently de-allocated by the Commission at its May 2010 meeting. The construction contract was awarded in November 2009 and construction began in December 2009. Although the construction contract acceptance (CCA) milestone is scheduled for March 2011, it is anticipated that all the major construction activities will be completed and the facility opened to traffic by October 2010. The project is located on a site that was originally on the edge of the San Francisco Bay and currently sits atop an abandoned railroad alignment. These factors added to the risks associated with differing sub-surface conditions. Furthermore, the project location also experiences heavy pedestrian and bicycle traffic that comes from a disadvantaged community adjacent to the project site and also from a number of critical crossroads of regional and local traffic access to Route 580.

    In April 2013, it was reported that deck replacement was about to begin on the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge. The project will (a) Replace the concrete decks for three bridges; (b) refresh the eastbound and westbound Scofield Avenue Bridge Undercrossings; (c) refresh the Westbound Western Drive Bridge Undercrossing that approaches the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge Toll Plaza; (d) Strengthen structural steel bridge members; (e) Re-paint structural steel for corrosion protection; and (f) Replace bridge deck joints and seals.

    In September 2014, it was reported that BATA was considering a proposal to restore a third lane to the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge. Specifically, the BATA approved a contract with HNTB Corp. for up to $3 million to provide design services regarding the third lane. A bike path on the upper deck is also part of the design. Another lane would mean more traffic flowing onto the 4.2-mile span, helping clear the congestion on US 101 and Sir Francis Drake Boulevard. It would only be used for eastbound vehicle traffic during evening peak periods. No construction would be involved, because there were originally three lanes on each deck. Caltrans closed one lane in each direction for emergencies and maintenance. In the mid-1970s, the lane was used for a pipe that was stretched across the bridge to carry water from Contra Costa to parched Marin during the drought. The third lane idea has been discussed for years, but something is finally happening thanks to the transportation commission and the Transportation Authority of Marin. There are two elements to the design project. One is to provide an additional travel lane eastbound from the Sir Francis Drake onramp from San Quentin to the Marine Street offramp in Richmond. This mostly involves converting the right shoulder of the lower deck of the bridge to a lane . The second element is more complicated, and would use the right-hand shoulder on the upper deck for bidirectional bicyclist and pedestrian crossings. This would require the installation of a movable median barrier. It also requires developing a way to provide cyclists access from the east side of the bridge.
    (Source: Marin IJ, 9/21/2014)

    In June 2015, it was reported that plans to add an additional commuter lane and a bike-pedestrian path on the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge are moving forward. The $74 million improvement project would be fully funded with Bay Area Toll Authority toll funds. Right now, the plan includes building a concrete barrier system on the upper deck of the span for a bicycle and pedestrian pathway. On the lower deck, the existing shoulder would be converted to a commuter lane, expected to relieve traffic congestion during peak periods. In August 2015, it was reported that Assembly Man Marc Levine believes that third eastbound lane on the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge should be opened by the end of September 2015 at the latest, not in 2017 as Caltrans has proposed. He has introduced a bill, AB9, in an attempt to push the agency into action. Levine contends opening the third lane — which now is a shoulder — is a simple fix: just paint in a new lane. The bridge initially had three lanes when it opened in 1956, but when drought hit in 1977 a lane was closed so a pipeline could be laid across the span to bring water to Marin. When the pipeline was removed in 1978, the lane was converted to a shoulder given light traffic. “The lane is there, they are just pretending it’s a shoulder,” Levine said, adding the lane could be opened on a “temporary” basis until a permanent fix is achieved. Caltrans officials said simply painting in a new lane is not as easy as it sounds. Caltrans noted the shoulder reduces in width from 10 feet on the bridge to just over 2 feet on land in Richmond, which would create a bottleneck for cars. Caltrans also says the existing shoulder is currently used as a bike path as it comes off the bridge. That use would not be possible if the shoulder is widened for vehicle use. They are also working over water, and now have to do the required environmental planning.
    (Source: KCBS, 6/24/2015, Marin I-J, 8/18/2015)



    I-580 from I-80 to the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge through Richmond is named the "John T. Knox Freeway". John J. Knox., elected to the California Assembly in 1960, made important legislative contributions to the upgrade of I-580 to meet interstate freeway standards. Named by Senate Concurrent Resolution 50, Chapter 78 in 1980.


    Named Structures

    Bridge 28-100, the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge (named by Senate Concurrent Resolution 100 Chapter 243 in 1955) between Richmond and San Rafael in Contra Costa county.

    It was officially renamed the "John F. McCarthy Memorial Bridge". John F. McCarthy served in the California Senate from 1950 to 1970 where he was instrumental in the creation of the Bay Area Rapid Transit District. It was built in 1956, and renamed by Senate Concurrent Resolution 19, Chapter 76 in 1981.


    Commuter Lanes

    In Contra Costa County, HOV lanes once ran eastbound from Marine Street to W of Central Avenue, for a length of 4.5 mi. They ran westbound from E of Central Avenue to Marine Street for a length of 5.3 mi. They were opened in 1989, extended in 1992, and were closed through Richmond by February 2000.

    There is also a HOV exclusive lane on the Richmond/San Rafael Bridge. It opened in October 1989. It requires three or more occupants (two for two-seater vehicles) and operates during rush hour.


    Interstate Submissions

    Approved as chargeable interstate in April 1978; originally numbered as I-180; the portion between Castro Street in Richmond and Route 101 is 139(a) non-chargeable milage.

Classified Landcaped Freeway

The following segments are designated as Classified Landscaped Freeway:

County Route Starting PM Ending PM
Alameda 580 10.22 10.82
Alameda 580 13.17 13.41
Alameda 580 14.97 15.63
Alameda 580 17.55 18.31
Alameda 580 18.54 19.12
Alameda 580 19.76 19.96
Alameda 580 20.14 20.39
Alameda 580 28.10 43.50
Alameda 580 43.63 46.09
Alameda 580 47.87 48.04
Contra Costa 580 0.00 0.03
Contra Costa 580 0.38 0.70
Contra Costa 580 1.25 R4.10
Contra Costa 580 R4.17 R4.37
Contra Costa 580 R4.49 R4.83
Contra Costa 580 R4.94 R5.67
Marin 580 3.76 4.78




Other WWW Links



[SHC 253.1] Entire route. Added to the Freeway and Expressway system in 1959.


Overall statistics for Route 580:

  • Total Length (1995): 76 miles
  • Average Daily Traffic (1992): 14,100 to 286,000
  • Milage Classification: Rural: 28; Sm. Urban: 0; Urbanized: 48.
  • Previous Federal Aid Milage: FAI: 68 mi; FAP: 8 mi.
  • Functional Classification: Prin. Arterial: 76 mi.
  • Counties Traversed: San Joaquin, Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin.

Interstate Shield

Interstate 605

  1. From Route 1 near Seal Beach to Route 405.

    Post 1964 Signage History

    In 1963, Route 605 was defined as "Route 405 to Route 10 near the San Gabriel River."

    In 1964, it was noted that "Similarly, the southern extension, from the San Diego Freeway to the Pacific Coast Highway, is noninterstate. It is now designated as Route 240. Studies leading to adoption of the route are in a preliminary stage."

    In 1968, Chapter 282 added segment (a) and (c): "(a) Route 1 near Seal Beach to Route 405. (b) Route 405 to Route 10 near the San Gabriel River. (c) Route 10 to Route 210 near Duarte." Segment (a) was a transfer from Route 240 (defined in 1964).


    Pre 1964 Signage History

    This was LRN 170. The portion between Route 22 and I-10 was defined in 1933; the portion between Route 1 and Route 22 in 1957; and the remainder in 1959.



    Unconstructed The portion between Route 1 and Route 22 is unconstructed. The routing is roughly Seal Beach Blvd, although this does not meet the definition of a traversable highway. In 1965, it was planned to connect to the Pacific Coast Freeway (Route 1).

  2. From Route 405 to Route 210 near Duarte.

    Post 1964 Signage History

    In 1963, Route 605 was defined as "Route 405 to Route 10 near the San Gabriel River."

    In 1964, it was noted that "The northerly extension of the San Gabriel River Freeway, 5.4 miles in length, between the San Bernardino Freeway and the future Foothill Freeway, is being designed and right-of-way is being acquired. This section, not on the interstate system, is now designated as Route 243. Construction is about four years in the future (1968)."

    In 1968, Chapter 282 added segment (a) and (c): "(a) Route 1 near Seal Beach to Route 405. (b) Route 405 to Route 10 near the San Gabriel River. (c) Route 10 to Route 210 near Duarte." Segment (c) was transferred from Route 243. The Route 243 segment was approved for interstate construction as part of the December 1968 Federal Aid Highway act, which provided $19.0 million for the 5.5 mile segment.

    In 1984, Chapter 409 combined (b) and (c): "(b) Route 405 to Route 210 near Duarte."

    The freeway started construction in 1964, and was extended north to the I-210 in 1971.


    Pre 1964 Signage History

    This was LRN 170. The portion between Route 22 and I-10 was defined in 1933; the portion between Route 1 and Route 22 in 1957; and the remainder in 1959. On 12/15/1954, the CTC adopted a freeway routing for the future I-605 between the San Diego Freeway and the San Bernardino Freeway (Route 7 and US 70-99 then, now I-405 and I-10).



    In December 2005, utilizing Measure M money, the OCTA authorized construction of HOV connector ramps between I-405 and I-605.

    In January 2011, the CTC authorized relinquishment of right of way in the city of Irwindale along Route 605 between West Ramona Boulevard and Rivergrade Road, consisting of collateral facilities.

    In August 2011, the CTC approved $2,033,000 in SHOPP funding for repairs in and near Pico Rivera, from 195th Street to Route 210, that will repair bridge decks and replace joint seals on 22 bridges to extend the service life of the structures.

    In April 2012, the CTC authorized SHOPP funding on I-605, in Los Angeles County, 07-LA-605 R0.1/R16.6 In Los Angeles County through various cities, from Coyote Creek Bridge to Peck Road. $588,000 to construct 11,500 feet of metal beam guardrail, and 2,000 feet of concrete barrier at locations of high embankments, trees, and fixed objects. The project will improve safety by reducing the severity of run-off-the road collisions.

    The SAFETEA-LU act, enacted in August 2005 as the reauthorization of TEA-21, provided the following expenditures on or near this route:

    • High Priority Project #574: Construction funding for I-605 Interchange Capacity Improvements in Irwindale. $1,600,000.

    • High Priority Project #3175: Route 91/I-605 Needs Assesment Study, Whittier, CA.$12,800.

    According to an article in the San Gabriel Tribune, the I-10/I-605 interchange was designed in 1964 and was supposed to accommodate traffic until 1984. No major changes have been undertaken there since it was built. An average of 438,000 cars use the interchange each day, making the intersection the 19th busiest in the state. According to a 1999 study by the South Coast Air Quality Management District, the area directly around the interchange has one of the highest air-pollution- related cancer risk factors in the San Gabriel Valley. One of the main problems with the intersection is what engineers call "the weave,", where vehicles transferring from the I-10 west to the I-605 south have to weave across cars getting on the I-605 south from the I-10 east. Cars from both directions have only about 150 feet to change places with each other. Additionally, drivers who want to transfer from the southbound I-605 to the eastbound I-10 east have to take a left turn when leaving the I-605. According to Caltrans, the prospects for improvements are bleak. Caltrans is considering building a flyover from the I-605 south to the I-10 east, which would eliminate the weaving-in section. Construction for the $66 million direct connector should break ground in 2011.

    In June 2009, the CTC approved for future consideration of funding this project. It will construct an elevated direct connector from southbound I-605 to eastbound I-10 that would replace the existing southbound I-605 to eastbound I-10 connector. The project is fully funded and is programmed on the 2008 State Highway Operation Protection Program Grant Anticipation Revenue Vehicles (GARVEE) list. The estimated project cost is $76,460,000, capital and support. Construction is estimated to begin in Fiscal Year (FY) 2010-11.

    In December 2012, construction started on the $66 million one-lane flyover ramp that will provide a direct connection from SB I-605 to the EB I-10. The ramp will be erected 70 feet above the freeway so that those driving along SB I-605 freeway will have their own ramp to connect with EB I-10 freeway without having to make lane changes that interfere with other drivers also merging on the interchange. The project is funded by the State Highway Operation and Protection Program (SHOPP), with a combination of state and federal monies.

    In March 2012, Caltrans began construction of a $14-million sound wall project along the 605 freeway in the city of Whittier and unincorporated county. The project consists of approximately three miles of sound walls on both sides of the freeway with a scheduled completion of winter 2013. Metro funded the entire $14 million from Prop C and Measure R monies.

    In April 2012, the CTC approved $588,000 allocation for safety improvements on I-605 extending from Cerritos to Pico Rivera (Coyote Creek Bridge to Peck Road) to construct metal beam guardrail and concrete barrier at locations with high embankments, trees, and fixed objects.



    The portion of this segment from Route 405 to Route 10 is officially designated as the "San Gabriel River Freeway." It was named by Senate Bill 99, Chapter 1101, in 1967. The first segment opened in 1964; the last in 1971.

    The portion between I-10 and I-210 was known during construction as the "Rivergrade Freeway", as it was virtually paved over the then-existing Rivergrade Road alignment that ran between Valley Blvd (South Terminus) and Arrow Highway (Northern Terminus). Today Rivergrade Road now only exists between Live Oak Ave and Arrow Highway, running along the eastern side of the San Gabriel River. The southern tiny portion at Valley Blvd is known as Perez Place which also intersects with Temple Ave.

    The interchange of I-605 and I-210 is named the Los Angeles County Deputy Sheriff David W. March Memorial Interchange. It was named in memory of Deputy David W. March of the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department, who was killed in the line of duty at the age of 33 on April 29, 2002, in Irwindale while conducting a "routine" traffic stop. He was a longtime resident of Santa Clarita Valley and a 1988 graduate of Canyon High School where he played football and baseball. He served seven years as a law enforcement officer. It was named by Assembly Concurrent Resolution 142, July 16, 2004. Chapter 122.

    The portion of I-605 between Carson Street and Del Amo Boulevard, in the County of Los Angeles, is named the "John Sanford Todd Memorial Highway". It was named in memory of John Sanford Todd, who was active in the battle to presever the independence of the city of Lakewood in the early 1953s in the face of annexation elections by the city of Long Beach. With other community members, John Sanford Todd mounted a spirited campaign to prevent "piecemeal annexation." It was his strategy of appealing each annexation election as soon as it was announced stalled the City of Long Beach's plans, although Lakewood Village and a few other neighborhoods accepted annexation. Todd was also responsible for Lakewood Cityhood, including the idea that unincorporated communities did not have to choose between annexation by a big city or building a costly civic infrastructure from scratch. Instead, Todd believed that city councils could turn to the county to deliver municipal services through a system of contracts. Todd served as Lakewood's City Attorney from 1954 until 2004, a period of 50 years. As the city's legal counsel over that period of 50 years, John Sanford Todd drafted hundreds of ordinances, policies, regulations, and resolutions. The quality of everyday life in Lakewood can be directly attributed to the body of law of which John Sanford Todd was the principal author. John Sanford Todd served in other ways, including as an officer in the contract cities association and in the statewide League of California Cities. He was, for a time, the City Attorney of Pico Rivera as well as Lakewood. He was also the first legal counsel of the California Joint Powers Insurance Authority, an agency that provides member cities with insurance protection. Named by Assembly Concurrent Resolution (ACR) 15, Resolution Chapter 76, on 7/16/2009.

    The portion from Route 10 to Route 210 is unnamed.


    Named Structures

    The freeway interchange between Route 105 and Route 605 is officially designated the "Joe A. Gonsalves Memorial Interchange". Joe A. Gonsalves was born to Joaquim Gonsalves and Elvira Silva Gonsalves in Holtville, California, on October 13, 1919. He was elected to the City Council of the City of Dairy Valley, now known as the City of Cerritos, in 1958, and was twice elected the Mayor of Dairy Valley. In 1962, he was elected to the California State Assembly, representing the 66th Assembly District (making him the first person of Portuguese ancestry to be elected to the California State Legislature). During his 12 years in the California Legislature he served as Chair of the Assembly Rules Committee, Revenue and Taxation Committee, and the Joint Committee on Rules and, served as a member of the Assembly Education Committee, and the State Allocation Board. In 1963, during his legislative tenure, Section 405 of the Streets and Highways Code was enacted, describing Route 105 as running from Route 5, to the junction of Route 101 and Route 110, which would have caused Route 105 to cut through the Cities of Norwalk and La Mirada [Note: The above is from the resolution, and reflects poor research. The current incarnation of Route 105 wasn't defined as Route 105 in 1963; the closest routing was pre-1968 Route 42]. At the requests of the Cities of Norwalk and La Mirada and their residents, Joe A. Gonsalves was instrumental in having Section 405 of the Streets and Highways Code amended in 1968, so that Route 105 ended at Route 605 rather than cutting through the Cities of Norwalk and La Mirada (thus, those of you who complain that I-105 doesn't go through to I-5 have Mr. Gonsalves to blame). After leaving the legislature, Joe A. Gonsalves operated the only three-generation lobbying firm in Sacramento, with his son, Anthony Gonsalves, and his grandson, Jason Gonsalves. Joe A. Gonsalves passed away on July 7, 2000. Named by Assembly Concurrent Resolution 96, Chapter 129, September 24, 2001.



Other WWW Links


Commuter Lanes

Commuter lanes are under construction on this route between Telegraph Road and I-10. They are scheduled to open in April 1998.

Lanes are planned between the Los Angeles/Orange County line and South Street; construction starts in 1999. That date, however, was optimistic. In June 2002, there was a STIP proposal on the CTC agenda for constructing HOV lanes from Route 405 to the Los Angeles County line. This also shows on the regional transportation improvement plan.


Classified Landcaped Freeway

The following segments are designated as Classified Landscaped Freeway:

County Route Starting PM Ending PM
Orange 605 3.09 R1.64
Los Angeles 605 R0.00 R8.24
Los Angeles 605 R8.28 R8.47
Los Angeles 605 R8.94 R16.52
Los Angeles 605 R16.57 R17.69
Los Angeles 605 R17.75 R19.45
Los Angeles 605 R19.49 R19.85
Los Angeles 605 R20.00 21.26
Los Angeles 605 25.61 26.00


Interstate Submissions

Approved as chargeable Interstate from Route 405 to Route 10 on 9/15/1955; the Route 10 to Route 210 portion was approved as chargeable in December 1968 as a result of the December 1968 Federal Aid Highway Act.

In November 1957, the California Department of Highways proposed this as I-13. When that was rejected for an urban route, the department tried it as a 3 digit interstate, I-105. This was before the numbering conventions were established, and sequential 3dis were being used. That number was also rejected. In August 1958, the department proposed I-605, which was accepted.



[SHC 253.1] Entire route. Added to the Freeway and Expressway system in 1959.


Overall statistics for I-605:

  • Total Length (1995): 27 miles traversed; 3 miles unconstructed.
  • Average Daily Traffic (1992): 34,000 to 247,000.
  • Milage Classification: Rural: 0; Sm. Urban: 0; Urbanized: 30.
  • Previous Federal Aid Milage: FAI: 27 mi.
  • Functional Classification: Prin. Arterial: 27 mi.
  • Counties Traversed: Los Angeles, Orange.

Interstate Shield

Interstate 680

  1. From Route 101 near San Jose to Route 780 at Benicia passing near Warm Springs, Mission San Jose, Scotts Corners and Sunol, and via Walnut Creek.

    Post 1964 Signage History

    1964 680 routingIn 1963, Route 680 was defined as "Route 280 in San Jose to Route 80 in Vallejo passing near Warm Springs, Mission San Jose, Scotts Corners and Sunol, and via Walnut Creek and Benicia.". The 1964 routing is illustrated to the right.

    In 1965, Chapter 1371 changed the origin of the route: "Route 280 Route 101 near San Jose to Route 80 in Vallejo passing near Warm Springs, Mission San Jose, Scotts Corners and Sunol, and via Walnut Creek and Benicia."

    In 1976, Chapter 1354 added a second segment and change terminus of (a): "(a) Route 101 near San Jose to Route 780 in Vallejo at Benicia passing near Warm Springs, Mission San Jose, Scotts Corners, and Sunol, and via Walnut Creek and Benecia. (b) Route 780 at Benicia to Route 80 near Cordelia." This was the result of a transfer from Route 21, combined with a concurrent transfer to new I-780.

    Portions of this segment was once signed as Route 21 (and for a while, during the numbering changeover, was cosigned as Route 21). The beginning of the 1963 segment (b) of Route 17 [Route 101 near San Jose...] (as opposed to "at Story Road", which is in the definition of I-280) could imply that instead of the second segment of Route 17 representing current I-680 between US 101 and Route 262, the 1963 notion represented the surface street routing along Oakland Road (later to be signed as Route 238), with I-680 being the only legislatively defined number for all of current Route 262 and all of the Route 17/I-880 from I-280 to Route 262. This might imply that the segment of I-680 from Route 262 to US 101 was first planned in 1965.* It appears the original plans were for Route 17 to have turned east in San Jose onto what is now I-280, crossed US 101, and then joined with I-680 in Fremont using the present-day I-680 alignment. I-280 would have turned north on present-day I-880 (then signed as Route 17) at Route 17, switched to I-680 at US 101, and then would have joined the proposed Route 17 at Fremont near Route 262. Apparently, Route 17 would have crossed over somewhere at that point to its then-existing routing up to Oakland.
    [*: Credit for the surmisings regarding 1963-1965 I-680 should go to Chris Sampang]

    At this time (i.e., before the section south of Fremont opened), I-680 was routed along present-day I-880 to US 101 in San Jose. The section from Mission Blvd to Route 237 opened in 1971, and the section south of that opened in 1974. The I-280/US 101 interchange opened in 1982. For a time, I-680 was routed along Route 17 (now I-880) to Route 237, across Route 237, and then up the current I-680 from Route 237.

    There is also a maintenance facility at the southwest corner of Scott Creek Road. It was originally acquired by Caltrans for a freeway that was going to connect I-680 to I-880. This freeway was killed by Gov. Jerry Brown in the 1970s.

    After the new I-680 alignment was finalized, Oakland Road and Main Street were signed as Route 238, since that portion of Mission Blvd south of the present terminus of Route 238 was signed as Route 238 to Warm Springs. Today's I-880 freeway was signed as Route 17 and Temporary I-680 north of US 101 to the junction of Route 262 and Route 17 and Temporary I-280 south of US 101 to the junction of US 280. Note that Mission Blvd crosses I-680 twice. At the first (northern) crossing it is signed as Route 238 and this is the present terminus of Route 238. At the second (southern) crossing it is signed as a connection to I-880; this is the eastern terminus of (unsigned) Route 262. Also, the city of Milpitas built a new alignment for Main Street, so present-day maps do not show how Oakland Road connected with Mission Blvd in Warm Springs via Main Street.

    When I-680 was built in the hills through Fremont's east side in the 1963-1964, an overpass and roadway was also constructed heading northwest where I-680 now turns east up through Mission Pass, between the Washington Boulevard and Auto Mall Parkway exits. That section, about 1,000 feet long, was the start of the aborted Mission Freeway that was to have run northwest under Lake Elizabeth through the middle of Fremont and Union City to connect with I-580 in Hayward. These plans were scuttled in the 1970s. This "bridge to nowhere" was demolished in 2002 to accomodate widening of I-680, and the southbound carpool lane construction. Caltrans still owns property on the north side of the curve east of Osgood that it has used for construction staging. However, the Caltrans Bridge Log dates the bridge as 1971, and refers to it as "FUTURE 238/680". This has left a mysterious exit-like area off I-680 in Fremont.

    The Benicia-Martinez bridge opened on September 15, 1962, replacing a ferry. Concurrently, the Benicia-Martinez Ferry made its last trip across the Carquinez Straits. This marked not only the end of the state-operated ferry system, but also the end of 115 yeaxs of ferry service in the San Francisco Bay area (except for a new Tiburon commuter vessel). The M.V. Carquinez has been sold to the State of Florida for $86,001. It will be used as a part of the State of Florida's ferry system across the mouth of the St. Johns River on the Atlantic Coast east of Jacksonville.

    They are working on a new Benicia Bridge, but it may not happen because of some the construction of the foundation piers may be interfering with salmon and delta smelt migration. The project experienced a delay in November 2002 due to rock boring problems and problems with the collapsing of mud in the underwater bores. These delays pushed back the opening seven years and increased the cost to nearly $1.3 billion. The first major construction problem came when the noise and vibration from pile-driving operations killed fish in the Carquinez Strait. The work stopped while engineers designed an air bubble curtain to protect aquatic life. Contractors then hit unexpectedly soft rock at the base of the pilings used to support the bridge's piers. To anchor the pilings deep beneath the riverbed, the contractor inserted steel sleeves into the pilings and filled them with concrete and rebar, a costly and time-consuming task. Later, as workers began pouring the first of 344 16-foot segments, the chemistry of the lightweight concrete produced too much heat. To cool down the concrete, the contractor pumped water from the river into a series of pipes to each segment until each cured properly. It opened at the end of August 2007. Details on the project can be found here and here. The basic project includes the following features:

    • Construction of a new five lane bridge (four mixed-flow lanes one slow-vehicle lane), east of the existing bridge and rail span with provisions to accommodate future light rail
    • Construction of a new 9-booth toll plaza – including one carpool bypass lane, two open road tolling lanes and accommodation for electronic toll collection – as well as an administration building at the southern approach to the new bridge in Contra Costa County
    • Reconstruction of the Interstate 680 interchanges at I-780 in Benicia and Marina Vista/Waterfront Road in Martinez to accommodate the new bridge and toll plaza
    • Modifications of the existing bridge to accommodate four mixed-flow lanes of southbound traffic and two-way bicycle/pedestrian lane
    • Restoration of a 22.8 acre parcel of tidal marsh in the City of Benicia

    This was the first bridge in Northern California to have FasTrak Express lanes. Unlike existing FasTrak lanes, which use treadles mounted in the pavement and laser-light curtains to count axles and measure vehicles, the technology used for open-road tolling does the job from above in a fraction of a second. And if it doesn't recognize the vehicle, it snaps photographs of it and its license numbers. Drivers, if they're paying attention, will hear the familiar "beep-beep" from their FasTrak transponder as they pass the toll plaza and speed toward the bridge. The new equipment can collect tolls at speeds up to 100 mph. A California Highway Patrol officer, testing the system by zipping through the plaza at 85 mph, had his toll collected electronically. The equipment also snapped a clear image of his license plate. Bridge officials also have tested the lanes by flooding them with vehicles to make sure the equipment works in crowded conditions. And they've installed cameras and detectors over the wide shoulders to make sure drivers straddling the line or trying to sneak through without paying will be charged.

    The new Benicia-Martinez Bridge, funded with voter-approved toll increases, will carry northbound traffic, and the existing bridge will carry southbound traffic in three lanes. Over the next two years, crews will remove the median and convert the old span to four traffic lanes and one bicycle/pedestrian lane.

    This project also includes replacement of the Marina Vista Bridge. This bridge was the site of a horrific accident on May 21, 1976, when the driver of a school bus full of choir students from Yuba City High School took the off-ramp at Marina Vista in Martinez. The bus plunged over the railing, landing upside down more than 20 feet below. Twenty eight students and one teacher died. Twenty two were injured. Along with driver error and mechanical failure, investigators ruled the severe curvature of the off-ramp was a contributing factor in the crash. In May 2016, it was reported that the infamous offramp was gone, and a new one should open by October 2015.
    (Source: KGO, 5/21/2015)

    Before 1976, the north end of I-680 went along present-day I-780 to I-80 in Vallejo, and Route 21 continued as a freeway to Fairfield.

    In May 2003, the CTC considered relinquishment of the segment from PM 12.9 to PM 14.1 in the County of Alameda. This is likely an original surface street or frontage routing.


    Pre 1964 Signage History

    The portion of this route between US 101 and present-day Route 238 was signed until 1964 as Alternate US 101.

    What was eventually signed as I-680 was built from the following LRNs:

    • The portion of LRN 5 between US 101 (Bypass US 101) and the vicinity of Irvington. This LRN was defined in 1909, and was originally part of Route 21. LRN 108 between Irvington and Sunol. This LRN was defined in 1933.

    • LRN 107 between Sunol and Walnut Creek. This LRN was defined in 1933. This was originally signed as part of Route 21.

    • The portion of LRN 75 between Walnut Creek and Benecia. This segment of LRN 75 was defined in 1933. Portions of this were signed as Route 24/Route 21 (until where Route 242 now diverges), and the remainder to Benecia was signed as Route 21. This segment was signed as Route 24 before the interstate signage, starting in 1935.



    From US 101 in San Jose to Fremont

    The CTC is funding a study for a cross connector freeway (Route 262) between I-680 and I-880 near Warm Springs.

    I-680 NB HOV/Express Lanes: Route 237 ⇒ Route 84

    There is also a project to construct a northbound HOV lane over the Sunol Grade, Milpitas to Route 84 in Santa Clara and Alameda Counties. This was first discussed during the June 2001 CTC meeting under Agenda Item 2.1c.(1). It is TCRP Project #4, requested by the Alameda County Congestion Management Agency and authorized for $60,000,000. On June 6, 2001, the Commission designated the northbound and southbound Route 680 HOV lanes over the Sunol Grade in Alameda and Santa Clara Counties as one corridor project (STIP Amendment 00S-031). Both projects are proceeding concurrently. The northbound project is in the environmental process and the southbound project is under construction.

    HOV Lanes NB 680In January 2015, the CTC received notice of a draft EIR for the I-680 Northbound HOV/Express Lane Project, which will construct an approximately 15-mile HOV/Express Lane on northbound I-680 from south of Route 237 in Santa Clara County to north of Route 84 (Vallecitos Road) in Alameda County. The alternatives are either build or no-build; the build would be in multiple phases. The EIR was prepared due to a substantial amount of public controversy surrounding the project associated with the proposed removal of five historic trees. The routing appears to be approximately the same segment that has the SB lanes. The project involves addition of the HOV lane, installation of electronic tolling equipment and signage, widening of existing paved surfaces in the median, construction of auxiliary lanes, demolition and replacement of the Sheridan Road overcrossing, widening the east side of the Alameda Creek Bridge, construction of retaining walls, new and replacement sound walls, modification of ramp metering, and pavement rehabilitation.

    The plan is to build the HOV/express lanes in multiple phases, with the first phase being constructing the lanes from Auto Mall Parkway to Route 84 (from Post Mile 3.4 to the end of the project). It would also add an auxiliary lane between Washington Blvd and Route 238. Estimated construction costs are ~$205.789 Million for Phase 1, and $299,374 Million for the entire build.

    In March 2015, it was reported that survey work has begun for adding a fourth northbound lane between Auto Mall Parkway and Route 84. It will be a carpool/express lane, as there is in the southbound direction. This is moving ahead because Alameda County voters approved funding for it in November 2014. The environmental report will be ready in late 2015, and design work will be completed in mid-2017. Construction will be done by 2019.
    (Source: San Jose Mercury News, 3/27/2015)

    I-680 SB HOV/Express Lanes: Route 84 ⇒ Route 237

    In November 2002, the first section of this project opened: a carpool lane from Washington Blvd in Fremont to Route 237 in Milpitas—a 7 mile section only in the southbound direction. The southbound interim section from Washington Blvd to Route 84 opened in December 2002. The fourth and final phase of the southbound work is currently in design with a Ready to List target of August 2007. The northbound project’s final environmental document was completed in June 2005. However, the northbound HOV project has experienced delays due to a lawsuit that was filed in response to the environmental document. In April 2006, the CTC considered a proposal to amend the scope of work to continue with design on the northbound project and utilize $58,000,000 in TCRP funds to fully fund the southbound project and provide delivery in an earlier fiscal year. The increase in scope and shift of funds was to allow time for the legal challenges of the northbound environmental document to be resolved. The revised completion dates are: Phase 1: FY 2005/2006; Phase 2: FY 2009/2010; Phase 3: FY 2009/2010; Phase 4: FY 2012/2013. In June 2008, the CTC approved an adjustment in the financial allocations.

    Note that High Occupancy/Toll lanes are proposed for I-680 SB from Route 84 to Route 237. For this project the current HOV lane (opened recently) would be converted to HOT, separated from general-purpose lanes by two double yellow lines, and outfitted with transponder devices a la EZPass/FastPass. Tolls would vary depending on congestion. Carpoolers would ride free.

    As of August 2009, it was noted that the toll SB HOV lane is under construction in Fremont. An additional lane was getting carved out of the Sunol Grade, and the Mission Boulevard/Route 238 overpass has been widened.

    I-680 SunolIn September 2010, HOT lanes opened at the Sunol Grade, offering solo drivers the opportunity to buy their way into the carpool lane. Tolls will planned to vary from less than a dollar to several dollars - with an average toll of $3 to $5. Specific toll amounts are determined using computerized models and the experience of existing toll bridges and roads that use the system, known as "dynamic pricing." Carpools, buses and hybrids with the appropriate permits will be able to use the lanes free. CHP officers will use a combination of visual and electronic monitoring to catch cheaters, who will face a $381 fine. Tolls are set according to information gathered by sensors installed in the pavement that measure traffic flow, including speed and level of congestion, in both the toll and unrestricted lanes. Tolls rise along with congestion - and the value of a trip around the backup. Drivers buying their way into the fast lane won't have the option of paying cash. Express lanes require users to have a FasTrak tag in their vehicle. Tolls will be collected electronically by a network of overhead antennas mounted on gantries. Drivers will be able to enter the express lane at Route 84 and at Washington Parkway and Mission Boulevard in Fremont. Exits will be available at Auto Mall Parkway in Fremont and Jacklin Road and Route 237 in Milpitas. The express lane will operate from 5 a.m. to 8 p.m. Monday through Friday. Outside of those hours, the lanes will be open to all drivers. The toll lane will not be separated by a barrier, cones or plastic stakes but by a 2-foot-wide stripe. The lanes have specific entry and exit points. Entries will be at the start of the lane, 1 mile south of Route 84, just past Mission Boulevard in Fremont and just past Auto Mall Parkway. Exits will be just past Auto Mall Parkway, just past Jacklin Road, and at the end of the lane south of Route 237. They will be marked with signs and special striping.
    [Source: San Francisco Chronicle, 6/24/10 and 9/13/10]

    In August 2014, the CTC reprogrammed some cost savings from the Sunol Grade HOV lane construction to the southbound lane project's landscaping contract.

    From Fremont to Dublin

    In July 2010, Caltrans removed a flag mural that had been painted on a concrete slab near the Sunol Grade after the terrorist attacks on Sept. 11, 2001. Caltrans said it removed the mural, which was visible to passing motorists, after it belatedly discovered it was on state-owned land. Gov. Schwarzenegger said that it was "unconscionable" to remove the flag mural only a few days before the Fourth of July. The controversy grew. Caltrans then met with East Bay residents R.J. Waldron, Eric Noda and Thomas Hanley, who painted the mural in 2001, "to discuss a suitable location" for a flag mural. Meanwhile two other men repainted the flag mural without contacting Caltrans so it would be in place for the Fourth of July.

    From Dublin to Walnut Creek

    In January 2013, the CTC authorized relinquishment of right of way along Route 680 at St. Patrick Way, in the city of Dublin, consisting of collateral facilities.

    There are plans to add NB and SB auxilliary lanes on Route 680 in San Ramon from Bollinger Canyon Road to Crow Canyon Road and in Danville from Sycamore Valley Road to Diablo Road. September 2005 CTC Agenda.

    In February 2013, it was reported that Caltrans plans to convert HOV lanes on I-680 into HOT ("Express" or High Occupancy/Toll) lanes -- specifically, I-680 southbound from the Benicia-Martinez Bridge to I-580 and northbound from I-580 to south of Walnut Creek as well as a stretch from Concord to the Benicia-Martinez Bridge. Express lanes work by continuing to allow carpoolers free access to the fast lane but then selling unused capacity to drivers who wouldn't normally qualify to drive in them. Tolls are collected electronically using FasTrak transponders, and electronic systems are used to monitor traffic and set tolls at a rate designed to keep traffic in the lanes flowing at 50 mph or faster. As the lanes get more congested, tolls rise, and as gridlock eases, they drop. Toll rates for the network have not been set yet, but on the existing lanes they have varied from a 30-cent minimum to about $5 or $6.

    In March 2014, it was reported that the first toll lanes in Contra Costa County are expected to open on I-680 by mid-2016. The $45 million project, which is in the design stage, will create 23 miles of FasTrak express lanes that solo drivers can pay to use -- as long as its traffic is moving at least 45 mph. Construction should begin at the start of 2015. The system would use the same FasTrak technology used on Bay Area bridges, with electronic toll tags that charge fees but require no stopping at toll booths. The toll lanes -- which will be free for carpoolers, motorcycles and electric vehicles -- will run on southbound I-680 from Rudgear Road in Walnut Creek to Alcosta Boulevard in San Ramon, and on northbound I-680 from Alcosta to Livorna Road in Alamo. The I-680 project is proceeding quickly because it is relatively inexpensive, with no need to build new lanes. Instead, existing HOV lanes would be converted with the installation of FasTrak toll tag readers, signs, traffic-monitoring video cameras, and observation areas for the California Highway Patrol to monitor lanes.
    (Source: Contra Costa Times)

    In August 2015, it was reported that the project to bring toll express lanes to I-680 through the San Ramon Valley is expected to start construction in August 2015, with completion estimated for late 2016.The MTC aims to convert existing high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes on I-680 between Alcosta Boulevard in San Ramon and Rudgear Road in southern Walnut Creek into express lanes that would charge tolls for access during peak commute times. The project does not include freeway widening.As proposed, the congestion-relief project would replace existing HOV lanes with express lanes on southbound I-680 from Rudgear Road to Alcosta Boulevard and on northbound I-680 from Alcosta to Livorna Road in Alamo -- approximately 23 miles overall. The express lanes would be free to access for carpools, vanpools, public transit, motorcycles and eligible clean-air vehicles while other solo drivers could pay a toll to use the lanes. Toll lane hours and rates have not been finalized. Work by DeSilva Gates is set to include adding signage, overhead toll readers, camera equipment and polls, median barriers, roadside lighting and associated roadwork such as striping and paving. A total of 31 overhead sign structures are planned for medians through the I-680 corridor. The contract awarded to DeSilva Gates on June 24 is worth about $16.3 million for construction, plus almost $2.2 million in contingency funding. There are three express-lane segments that in time will extend from the Benicia Bridge to the county border at Alcosta Boulevard in San Ramon. The first segment is on both directions of I-680 from Walnut Creek to San Ramon. The first stage of the installation is preparing the highway for installation of fiber optic cables that will carry information to overhead signs that alert drivers to the tolls.
    (Source: Pleasanton Weekly, 8/7/2015, Contra Costa Times, 8/12/2015)

    In August 2013, the CTC received notice of preparation of an EIR for a proposed project in Contra Costa County that would construct High Occupancy Vehicle on- and off-ramps and auxiliary lanes on I-680 between Bollinger Canyon Road and Crow Canyon Road in the city of San Ramon. The project is not fully funded. The project is funded through the environmental phase with local funds. Funds for construction may be requested from the Commission in the future. The total estimated cost is $102,000,000 for capital and support. Depending on the availability of funds, construction is estimated to begin in Fiscal Year 2017-18. Three alternatives are being considered:

    1. Alternative 1 – North Canyon Alternative. This alternative would construct direct on- and off-ramps from the I-680 median HOV lanes in both northbound and southbound directions, at a replaced Norris Canyon Road Overcrossing.
    2. Alternative 2 – Executive Parkway Alternative. This alternative would construct direct onand off-ramps from the I-680 median HOV lanes in both northbound and southbound directions, at a new overcrossing.
    3. Alternative 3 – No-Build (No-Project).

    In August 2012, the CTC approved $18,910 for I-680 Auxiliary Lanes - Segment 2. In the Cities of Danville and San Ramon. Construct auxiliary lanes in two both directions, between Sycamore Valley Road in Danville and Crow Canyon Road in San Ramon.

    In March 2013, it was reported that construction was about to being on the auxiliary lane project between Sycamore Valley Road in Danville and Crow Canyon Road in San Ramon. Construction actually began in April 2013. The construction contract permits the project to be finished in mid-2014. The contractors -- a joint venture of Bay Cities Paving & Grading and Inc/Myers J.V. — are pushing for an earlier completion if dry weather allows. Half or $16 million of the cost is paid for with funds from Contra Costa County's voter-approved half cent sales tax for transportation. Another $9.2 million comes from developer fees collected in the Tri-Valley region. Another $4.2 million comes from state and federal grants.
    (Source: Contra Costa Times, 4/8/13)

    In December 2011, it was reported that Contra Costa County transit officials and Caltrans are exploring rebuilding the Norris Canyon Overpass to include new onramps and offramps tied directly to carpool lanes, with use restricted to buses and carpools. Neighbors near Norris Canyon Road, however, say it would worsen local traffic and make it unsafe for children to walk or bike across a freeway overpass.

    In March 2013, it was reported that there were going to be community meetings on the HOV ramp project in San Ramon. The ramps were originally proposed for the Norris Canyon overpass, but were vigorously opposed by neighbors at public meetings last year. Neighbors said the ramps would negatively affect their quality of life by increasing traffic and noise. Others claimed the ramps would affect safety by increasing the number of buses and trucks on Norris Canyon Road, where children ride bikes to school. After these protests, Caltrans indicated they would reconsider an option for an HOV ramp at nearby Executive Parkway, previously considered a less suitable location.

    In 2007, the CTC considered a request for $10.5M from the Corridor Mobility Improvement Account (CMIA) to extend the NB HOV from North Main St. to Route 242 in Contra Costa County, but didn't recommend it for funding.

    From Walnut Creek to I-780 near Benecia

    HOV Lanes 680 Walnut CreekIn December 2014, the CTC approved for future consideration of funding a project in Contra Costa County that will construct a 5.4 mile long HOV Lane on a portion of I-680 in the city of Walnut Creek. The project is programmed in the 2014 State Transportation Improvement Program. The total estimated cost is $84,657,000 for capital and support. Construction is estimated to begin in Fiscal Year 2016-17. The scope, as described for the preferred alternative, is consistent with the project scope programmed by the Commission in the 2014 State Transportation Improvement Program.

    In January 2008, the CTC relinquished right of way in the city of Walnut Creek, at North Main Street, from approximately 250 feet south of Sun Valley Drive to the Walnut Creek/Pleasant Hill city limit line, consisting of reconstructed city streets.

    In August 2012, the CTC relinquished right of way in the city of Walnut Creek along Route 680 between Lancaster Road and San Luis Road, consisting of collateral and nonmotorized transportation facilities.

    In March 2008, the CTC relinquished right of way in the city of Pleasant Hill, on North Main Street, Contra Costa Boulevard, and Monument Boulevard, between the southerly city limit line and north to Monument Boulevard, consisting of relocated and reconstructed city streets, frontage roads, and other State constructed local roads.

    In April 2013, it was reported that there was finally a path ahead to improving the interchange of I-680 and Route 4. This interchange is so problematic that Contra Costa voters in 1988 approved a half-cent sales tax to start planning its fix. Almost 25 years later, Contra Costa County's congestion management agency says it has found a path to begin the first phase of the $400 million freeway fix in about two years, pulling it out of an indefinite limbo. Under earlier plans, the congestion agency and Caltrans would have waited until the money was lined up to build the most expensive yet effective parts of the five-phase project. To break the logjam, the county agency revamped its construction staging and financing plans. The agency plans to start smaller and have more money to spend because of the improving economy. It would begin with widening three miles of Route 4 to add an extra lane in each direction between Morello Avenue and Route 242. The widening would cost some $50 million. The transportation authority also figures it will have $186 million more than previously expected over the next 21 years because of improvements in its financial picture. The agency is taking in more sales tax revenues as the economy recovers. The authority also got an "AA+" credit rating last fall from two rating agencies, enabling it to save millions of dollars in selling $225 million in bonds in December, and refinancing $200 million of existing debt. With a rosier outlook ahead, the Transportation Authority board on Wednesday is scheduled to authorize consultants to study design on the highway widening. That action could lead to a widening contract being awarded in 2015. In later phases of the freeway overhaul, contractors will build new connector ramps, remove the cloverleaf connectors, and add a flyover ramp so motorists can stay in a carpool lane continuously while merging from one freeway to another. Getting started on the project makes it easier to seek state and federal grants for later phases of construction.
    (Source: Contra Costa Times, 4/14/13) 

    In March 2015, the CTC received notice of a future STIP amendment from the Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA), which proposed to delay $36,610,000 in Regional Improvement Program (RIP) construction funds from Fiscal Year (FY) 2015-16 to FY 2016-17 for the I-680/Route 4 Interchange – Phase 3 project (PPNO 0298E) in Contra Costa County. As of March 2015, the Phase 3 project was programmed with $36,610,000 in RIP construction in FY 2015-16. This Phase 3 project scope consists of widening Route 4 in the median to construct an additional lane in each direction from Morello Avenue to Route 242. The current scope of work also includes widening of various bridge structures within the project limits. Originally, the highway bridge structure spanning the Grayson Creek was planned to be widened. However, based upon a detailed analysis and evaluation of the condition of this aged structure, was determined that it is necessary to replace it. Furthermore, permits from the US Army Corp of Engineers will now be needed for both the Grayson Creek bridge replacement and the Walnut Creek bridge widening work. The CCTA is actively seeking additional funds to cover the cost of replacing the Grayson Creek Bridge. However, if additional funding does not materialize, the overall project cost will be reduced by adjusting the westbound projects limits. As a result of additional design efforts and the above described permit requirements, the delivery of the project will be delayed from Fiscal Year 2015-16 to 2016-17. In May 2015, the STIP amendment showed up on the CTC agenda and was approved.

    In February 2010, the toll increased to $5 at all times on the Dumbarton, San Mateo, Richmond-San Rafael, Carquinez, Benicia-Martinez and Antioch bridges. In July 2010, the toll will be extended to carpoolers, who will pay $2.50.



    The portion of this route from the Route 280/US101 junction to the Santa Clara/Alameda County line is named the "Sinclair Freeway". Joseph P. Sinclair was District Engineer for the District 4 Division of Highways (now Caltrans) from 1952 to 1964. Named by Assembly Concurrent Resolution 104, Chapt. 168 in 1967. His son, Mike Sinclair, provided more information regarding his father: This stretch of I-280 and I-680 provided San Jose with its first freeway service. The concept for the freeway took shape during the tenure of Joseph Sinclair as District Engineer in charge of District IV, California State Division of Highways (now Caltrans), from 1959 to 1964. Route location studies were initiated in 1955, and adopted as part of the Interstate System in 1962. Much planning and research went into the design of this freeway in order to provide both a beautiful and functional facility. The City of San Jose and the Division of Highways negotiated a cooperative agreement for the development of park and recreational facilities within the freeway right-of-way at six locations along this route in a precedent-setting Freeway/Parks concept. To make the freeway more compatible with the adjacent residential properties, the first noise barrier in the Bay Area was installed. The freeway passed through an old Olive orchard. Many of the trees were removed and replanted within the freeway right of way to preserve these old trees. The freeway was landscaped and was officially designated as a "landscape freeway". When a freeway gets this official designation it eliminates the possibility of outdoor advertising being placed adjacent to the freeway. Sinclair was a pioneer in the design and routing of the state's freeway system. Born in Minnesota in 1910, he joined the Division of Highways in 1932 as rodman on a survey party, after graduation from the University of Southern California as a civil engineer. Subsequently, he filled positions of increasing responsibility as a freeway planner, designer, and builder in San Diego and Los Angeles, prior to coming to San Francisco in 1952. During World War II he served as Lieutenant Commander in the US Navy Seabees, stationed in the South Pacific. At the time of his death in 1964 he had become nationally known in his profession. In designating a freeway in his honor, the legislature for the first time named a highway after a civil engineer.

    The portion of this route between Alcosta Boulevard and the intersection with I-580 is officially named the "Officer John Paul Monego Memorial Freeway." It was named after Dublin Police Officer John Paul Monego, who died on December 12, 1998, in the line of duty at the age of 33 years, while responding to a takeover robbery. Named by Senate Concurrent Resolution 60, enrolled August 18, 2000.

    The portion of this route from Route 24 to Route 4 is historically part of "El Camino Sierra" (The Road to the Mountains).

    The portion of this route from about the Livorna Road interchange in Walnut Creek/Alamo to the Alcosta Blvd. interchange in San Ramon appears to be named the "Donald D. Doyle Highway". While serving in the California Assembly from 1953 to 1958, Donald D. Doyle co-authored the Short-Doyle Mental Health Act and authored legislation creating the ferry boat transportation system between Benecia and Martinez. The signs indicating this were erected in 1998.

    The Grimmer Boulevard Bridge in the City of Fremonton I-680 portion of I-680 at Auto Mall Parkway in the County of Alameda is named the "CHP Officers Fredrick Wayne Enright and Adolfo Martinez Hernandez Memorial Bridge". It was named in memory of Officers Frederick Wayne Enright and Adolfo Martinez Hernandez, who made the ultimate sacrifice while performing their sworn duty. Officer Frederick Wayne Enright was born August 27, 1944, to Francis Xavier and Mary Alice, in Louisiana, Missouri. Officer Enright, badge number 7857, graduated from the CHP Academy in March of 1972 with the Cadet Training Class V-71, and upon graduation he was assigned to the West Valley area. After only six months with the CHP, Officer Enright achieved the rank of pilot and was transferred to the Golden Gate Division in the San Francisco Bay Area. As a helicopter pilot, Officer Enright responded to numerous land and water rescue operations and routinely flew commute traffic observation for bay area highways and freeways. During one of Officer Enright’s patrols, he encountered a drunk pilot, ordered him to land and escorted him to the ground, where the pilot was arrested. Not only was this a dangerous encounter, but the aircraft suffered power failure and Officer Enright successfully landed the helicopter without damage or injury. The CHP subsequently commended him for his exceptional skill and decisionmaking during this incident. Officer Adolfo Martinez Hernandez was born September 27, 1940, to Tiburcio and Juana in Etiwanda, California, and is one of 12 children. Officer Hernandez, badge number 4876, graduated from the CHP Academy in 1966, and proudly served the citizens of California for nine years. Officer Hernandez was a devoted officer, husband, and father. He was known for his big heart and immense love for his family and friends, even when some of them were “unlovable.” He enjoyed playing with his children, motorcycles, refurbishing a Volks Wagen van, making wood carvings, creating leather items including wallets, handbags, sandals, belts, and a special holder for his CHP badge. He also loved “do-it-yourself” projects and built a bicycle seat for his daughter, a bike rack for his car, and a bookcase and small end table that his son still has in his home today. On June 27, 1975, the State of California suffered a tragic loss when CHP Officers Frederick Wayne Enright and Adolfo Martinez Hernandez were killed in a helicopter crash caused by mechanical failure. Named by Assembly Concurrent Resolution 100, Resolution Chapter 109, on September 4, 2012. Redesignated to Auto Mall Parkway by Senate Concurrent Resolution 125, Resolution Chapter 133, on August 28, 2014.

    The portion of I-680 that is between the Benicia-Martinez Bridge in Contra Costa County and Route 24 in the City of Walnut Creek is named the "Senator Daniel E. Boatwright Highway". This segment was named in honor of Senator Daniel E. Boatwright, who was elected to the California State Senate in 1980, and served for 16 years in the 7th Senate District, , as well as serving for eight years in the California State Assembly, to which he was first elected in 1972. Senator Boatwright was born in Harrison, Arkansas, but moved to Vallejo, California, as a child, where he attended public schools, where his education was interrupted by service in the United States Army as a combat member of the infantry in Korea. Boatwright attended Vallejo Junior College where he was chairman of the student council and Chairman of the California Community Colleges Student Council Association, and went on to receive both his B.A. degree and his law degree from the University of California at Berkeley. Boatwright served as deputy district attorney in Contra Costa County, becoming chief trial deputy under then District Attorney John Nejedly before opening his own law firm in Concord in 1970. Boatwright served as a city council member and Mayor of the City of Concord, Chairman of the Contra Costa County Consolidated Fire Board, and City Attorney for the City of Brentwood prior to his election to the California State Assembly. During his 24-year legislative career, he authored more than 350 laws and held several prominent committee chairmanships in each house, including chairmanships of the Assembly and Senate Revenue and Taxation Committees, the Assembly Ways and Means Committee, and the Senate Appropriations Committee, in which capacities he became legendary for his ability, year after year, to deliver state funding to cities, the county, and special districts for projects in his Contra Costa County-based district. From 1982 through 1992, Senator Boatwright worked tirelessly with the California Transportation Commission, the Department of Transportation, and the Department of Finance to secure funding and accelerate the construction and completion of I-680 lane additions and the I-680 and Route 24 interchange in Contra Costa County. Following his retirement from the Legislature in 1996, Senator Boatwright served as the Senate's representative in 1997 and 1998 to the California Medical Assistance Commission, and has since resumed the practice of law and begun the practice of lobbying. Named by Senate Concurrent Resolution (SCR) 4, Resolution Chapter 69, on 7/14/2009.


    Named Structures

    The interchange of I-680, I-280, and US 101 in the City of San Jose is named the "Joe Colla Interchange." This interchange was named in memory of Joseph Anthony Colla, who actively served the San Jose community during the 1970s as a pharmacist, bike racer, bike race promoter, and San Jose City Council Member. Councilman Joe Colla worked in the 1970s alongside future mayors Norman Mineta and Janet Gray Hayes to help the City of San Jose develop economically and culturally and become described as "San Jose, a City with a Future". Colla is best known for a stunt involving the US 101/I-680/I-280 interchange. Construction started on that interchange, and then stopped as then-Gov. Jerry Brown suspended most highway building in the state in a cost-cutting measure. Road crews disappeared and what remained was a 200-foot ramp suspended in the air with rebar sticking out of both ends. The ramp was dubbed San Jose's "Monument to Nowhere." In the pre-dawn hours of a sunny but chilly January day, Colla got a crane operator to lift a Chevy on top of the unfinished ramp. Then the feisty councilman and drugstore owner jumped in a helicopter, which dropped him off next to the car. A photograph was snapped of Colla with arms outstretched and the caption: "Where Do We Go From Here?"As a direct result of Councilman Joe Colla's exploits, including posing the question, "Where do I drive from here?" from atop the unfinished interchange, and identifying the monolith as "A Monument to Nowhere." This made Colla a true urban legend. After the car stunt, he organized a 300-car caravan to Sacramento to push for the interchange's completion. Eventually the City of San Jose received the necessary funding and the interchange project was completed. Named by Assembly Concurrant Resolution (ACR) 102, August 30, 2010, Resolution Chapter 107.

    Bridge 28-153 on Route 680 between Martinez and Benicia in Contra Costa and Solano counties is named the "George Miller Jr. Bridge", and is also known as the "Benicia-Martinez Bridge". George R. Miller, Jr., represented Contra Costa County in the State Assembly (1947-1949) and the State Senate (1947-1968). Benicia-Martinez refers to the cities connected by the bridge. They were named after the mid-19th century figures Ignacio Martinez—commandante of the Presidio at San Francisco and owner of Rancho El Pinole that extended from San Pablo Bay to Martinez—and General Mariano Vallejo's wife, Francisca Benicia. It was built in 1962, and was named by Assembly Concurrent Resolution 59, Chapter 84 in 1975.

    The new northbound Benicia-Martinez Bridge is named the "Congressman George Miller Benicia-Martinez Bridge". This segment was named in honor of Congressman George Miller, who was born in Richmond, California, on May 17, 1945. Congressman Miller graduated from San Francisco State University and received his law degree from the University of California, Davis. He thereafter served on the staff of former State Senate Majority Leader George Moscone. He has been a member of the United States Congress, representing the Seventh District of California since 1975. His myriad achievements include authoring laws concerning environmental protection and resource management, energy policy, child care, mental health, aid to victims of domestic violence, and numerous education reforms. He has consistently championed federal support for California's diverse, multimodal transportation system. His work was instrumental in accomplishing all of the following: extending the BART rail system, upgrading the Vallejo Baylink ferry service, reconfiguring the interchange of I-680 and Route 24, establishing the intermodal rail and bus stations in Martinez and Richmond, widening Route 4 between Martinez and Hercules and between Pacheco and Pittsburg, and advancing the Vallejo Station complex. He has been a tireless advocate for children and was one of the four original authors of the historic No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, which passed with strong bipartisan support in 2001 and was signed into law in 2002. Reflecting Congressman Miller's ability to reach across party lines, the act fulfilled many of his longstanding legislative efforts to improve teacher quality requirements, to hold schools accountable for the education of all children, and to provide federal financial support to meet the act's goals. In January 2007, Congressman Miller was elected by his colleagues to serve as chairman of the House Education and Labor Committee, a panel on which he has served since his arrival in Congress and as Senior Democrat since 2001. Congressman Miller continues to serve on the House Natural Resources Committee, a panel he chaired from 1991 to 1994; in this capacity, he orchestrated a federal and state effort to meet technical and environmental challenges created by construction of the new Benicia-Martinez Bridge, an effort that led to several important engineering advances, including the use of pumped air to create a bubble curtain around underwater pile driving to protect migratory fish from potentially lethal shockwaves. The original Benicia-Martinez Bridge, which opened in 1962, was designated the George Miller, Jr., Memorial Bridge in 1975 to honor Congressman Miller's father, who represented Contra Costa County in the California State Assembly from 1947 to 1948, and in the California State Senate from 1949 until his death in 1969. Named by Assembly Concurrent Resolution (ACR) 62, Resolution Chapter 107, on 8/23/2007.

    The Fostoria Overcrossing on I-680 in the City of San Ramon is named the "Thomas E. Burnett, Jr. Memorial Bridge". Named in honor of Thomas E. Burnett, Jr., who lived with his wife Deena and daughters Halley, Madison, and Anna Claire in the City of San Ramon. On September 11, 2001, terrorists hijacked four civilian aircraft, crashing two of them into the twin towers of the World Trade Center in New York City, and a third into the Pentagon outside Washington, D.C., and a fourth hijacked aircraft that crashed in southwestern Pennsylvania. Thomas E. Burnett, Jr. was a passenger on the fourth flight (United Airlines 93), and led the passengers in trying to take control of the aircraft in order to prevent the hijackers from probably crashing the aircraft in Washington D.C.. These heroic actions taken by Thomas E. Burnett, Jr. and his fellow passengers likely prevented the further loss of life. Named by Assembly Concurrent Resolution 38, Chaptered 7/2/2003, Chapter 84.

    The I-680 undercrossing over Livorna Road below Bridge No. 28-191 in Contra Costa County interchange with Route 24 in Contra Costa County is officially named the "CHP Officer Kenyon Youngstrom Memorial Undercrossing." It was named in memory of California Highway Patrol (CHP) Officer Kenyon Marc Youngstrom, who was born in October 1974 in Pasadena, California. CHP Officer Youngstrom graduated from Arlington High School in Riverside in 1993, and attended California Baptist University in Riverside, as well as Napa Valley College, in Napa. From a young age, Youngstrom recognized the importance of public service, and was known as a hard worker who always gave back to his community. He served as a member of the United States Army Reserve for six years, achieving the rank of an E-4 Specialist. He entered the CHP Academy in August 2005 and graduated in February 2006 (badge number 18063), and was initially assigned to the Contra Costa area. CHP Officer Youngstrom, after serving nearly three years in the Contra Costa area, voluntarily transferred to the Golden Gate Division as a member of the Field Support Unit, where he served as a distinguished member of the Protective Services Detail, responsible for providing protection to various dignitaries, heads of state, legislators, and other VIPs visiting the San Francisco Bay Area. He transferred back to the Contra Costa area in August 2012 where he spent the remainder of his career. CHP Officer Youngstrom performed several duties over the course of his career, and because of his exceptional skills as an officer, he served as a mentor and recruiter for new officers to the CHP, as well as a RADAR and LIDAR instructor. While assisting a fellow officer on September 4, 2012 with an enforcement stop on I-680, Officer Yongstrom was critically shot by the driver of the stopped vehicle, and passed away the following day at the John Muir Medical Center in Walnut Creek. Officer Youngstrom, upon his death, gave the gift of life through organ and tissue donation, helping to save the lives of four individuals. It The undercrossing over Livorna Road was named on 09/06/13 by SCR 43, Res. Chapter 98, Statutes of 2013. The naming was transferred (redesignated) to the interchange with Route 24 by Assembly Concurrent Resolution 67, Resolution Chapter 141, on September 2, 2014.


    Interstate Submissions

    Approved as chargeable Interstate on 9/15/1955; routing in San Jose adjusted in 10/64; Freeway.

    In the first attempt to number urban routes, the California Department of Highways proposed this as I-5. The first proposal as a 3-digit route was as I-113. Once the numbering scheme for 3-digit interstates was finalized, the proposal changed to I-580. AASHTO finally approved this as I-680.


    Scenic Highway

    [SHC 263.8] From the Santa Clara-Alameda county line to Route 24 in Walnut Creek.

  2. From Route 780 at Benicia to Route 80 near Cordelia.

    Post 1964 Signage History

    In 1963, Route 680 was defined as "Route 280 in San Jose to Route 80 in Vallejo passing near Warm Springs, Mission San Jose, Scotts Corners and Sunol, and via Walnut Creek and Benicia."

    In 1965, Chapter 1371 changed the origin of the route: "Route 280 Route 101 near San Jose to Route 80 in Vallejo passing near Warm Springs, Mission San Jose, Scotts Corners and Sunol, and via Walnut Creek and Benicia."

    In 1976, Chapter 1354 added a second segment and change terminus of (a): "(a) Route 101 near San Jose to Route 780 in Vallejo at Benicia passing near Warm Springs, Mission San Jose, Scotts Corners, and Sunol, and via Walnut Creek and Benecia. (b) Route 780 at Benicia to Route 80 near Cordelia." This was the result of a transfer from Route 21, combined with a concurrent transfer to new I-780.


    Pre 1964 Signage History

    This was LRN 74 (former Route 29) between Benicia and I-80 (former US 40). This segment was defined in 1933.



    The California Transportion Commission, in September 2000, considered a Traffic Congestion Relief Program proposal to reconstruct the I-80/I-680/Route 12 interchange; it would be a 12-interchange complex constructed in seven stages. The proposal was $1 million for stage 1; the total estimated cost was $13 million. This is TCRP Project #25, requested by the Solano Transportation Authority.

    The SAFETEA-LU act, enacted in August 2005 as the reauthorization of TEA-21, provided the following expenditures on or near this route:

    • High Priority Project #1812: Upgrade and reconstruct the I-80/I-680/Route 12 Interchange, Solano County. $17,480,000.

    In his 2006 Strategic Growth Plan, Governor Schwartzenegger proposed constructing the I-80/I-680/Route 12 Interchange Complex, including HOV Connector Lanes.

    80/680/12 Interchange ProjectIn January 2013, the CTC approved for future consideration of funding a project in Solano County that will improve the I-80/I-680/Route 12 Interchange, including the relocation of the westbound truck scales facility on I-80. For the preferred full-build alternative, the current total estimated cost for capital and support is $1,348,400,000. The project is not fully funded and will be developed in phases. Only Phase One of the full-build alternative is included in the financially constrained Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). Within Phase One, the first construction contract's total estimated cost for capital and support is $100,400,000, which is funded by the 2012 State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), the Trade Corridor Improvement Funds (TCIF) and local funding. The scope of the first construction contract includes the reconstruction of the I-80/Green Valley Interchange and construction of a two lane westbound I-80 to westbound Route 12 Connector with a new bridge over the I-80 Green Valley Road onramp. Construction is estimated to begin in fiscal year 2013-2014. The scope of the preferred alternative is consistent with the scope of the first construction contract that is programmed in the 2012 STIP and the TCIF.

    In May 2013, it was reported that the funding outlook for the updated I-80/I-680/Route 12 interchange was improving. The required permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers was obtained, and the Solano Transportation Authority had done what it is supposed to do to get the project ready for construction. The project is designed to improve traffic flow near the I-80 / I-680 interchange. It involves renovating the nearby Green Valley interchange and building ramps to sort traffic entering westbound I-80 from the Green Valley interchange from traffic exiting I-80 for Route 12 in Jameson Canyon. Construction work is to cost $60 million. The $24 million at risk is to come from Proposition 1B, the transportation bond passed by voters in 2006. The potential obstacle stems from the Buy America provisions, which requires that projects that receive federal dollars be built with materials made in America. Revisions in the 2012 federal transportation bill extend these provisions to contracts, including utility agreements, associated with the projects.

    According to Sean Tongson in June 2004, they are constructing a new Northbound Benicia Bridge. The current structure, that carries North and Soutbound traffic, will revert to a 5 lane, southbound only bridge. The toll plaza, currrently located on the Northbound lanes at the North end of the bridge, will be reconstructed, still using the Northbound lanes, to the south start of the Bridge. In addition, the I-680/I-780 interchange is being re-configured. In particular, the EB I-780 to NB I-680 left exit connector will be eliminated in favor of a huge flyover ramp, soaring over the current but soon to moved toll plaza.

    I-680 / I-<a href=80 / SR 12 Interchange" src="maps/i680-i80-sr12.jpg" style="float: right" align="right" hspace="5" vspace="5" width="450" height="254" />In December 2013, the CTC approved adoption of a new freeway route for Route 680 as part of the reconstruction of the I-680/I-80/Route 12 interchange in Solano County. I-680 was originally adopted as a freeway within Solano County in 1957, and was completed between Benicia and Cordelia in 1966. The intent of this project (and the route adoption) is to realign I-680 where it intersects I-80. The new I-680 alignment will tie into I-80 west of the current location at the intersection of Route 12 and I-80. The existing I-80/I-680/Route 12 interchange complex is the result of the connection of three separate highways, I-80, western and eastern segments of Route 12, and I-680. I-680 begins at Interstate 80 between the two interchange points of Route 12 and extends south. The I-80/I-680/Route 12 interchange is a confluence of interregional significance as it connects the San Francisco Bay Area and the Napa Valley with the Central Valley. Not only is this interchange at the convergence of several key interregional routes, but it also supports a developing Solano County community served by a series of local roadways that are interwoven with the interregional routes. Two components of this project include directly connecting I-680 northbound to Route 12 westbound (Jameson Canyon), adding connectors and reconstructing local interchanges, as well as providing auxiliary lanes on I-80 in eastbound and westbound directions from I-680 to Air Base Parkway (includes a new eastbound mixed-flow lane from Route 12 east to Air Base Parkway). The Project Report cost estimate is $2.2 billion for the full project and $664 million for a fundable Phase 1. The full project consists of 5.9 miles of I-80, 3.1 miles of I-680, 1.1 miles of Route 12 West and 3.0 miles of Route 12 East. Construction of the fundable first phase (Phase 1) is proposed to take place in a series of construction packages. Phase 1 would improve the connections from westbound I-80 to I-680 and Route 12 (West); directly connect northbound I-680 and Route 12 (West); connect the I-80/Red Top Road interchange with Business Center Drive; and construct or improve interchanges at Route 12 (West)/Red Top Road, I-80/Red Top Road, I-80/Green Valley Road, and I-680/Red Top Road. A third eastbound lane would be added to Route 12 (East) from the Chadbourne Road on ramp to the Webster Street off ramp.

    In September 2014, construction started on the I-80/I-680 project. This initial project doesn’t include direct work on the I-80 and I-680 interchange structure itself, but rather replaces the nearby Green Valley interchange. Workers over the next one-and-a-half years will build a new Green Valley interchange slightly to the east of the existing one. This new interchange will have a four-lane overpass as opposed to two lanes. Workers will also build new onramps to better sort out traffic merging from Green Valley Road onto westbound I-80 and I-80 traffic exiting onto westbound Route 12 at Jameson Canyon. The connector ramp from westbound I-80 to Route 12 also will be widened from one lane to two lanes. This first round of improvements will cost about $65 million and could be completed by summer 2016. The project received $15 million from Proposition 1B, a 2006 voter-approved transportation bond. The remaining six phases will be constructed and completed as funding becomes available. Improvements in the upcoming phases will include: (1) New interchange at Red Top Road and I-680; (2) New westbound connector ramp from westbound I-80 to southbound I-680; (3) Realignment of I-680 between I-80 and the Lopes Road exit in Cordelia; (4) Realignment of the connector ramp from Route 12 to eastbound I-80; (5) New entrance/exit ramps; and (6) The extension of some local streets leading to I-80 and Route 12.

    In April 2014, it was reported that significant overhead work was recently completed on the I-80/I-680/Route 12 interchange project, marking a major milestone in the first phase of construction. In particular, pPreliminary overhead structures were installed earlier this month for the new Green Valley Road overcrossing over I-80. Ground was broken for the first phase of the project in June 2014. About 75% of the work should be complete by the end of the year, a Caltrans engineer estimated in March. The first phase should be complete by December 2016 or a little sooner depending on the weather, he said.
    (Source: Daily Republic, 4/23/2015)



    Interstate 680 from Interstate 780 to Interstate 80 in Solano County is named the "Luther E. Gibson Freeway". Luther E. Gibson, State Senator from 1949 to 1966, was a long time proponent of transportation development and authored legislation which resulted in the construction of the Carquinez Bridge and the Benecia-Martinez Span. It was named by Senate Concurrent Resolution 21, Chapter 160 in 1967.


    Commuter Lanes

    In Contra Costa County, HOV lanes run northbound from 0.4 mi S of the Alcosta on-ramp to the Livorna on-ramp, for a length of 11.9 mies. Southbound, they run from 0.5 mi N of the Livorna on-ramp to 0.6 mi S of the Alcosta Blvd on-ramp, for a length of 12.6 mi. These lanes were opened in 1994 and extended in 1995. These lanes operate weekdays between 6:00am and 9:00am, and between 3:00pm and 6:00pm.

    HOV lanes exist in Solano County on the Benicia/Martinez Bridge. These require three or more occupants, and operate weekdays between 5:00am and 10:00am, and between 3:00pm and 7:00pm.

    HOV lanes exist from the Junction of I-580 and I-680 in Dublin to near Alamo. As part of the Route 24/I-680 junction rebuild that has been going on for two years, commute lanes will be extended to above the junction of I-680 and Route 242 just north of Walnut Creek (Marina Vista Drive). Construction starts in January 1999. New car-pool lanes along Interstate 680 from Center Avenue in Concord to North Main Street in Walnut Creek opened in 2004.

    In November 2011, Caltrans opened a $1.9 million carpool lane extension from Rudgear Road in Walnut Creek to Livorna Road in Alamo. With this addition, the southbound carpool lane extends from Rudgear to the Alameda County line. The project was paid for with funds from the Measure J transportation sales tax in Contra Costa. The lane extension is a small part of a $49.8 million project to overhaul and repave I-680 in the San Ramon Valley and southern Walnut Creek

    There are also plans to add HOV lanes from Walnut Creek to Martinez (N Main Street to Marina Vista). [June 2002 CTC Agenda]


    Interstate Submissions

    Approved as 139(a) non-chargeable milage in 1973.

Classified Landcaped Freeway

The following segments are designated as Classified Landscaped Freeway:

County Route Starting PM Ending PM
Santa Clara 680 M0.00 M9.93
Alameda 680 M0.00 M2.85
Alameda 680 M3.23 M4.07
Alameda 680 M5.11 R6.62
Alameda 680 18.40 19.85
Alameda 680 R20.42 R21.88
Contra Costa 680 R0.00 R2.76
Contra Costa 680 R3.02 R3.74
Contra Costa 680 R3.90 R9.05
Contra Costa 680 R9.22 R12.05
Contra Costa 680 R12.16 21.71
Contra Costa 680 22.48 22.81
Contra Costa 680 24.47 24.95
Solano 680 0.51 M0.91*
Solano 680 M0.91 R0.50
Solano 680 R1.31 R2.01

* Note: PM 0.51 is not the same thing as PM R0.50




Other WWW Links


Blue Star Memorial Highway

The portion of this route from the Alameda county line to the Benicia-Martinez Bridge was designated as a "Blue Star Memorial Highway" by Senate Concurrent Resolution 38, Ch. 175 in 1970.



[SHC 253.1] Entire route. Added to the Freeway and Expressway system in 1959.


Overall statistics for Route 680:

  • Total Length (1995): 71 miles
  • Average Daily Traffic (1993): 46,000 to 203,000
  • Milage Classification: Rural: 13; Sm. Urban: 0; Urbanized: 58.
  • Previous Federal Aid Milage: FAI: 58 mi; FAP: 13 mi.
  • Functional Classification: Prin. Arterial: 71 mi.
  • Counties Traversed: Santa Clara, Alameda, Contra Costa, Solano.

Interstate Shield

Interstate 710


State Shield Interstate Shield From Route 1 to Route 210 in Pasadena.

The route also includes 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.


Post 1964 Signage History

Until July 1, 1964, this routing was signed as Route 15. When the Route 15 signage had to be applied to the new Interstate that had previously been US 91 (between I-10 and Las Vegas), the routing was renumbered as Route 7:

In 1963, Route 7 was defined as "from Route 11 [Present-Day Route 110] in San Pedro to Route 210 in Pasadena via Long Beach and including a bridge, with at least four lanes, from San Pedro at or near Boschke Slough to Terminal Island." In 1965 the southern end was truncated by Chapter 1372, transferring the San Pedro portion and bridge to Route 47. This left the route definition as "from Route 1 to Route 210 in Pasadena." In 1982, Chapter 914 extended the definition to 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. It was noted that this extension didn't become operative unless the commission approves a financial plan.

In 1984, Chapter 409 defined Route 710 as "Route 1 to Route 210 in Pasadena." The additional conditions regarding the Harbor Scenic Drive and the financial conditions were also transferred. This reflected the approval of Route 7 as 139(a) non-chargable interstate for continuity of numbering with Route 10 (I-10), off of which it spurs. [One might argue that it could have been considered a loop route around the center of the city, and as such, would more appropriately have an (even digit)05 number. However, all of the (even-digit)05 numbers are in use: I-205 (Sacramento), I-405 (Los Angeles), I-605 (Los Angeles), I-805 (San Diego).

The 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.

Note that the south end of I-710 actually follows the west riverbank, not the east riverbank (into downtown Long Beach). Caltrans only maintains the east riverbank spur until the 9th Street exit; the City of Long Beach has control of the road (Shoreline Drive) past this point. Supposedly, once improvements are made, I-710 will then continue west along Ocean Boulevard to the Terminal Island Freeway (Route 47). The southern extension (towards the Queen Mary) is Harbor Scenic Drive.

[In fact, the state did not construct the portion of I-710 S of Route 1. That portion was constructed to freeway standards by the City of Long Beach. The construction cost was $12 million.]

Unconstructed The route is unconstructed and unsigned between Columbia St and I-210 in Pasadena, although there is a stub of Route 710 (not Interstate) at the Route 134/I-210 junction. There has been intense local opposition to completion of this freeway as it would have a potentially adverse impact on historic homes in Pasadena and South Pasadena. On the other hand, it is a critical link in the overall Southern California freeway system. The traversable route is... oh hell, just read the mishegas below.

1964 710 RoutingThe first mention of the extension of the route to Pasadena is in 1961, when CHPW notes that the extension was defined by SB 480, and Advance Planning was starting to determine potential routes. In 1964, it was reported that planning was underway for the Long Beach Freeway (Route 7, now Route 710) from the Foothill Freeway, Route 134 and Long Beach Freeway Interchange to Norwich Avenue. On June 3-4 1964, a routing was adopted for I-210, Route 134, and Route 710 (then Route 7). This routing extends the Long Beach Freeway four mi N-ly to Route 134, and then extends I-210 N-ly to Sunland. It also extends Route 2 to I-210. Starting at Huntington Drive, the route proceeds N-ly to connect with Route 134/I-210, swings W-ly just S of Devils Gate Dam and proceeding generally S of Foothill Blvd through the Verdugo Mtns and across Big Tujunga Wash to Wheatland Ave. Also noticable on the map is the inclusion of Route 159 (old Figueroa Blvd, and the connection on Linda Vista between Route 134 and I-210), Route 248 (which was the surface street routing of Colorado between Route 134 and I-210 near Monrovia), and Route 212 (which is the old Valley Blvd routing of US 60, former LRN 77). The legislative definitions were later amended to note that Route 159 and Route 248 ceased to be state highways after I-210 was completed. Note how this also still shows Route 118 in the area; that was later renumbered to Route 210.

Streetsblog-LA has a nice timeline of the Route 710 project:

Route 710 Timeline

Mike Ballard has a page with pictures of the Route 710 gap and stubs.

In 2013, Chapter 525 (SB 788, 10/9/13) deleted the words in the route definition about a financial plan:

(b) Subdivision (a) shall not become operative, and this section shall be repealed on January 1, 1985, unless the commission approves, not later than December 31, 1984, a financial plan, which is submitted to them by the Los Angeles County Transportation Commission not later than January 1, 1984.

(c) The financial plan shall be prepared in cooperation with the department and shall include, but not be limited to, a cost estimate and the source of funding to make the route changes in subdivision (a) and any proposed improvements.

The following freeway-to-freeway connections were never constructed:

  • NB I-710 to SB I-5. Rationale: Illogical Reverse Move. The angle between the two freeways is too acute.


Pre 1964 Signage History

This was formerly signed as Route 15, and was LRN 167, defined in 1933. Until the construction of the freeway, Route 15 ran between Pacific Coast Highway and US 99 along Atlantic Blvd. In 1964, the freeway routing was renumbered as Route 7, and was later renumbered as Route 710 and I-710.

An August 1941 report issued by the Regional Planning Commission of Los Angeles County entitled “A Report on the Feasibility of a Freeway Along the Channel of the Los Angeles River” proposed a four-lane roadway on each levee from Anaheim Street in Long Beach north to Sepulveda Boulevard in the San Fernando Valley; excepting between Soto Street and Dayton Street in downtown Los Angeles, where, due to a lack of right-of-way along the river, the alignment matches the future alignment of the US 101 portion of the Santa Ana Freeway. There is no mention in the report of a master plan of freeways like that issued in 1947, although the maps showed connections to the already-completed Arroyo Seco Parkway and the proposed Ramona and Rio Hondo Parkways.
(Thanks to Daniel Thomas for hunting down this information)

In the 1930s and 1940s, before the route was adopted as a freeway routing, the cities of Long Beach and Los Angeles knew the route was coming, and began preserving right of way along the Los Angeles River for the future route. This saved significant money for right of way acquisition.

The route was originally to be named the "Los Angeles River Freeway"; in 1952, the LA Board of Supervisors approved renaming it the Long Beach Freeway.



In June 2015, it was reported that, in its latest analysis of California Highway Patrol data from 2012, the Southern California Associations of Governments (SCAG) included sections of this route in its list of freeway sections in L.A. County and the Inland Empire with the highest concentrations of truck crashes per mile annually. These sections were I-710 at Route 60 in the East L.A. Interchange, with 7.2 accidents; I-710 between I-105 and the Route 91, with 5.8 accidents; the convergence of Route 60 and Route 57, with six crashes; and I-5 between I-710 and I-10, also in the East L.A. Interchange, with 6.6 crashes. The analysis also identified that the second-highest number of truck crashes can be found on three parts of Route 60 between I-605 and I-710, between the I-15 and Route 71 — the Chino Valley Highway, formerly known as the Corona Expressway — and immediately east of I-215. That category also includes I-10 between Route 71 and I-215, I-605 between Route 60 and I-10, and Route 710 between Route 91 and the Port of Long Beach as well as between I-5 and I-105. With the nation's largest combined harbor, the Los Angeles area also is one of the busiest in the country, if not the world, for trucking. I-710 often handles more than 43,000 daily truck trips, Route 60 up to 27,000 and I-5 about 21,500, according to Caltrans. In June 2015, it was also reported that Caltrans and Metro are studying elevated truck lanes for I-710 or rearranging lanes so trucks have a bypass lane.
(Source: LA Times, 6/2/2015, LA Magazine, 6/2/2015)

Gerald Desmond Bridge

The SAFETEA-LU act, enacted in August 2005 as the reauthorization of TEA-21, authorized $2,400,000 for High Priority Project #266: Reconstruct the southern terminus off ramps of I-710 in Long Beach. This was noted in the Long Beach Press Telegraph, and actually disappointed Long Beach. The disappointment arose because the bill did not provide funding for a multi-billion project to rebuild the Long Beach Freeway. The city lobbied for $395 million and got nothing. Another $3.2 million was awarded to widen and realign Cherry Avenue from 19th Street to one block south of Pacific Coast Highway. There was $4.8 million set aside for freight transportation management systems, part of $1.3 billion dedicated to freight movement in the state in the new bill. Lastly, there was $100 million to replace the Gerald Desmond Bridge.

Near Route 710, although not on Route 710, is the Gerald Desmond Bridge"*. In August 2005, the SAFETEA-LEU act provided $100 million in funding to replace the Gerald Desmond Bridge. [*: That is, the original bridge. The replacement bridge was adopted into the highway system in November 2010.

In February 2010, it was reported that Port of Long Beach officials want to tear down the bridge and replace it with one that is taller and wider to accommodate the biggest cargo ships. Currently, the bridge is so low that some container vessels barely fit under the bridge. Additional problems are the bridge's strategic location as a primary link between Terminal Island cargo facilities and Long Beach (officials at the Los Angeles and Long Beach ports estimate that the bridge carries 15% of all the nation's cargo that moves by sea). The bridge only has five traffic lanes, a walkway on one side, and no shoulders or emergency lanes. Any accident involving vehicles that can't be driven off can shut down one side or the other, diverting traffic onto adjacent streets that are easily jammed.

For years, there was no bridge at all, just a ferry. In 1944, the U.S. Navy erected a pontoon bridge that was supposed to be used for only six months. Instead, the pontoon bridge was in place for 24 years, sometimes with disastrous results. Some motorists, approaching it too fast, became airborne, landed in the water and drowned in their cars. In 1968, the Gerald Desmond Bridge was built, but planners expected only modest traffic -- mostly people going to and from the Long Beach Naval Shipyard on Terminal Island. But by the 1990s, the shipyards were closed and the fishing industry had all but disappeared. Long Beach then emerged as the nation's busiest container port, until 2001, when it was eclipsed by the neighboring port of Los Angeles. Due to the constant pounding of heavy trucks and commuter traffic, its Caltrans structural "sufficiency" rating is only 43 out of a possible 100 points as of August 2007, and the bridge wears nylon mesh "diapers" to catch chunks of concrete falling from its deck.

The plans for the new bridge would add a sixth traffic lane and two emergency lanes and would clear the water by 200', an increase from 165'. Rep. Laura Richardson (D-Long Beach) has used her membership on the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure to push for more than $375 million in federal funds for the project.
[Source: "Bridge poses a tight squeeze for cargo ships", Los Angeles Times, 2/9/2010]

In late September 2010, the Long Beach City Council approved the $1.1billion port plan to replace the Gerald Desmond Bridge, clearing the way for Long Beach's largest public-works project in decades. Construction was expected to begin sometime in 2011 and take 5 to 6 years. The replacement bridge includes emergency shoulders in each direction, and it expands from four to six the total number of lanes. It will rise more than 50 feet higher than the existing span. The replacement will be constructed just several feet from the existing span, which will remain open throughout construction. The old bridge will then be taken down during a yearlong deconstruction starting in 2015. The bridge replacement project is expected to support about 4,000 jobs annually through 2016. Officials say it could last as long as 100 years, though strict maintenance will be needed to ensure a long life. The cost of the new bridge is estimated at $950 million. Of that, roughly $500 million will come from state highway transportation funds, $300 million from federal sources, $114 million from the Port of Long Beach and $28 million from Los Angeles County Metro.

Gerald Desmond Bridge Route AdoptionIn September 2010, the CTC approved for future consideration of funding and route adoption a project that will replace the existing Gerald Desmond Bridge with a new structurally sound bridge linking Terminal Island and Long Beach/Route 710; provide sufficient roadway capacity to handle current and projected vehicular traffic volume demand; and provide sufficient vertical clearance for safe navigation through the Back Channel to the Inner Harbor. The replacement bridge will be constructed just north of the existing bridge in order to maintain access between Terminal Island and the Route 710 during construction. As part of the project, existing connections to the Route 710 interchange, and Ocean Boulevard in downtown Long Beach would be replaced, as would the connector ramps between Route 710 and the bridge. A new hook ramp or loop ramp would be used to replace the existing on-ramp between Pico Avenue and the WB Gerald Desmond Bridge. The current ramp between Pico Avenue would be partially reconstructed to join the new connectors from Route 710. As part of the Project, the bridge and Ocean Boulevard would become part of Route 710 and would operate as a freeway facility with controlled access. The improvements between the existing Route 710 and Route 47, including the bridge, would be transferred to Caltrans by easement following route adoption and execution of a freeway agreement. It is estimated that the transfer would be completed within 2 years after construction. The project is programmed with TCIF and SHOPP funds. At the time of programming, the project was estimated to cost $1,125,200,000 and was programmed with Federal ($318,000,000), TCIF/SHOPP ($250,000,000), Local ($17,300,000), POLB ($375,100,000) and Port Intermodal Cargo Fees ($164,800,000). However, according to the POLB, the most recent cost estimate, developed in January 2010, resulted in a reduced project cost of $950,000,000. The new estimate reflects recent cost reductions related to the redesign of some elements, as well as current market conditions. Once a funding plan is approved for the project by the POLB, the POLB will request an amendment to the TCIF baseline agreement to reflect the approved funding plan. The POLB, in coordination with Caltrans, is currently developing a funding plan based on a design-build delivery method pursuant to Senate Bill 4, Second Extraordinary Session. The POLB intends to request design-build approval at a future Commission meeting. The project is estimated to begin construction in FY 2012/13.

In December 2011, it was reported that the Final Environmental Impact Report for the new Gerald Desmond Bridge includes a bicycle and pedestrian walkway. The proposed bike and pedestrian path is one of two revisions to the draft EIR (the other includes sound mitigation measures for pile driving and drilling during construction). The EIR includes the following description of the bike path: “A single, continuous, non-motorized Class I bikeway (bike path) connecting Route 47 to Pico Avenue. The Class I bikeway shall be a minimum of 12 feet wide, and signed and striped for two-way movement. The Class I bikeway shall be located along the south side of the main span and approach bridges, and shall be essentially the same elevation as the bridge deck. Protective railings shall be of an open design that provides and protects public views from the bridge.” The proposed bike path does not connect to the LA River trail, which, in turn, connects to Downtown LA, although port planners have already begun to look for ways to make the connection. At one point, construction on the new bridge was expected to begin in 2011, but as it turns out, an RFP for a design-build of the new bridge was sent to four pre-qualified bidders earlier this fall. The bids are expected in February, with final contractor selection in March. Design will take 12 to 18 months, and the bridge is scheduled to open in March 2016.
(Source: Curbed LA, 12/13/11)

In May 2012, it was reported that a joint venture team is the "best value" bidder with a $649.5 million proposal to replace the Gerald Desmond Bridge. Major members of the joint venture team include Shimmick Construction Co. Inc., FCC Construction S.A., Impregilo S.p.A., Arup North America Ltd. and Biggs Cardosa Associates Inc. A decision by the board on the actual award of the contract is expected in late June, with construction to kick off in early 2013. The total cost of the overall bridge replacement project is estimated at about $1 billion.

In September 2012, the CTC updated the project schedule to reflect switching from Design-Bid-Build to Design Build delivery method. In addition, contract negotiations with the winning bidder added time to the schedule, as well as extensive utility relocations, and revalidation of the environmental documents caused by the addition of a Class 1 bicycle path to the project. The new schedule shows construction completion in June 2016 (6 months earlier), with closeout completed in September 2016.

In October 2012, the CTC approved $153,657,000 for bridge construction.

In January 2013, it was reported that ground was broken on the Gerald Desmond Bridge construction. The $1 billion project will replace the aging span with a new structure that will have towers reaching 500 feet above ground level, additional traffic lanes, a higher clearance to accommodate the new generation of cargo ships, dedicated bicycle paths and pedestrian walkways, including scenic overlooks 200 feet above the water, according to the port. The development is expected to create about 3,000 jobs a year between 2013 and 2016, and generate $2billion of regional economic activity, port officials say.

In October 2013, it was reported that crews started clearing the path for a new Gerald Desmond Bridge encountered a mishmash of old and active oil wells tangled with 10 miles of utility lines beneath the surface, many of them unmapped or deeper than expected. The effort to cap and relocate the dozens of wells and lines turned into months of labor intensive work to clear the way for large steel-and-concrete piles as deep as an 18-story building. This raised the bridge's budget by over $200 million. It’s part of the challenge of building on one of the largest oil fields in the continental United States. Stretching 13 miles long and 3 miles deep, the Wilmington Oil Field sprouted with more than 6,000 oil wells in the 1930s, when oil was discovered beneath the port and the city. The work has included removing the old casings one section at a time while shoring up the soil so it doesn’t collapse on the work crews are doing; handling pipes as deep as 50 feet and injecting liquid nitrogen into the soil to keep water from flowing into a trench for a utility line relocation; and filling a 10-foot tall and wide tunnel found near one of the new bridge’s foundations that once flowed with sea water to cool a nearby power plant. Completion of the bridge is expected in 2016.
(Source: LA Daily News, 10/6/13)

In November 2013, it was reported that the new bridge (not necessarily named the Gerald Desmond) will be held upright by an extensive network of more than 300 steel and concrete support piles, built into the ground as deep as an 18-story building. To make room, port officials have directed a two-year blitz to remove or cap dozens of oil wells and dig up miles of utility lines that lie beneath the bridge's footprint. The work involves removing oil well casings as deep as 200 feet, section by section. Engineers designed custom tools to cut the steel pipes from inside and out, all while operating within a 7-foot-diameter drum to stabilize the surrounding soil. Once the casings are removed, the void is filled with a soil-like mixture of sand and mud. Further complicating the operation is that parts of the area sank as much as 30 feet in the 1940s and 1950s, the result of a boom on one of the nation's largest oil fields. Years later, soil was spread over the sunken landscape and new utility lines crisscrossed those buried under the new fill. Many of them were identified only with rough maps that pre-dated the precision of GPS, meaning crews had to employ guesswork when navigating the maze of pipes, tunnels and wires.
(Source: Los Angeles Times, 11/16/13)

In June 2014, it was reported that the massive $1.26 billion project to replace the ailing Gerald Desmond Bridge in Long Beach will be delayed at least a year, pushing back the opening and completion from the end of 2016, to late 2017 or early 2018. The delay has been attributed to design issues, including delays in obtaining approval for designs from Caltrans officials, who have the ultimate authority over plans. The operation has already been plagued with complications and cost overruns from a maze of poorly mapped underground utility lines and oil wells on Terminal Island.
(Source: Los Angeles Times, 6/27/14)

Route 710 Other Long Beach

The SAFETEA-LU act, enacted in August 2005 as the reauthorization of TEA-21, authorized $1,600,000 for High Priority Project #701: Develop and implement traffic calming measures for traffic exiting I-710 into Long Beach.

710 Corridor Mobility Improvements

The SAFETEA-LU act, enacted in August 2005 as the reauthorization of TEA-21, authorized $12,400,000 for High Priority Project #2178: Alameda Corridor East Gateway to America Trade Corridor Project, Highway-Railgrade separation along 35 mile corridor from Alameda Corridor (Hobart Junction) to Los Angeles/San Bernardino County Line.

[I-710 Study]Studies are currently ongoing (see the Gateway Council of Governments, regarding improving mobility in the 710 corridor. The plan is controversal ('natch), for some proposals involve the acquisition and demolition of nearly 700 homes and up to 259 businesses in Commerce, Bell Gardens, Bell, Long Beach and other cities. As many as 10,800 people could be affected in some way–of which 10,070 are minority residents. Commerce could lose two of its four parks, Bandini and Bristow. However, the actual improvement may be delayed due to the financial condition of the state, for according to the Los Angeles Times in October 2003:

"California's financial problems have stalled indefinitely a long-awaited $400- million plan to construct new barriers and shoulders along the Long Beach Freeway, sparking fresh concerns about safety on the truck-clogged route. The project would improve safety on most of the outmoded 24-mile freeway, including the area where six people recently died in a big-rig crash. Most of the freeway's medians and shoulders are narrower than state standards, and old wood-and-metal median barriers have not been replaced with the concrete barriers recommended for congested roadways with narrow medians, state Department of Transportation officials said. "

The project had been scheduled for completion in 2007. Most of the freeway has 16-foot medians, while current standards call for 22-foot medians. As for the shoulders, most of the freeway has 8-foot wide shoulders, while current standards call for 10-foot-wide shoulders. According to the LA Times article, I-710 carries 15% of the nation's seaborne cargo volume, or 47,000 trucks each day, a number projected to double or even triple in the coming years.

According to an article in the Los Angeles Times, in late January 2005, the Metropolitan Transportation Authority board approved a $5.5-billion plan to rebuild I-710, despite protests from residents. This plan would reconstruct an 18-mile stretch of the freeway from the harbors to rail yards in Commerce and East Los Angeles, transforming it from a 1950s-style road with six to 10 lanes to a modern 14-lane highway, with four lanes designed exclusively for trucks. Some portions of the truck lanes could be elevated. Construction would not begin until 2015 or later, and no one can say where funding would be found. Although most residents near the corridor agree the road needs to be rebuilt, many fear the project would create a massive truck artery without reducing air pollution. The Gateway Cities Council of Governments, made up of cities along the 710 corridor, made its first request to transportation officials to expand I-710 in 1999, and formal planning began a year later. But the process stalled in the spring of 2003, when residents learned that up to 800 homes could be demolished, and they accused officials of ignoring health concerns. The council then launched an elaborate process for community input. New design plans, meanwhile, call for the demolition of only five residential buildings and 61 industrial or commercial structures. Transportation officials say community health concerns will be addressed as part of the environmental review process, which could begin next year and take three to four years, at a cost of $35 million to $40 million.

In June 2006, the Metropolitan Transportation Agency Board of Directors authorized an environmental study of the project, which will cost $30 million and take three years. The ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles, the MTA, Caltrans and the Gateway Cities Council of Governments each contributed $5 million to help fund the study of the work; the overall project could cost up to $5.5 billion. The final project will involve building 10 mixed-flow lanes, four exclusive truck lanes, improving interchanges and arteries and direct truck ramps into railroad yards in Vernon and Commerce.

In December 2010, LA Metro provided an update. The environmental study was launched in 2008. Among the alternatives being studied for the project is widening the freeway to 10 lanes (five lanes in each direction); adding four elevated truck-only lanes adjacent to I-710 (two lanes in each direction); restricting the truck-only lanes to be used by trucks with zero tailpipe emissions; and possibly tolling the truck-only lanes. The goal is to release the study in Fall 2011.There are still money challenges. The construction cost of some of the alternatives ranges from $3.8 billion to $6.7 billion, depending on which alternative is selected. As part of the Measure R sales tax increase approved by L.A. County voters in 2008, $590 million is available for the I-710 project. In order to help address the funding shortfall, this project and five others, is being studied for a public-private partnership – i.e. deals in which private firms help pay for a project’s upfront cost in exchange for payments later. This is one reason the tolling option for trucks is being studied.

In June 2011, it was reported that the latest proposal would expand the 18-mile long roadway to 10 lanes without taking homes or disrupting adjacent Blue Line light- rail operations. Authorities expect the project to cost up to $8 billion and take more than a decade to complete, though tolls on trucks could significantly reduce public costs. The plan deviates significantly from a roundly dismissed proposal nearly 10 years ago that included destroying nearly 300 homes and businesses in North Long Beach and Compton, among other cities, to accommodate widening. The basic plan is to add new lanes on existing (electric) utility rights-of-way along the Los Angeles River, add a truck freight corridor, and improve interchanges and generally overall traffic flow. Traffic engineers expect truck traffic to increase from about 25,000 rigs per day now to as many as 90,000 daily by 2035. One proposal calls for adding a $10 toll on most large big rigs using a new, separated toll road during peak hours, generally from early morning to late afternoon, and $5 during off- peak hours. Passenger vehicles would not be taxed for using general-purpose lanes, though trucks using those lanes could be charged up to $20 per trip under details outlined in one plan. More details may be found at

710 CorridorIn June 2012, Caltrans released the Draft EIR for the mobility improvements. The defined alternatives assessed were:

  • √ ALTERNATIVE 1: NO BUILD. Carried forward. Alternative 1 would maintain the current configuration of the existing I-710 Corridor.
  • × ALTERNATIVE 2: TSM/TDM/TRANSIT/ITS. Not carried forward as standalone alternative. Transportation Systems Management/Transportation Demand Management (TSM/TDM), transit, and ITS improvements. The screening analysis demonstrated that these transportation improvements did not go far enough in resolving the worst of the congestion problems, air quality issues, design elements that need updating, and safety concerns that affect motorists and residents within the overall I-710 Corridor.
  • × ALTERNATIVE 3: GOODS MOVEMENT ENHANCEMENT BY RAIL AND/OR ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY. Not carried forward as standalone alternative. Alternative 3 did not sufficiently relieve traffic congestion on the I-710 mainline according to several of the mobility measures, nor did it address the existing safety and design elements that need updating on the I-710 compared to other alternatives.
  • × ALTERNATIVE 4: ARTERIAL HIGHWAY AND I-710 CONGESTION RELIEF IMPROVEMENTS. Not carried forward as standalone alternative. This alternative would not accommodate the high future traffic volumes generated by population and employment growth and the forecasted cargo growth.
  • √ ALTERNATIVE 5A: TEN GENERAL PURPOSE LANES. Recommended as standalone alternative. Contains all the components of Alternatives 1 through 4. Alternative 5A had the second-best performance on measures of congestion reduction (volume-to-capacity [v/c] ratio) and I-710 mainline travel time. It also ranked second among the screened alternatives in air emission reductions. Alternative 5A proposes to widen the I-710 mainline eight general purpose lanes south of I-405 and up to ten general purpose lanes north of I-405 (on I-710 northbound and on I-710 southbound). This alternative will modernize the design at the I-405 and Route 91 interchanges, modernize and reconfigure most local arterial interchanges throughout the I-710 corridor, modify freeway access at various locations, and shift the I-710 centerline at various locations to reduce right-of-way impacts. Specifically, it would widen the I-710 mainline (combined northbound and southbound) to eight general purpose lanes south of Pico Ave./Alondra Blvd. and ten general purpose lanes north of Del Amo Blvd. with the exception of the following: (1) Between the Alondra Blvd. northbound off-ramp and the westbound Route 91 to northbound I-710 connector; and (2) Within the I-105 interchange, between the eastbound and westbound I-105 connectors. It would shift the freeway centerline east horizontally at the following locations: Anaheim St. (100 feet), Pacific Coast Hwy. (200 feet), Willow St. (35 feet), Wardlow St. (45 feet), South of Artesia Blvd./Route 91 (40 feet), Atlantic Blvd./Alondra Blvd. (80 feet), Imperial Hwy. (200 feet), and South of Southern Ave. (70 feet). It would shift the freeway centerline west horizontally at the following locations: Del Amo Blvd. (120 feet), Long Beach Blvd. (45 feet), North of Firestone Blvd. (45 feet), Florence Ave. (100 feet). Additionally, the mainline will be raised as much as eight feet above existing grade around Washington Blvd. over the BNSF Railroad’s Hobart Yard and as much as five feet above existing grade over UP Railroad’s East Yard. Additional auxiliary lanes will be provided at various locations between the interchanges. The following improvements will be made to the I-710/I-405 interchange: The existing three-quadrant cloverleaf configuration will be replaced by a four-level configuration with direct connections; all eight existing connectors will be realigned and replaced; and all collector-distributor (CD) roads will be removed. The following improvements will be made to the I-710/Route 91 interchange: The existing internal loop for the northbound I-710 to westbound Route 91 connector will be replaced with a flyover connection; the westbound Route 91 to northbound I-710 connector will retain an alignment close to its existing alignment, but will be braided with the northbound Alondra Blvd. off-ramp and the eastbound Route 91 to the northbound I-710 connector; the eastbound Route 91 to northbound I-710 connector will be moved to tie in north of the westbound Route 91 to the northbound I-710 connector. This connector will also be braided with the northbound Alondra Blvd. off-ramp to separate the two movements. This will require new structures that continue over Atlantic Blvd. The southbound I-710 to eastbound Route 91 connector will be braided with the southbound Alondra Blvd. on-ramp to separate the two movements. There will also be a braid between the new flyover northbound I-710 to the westbound Route 91 connector and the Long Beach Blvd. on-ramp along westbound Route 91. The Route 91 connectors will separate from northbound I-710 altogether and split into a new flyover connector, followed by a split in the Artesia Blvd. off-ramp, and will continue to the existing alignment of the northbound I-710 to the eastbound Route 91 connector. Lastly, the following improvements will be made to the I-710/I-105 interchange: The northbound I-710 to the eastbound I-105 connector will diverge near the existing divergence location. A new separation structure is required on the connector approach to accommodate the new Rosecrans Ave. on-ramp alignment that will pass below. A new one-lane slip ramp will be added to connect the westbound I-105 to the southbound I-710 connector to the southbound Rosecrans Ave. off-ramp. The southbound divergence locations for the eastbound and westbound I-105 connectors will be reconstructed.
  • × ALTERNATIVE 5B: EIGHT GENERAL PURPOSE LANES PLUS TWO HOV LANES. Not carried foward. The screening analysis demonstrated that Alternative 5B had lower benefits compared to Alternative 5A because the HOV lanes under Alternative 5B would not be utilized as much as the proposed general purpose lanes under Alternative 5A, most likely due to the parallel HOV lanes on both I-110 and I-605.
  • √ ALTERNATIVE 6: ALTERNATIVE 5 WITH ADDITION OF FOUR SEPARATED FREIGHT MOVEMENT LANES. Carried forward. Alternative 6 was the only alternative estimated to reduce the peak-period v/c ratio on the I-710 mainline below the level indicating congestion conditions. It also was estimated to generate the lowest percentage of heavy-duty trucks sharing the general purpose lanes with automobiles and to result in the greatest reduction in freeway design elements that need updating, both of which are key indicators of improved traffic safety. Alternative 6 was recommended to have two variations: (1) Alternative 6A (previously labeled Alternative 6), which would include ten general purpose lanes and four separated freight movement lanes (freight corridor) for use by all heavy-duty trucks, whether powered by diesel engines or engines with lower or zero emissions; and (2) Alternative 6B, which would include ten general purpose lanes and incorporate Alternative 3’s advanced technology component by including four separated freight movement lanes. Alternative 6A includes all the components of Alternatives 1 and 5A as described above. In addition, this alternative includes a separated four-lane freight corridor to be used by conventional trucks. The freight corridor would be located on an elevated structure with two lanes in each direction between Ocean Blvd. and the intermodal rail yards in the cities of Vernon and Commerce. Dedicated entry and exit points to and from the freight corridor within the project limits would be at (1) Harbor Scenic Dr. (Southern Terminus); (2) Pico Ave; (3) Anaheim St.; (4) I-710/I-405 Interchange; (5) I-710/Route 91 Interchange; (6) I-710/I-105 Interchange; (7) I-710/Patata St.; (8) Atlantic Blvd./Bandini Blvd./Washington Blvd.; and (9) Sheila St. (Northern Terminus). Alternative 6B includes all the components of Alternative 6A described above and consists of the same footprint as Alternative 6A. Further, this alternative would restrict the use of the freight corridor to zero-emission trucks rather than conventionally powered trucks.

Subsequent to the completion of the Alternatives Screening Analysis described above, the I-710 Funding Partners agreed that a tolling option should be added to the freight corridor component of Alternatives 6A and 6B to provide a possible revenue source to fund the improvements. This alternative is known as Alternative 6C. Alternative 6C includes all the components of Alternative 6B as described above and consists of the same footprint as Alternatives 6A and 6B. Further, this alternative would toll trucks using the freight corridor. Per Federal statute, unless otherwise excepted, all Interstate highways must be toll-free. However, current exceptions relating to tolling of Interstate highways include Value Pricing Pilot Program; Express Lanes Demonstration Project; the Interstate System Reconstruction and Rehabilitation Pilot Program; and the Interstate System Construction Toll Pilot Program. Should Alternative 6C be selected as the preferred alternative, tolling would be implemented pursuant to one of these exceptions.

Truck Corridor AlternativesIn August 2011, the CTC indicated that there were no comments to the Draft EIR, that the Findings were accepted and that consideration of funding should be brought forward to the CTC for approval of Public Private Partnership funds.

In February 2013, it was reported that, following thousands of comments from leaders within community health and environmental coalitions, the State-led project to expand I-710 from eight lanes to 14 lanes for 17 miles from Long Beach to Route 60 in East Los Angeles was delayed. The Project Committee, am advisory committee to Metro, Caltrans and the Southern California Association of Governments, halted the project with an astounding “no” on the proposed routes. Meanwhile, the Long Beach City Council I-710 Oversight Committee recommended that Caltrans and Metro recirculate the draft EIR, allowing for more public comment. At that meeting, two of the most exceptionally flawed alternatives–known as 5A and 6A–were recommended to be removed from the table.

In March 2015, it was reported that transportation officials are considering two multibillion-dollar options to reconstruct an 18-mile stretch of I-710 between the harbor and rail yards near I-5. Both are designed to separate cars and trucks as much as possible. One alternative under study by Caltrans and the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority is an $8-billion freight corridor that includes four elevated truck-only lanes that would parallel I-710 between the highway and the Los Angeles River. The other option, which is far cheaper at an estimated $3 billion to $4 billion, would add one lane in each direction and a bypass that would take trucks around the I-405 interchange. I-710 now has anywhere from three to five lanes in each direction. The proposals include extensive improvements to about a dozen interchanges and redesigns of connector and ramp areas to eliminate weaving caused by merging trucks and cars. Bikeways and walkways for pedestrians also are under consideration. The two current proposals were essentially split off from a broader 710 South project approved in 2005 by MTA directors. That $4.5-billion proposal called not only for two elevated truck lanes but also for interchange improvements and at least two regular lanes in each direction. It would take about two years for the planning and environmental work to be completed. Once an option is selected and money is found, a construction contract could be awarded by 2018 or 2019.
(Source: Los Angeles Times, 3/16/2015)

Other Improvements

The SAFETEA-LU act, enacted in August 2005 as the reauthorization of TEA-21, authorized $5,500,000 for High Priority Project #3773: Reconstruct I-710 interchanges at I-405, at Route 91, and at I-105.

According to the Daily News, new pavement will be laid in a $164.5 million project along nine miles of I-710. The project includes shoulder reconstruction, new concrete barriers, a soundwall and widening of the Atlantic Boulevard undercrossing and of the southbound lanes at the Compton Creek bridge. Construction is scheduled to start in summer 2007.

The Los Angeles Times provided more information the new pavement in an article in September 2009. The project is called the "I-710 Long Life Pavement Project", and started in 2001. Part of the problem is the traffic load on the highway: On any given weekday, nearly 155,000 vehicles stream north and south on the 710 past Pacific Coast Highway, 16% of which are 18-wheelers carrying up to 40 tons to and from the Port of Long Beach and the Port of Los Angeles. The pavement is using a new asphalt mix, the culmination of testing and experimenting that goes back to the 1960s. The mix involves different types of asphalt being layered onto the roadway, combined with significant thickness, almost 12 inches sitting upon the old concrete roadbed. This approach serves to disseminate weight from the point of impact, broadening and lessening the load into the deeper layers. As the old concrete beneath the road jumps -- inevitable, beneath the weight of moving traffic -- the asphalt flexes and recoils, preventing the formation of cracks. In addition, pieces of rubber have been stirred into the top layer to mute the sound of traffic and divert water to stop hydroplaning. With regular maintenance, scraping and replacing this layer every eight to 12 years, the pavement is expected to last at least 30 years (the typical asphalt pavement lasts 10 years, and concrete, such as the design used for I-710, can last 40 years with maintenance).
[Based on an article in the Los Angeles Times, "A smooth idea for the 710 Freeway", 2009-09-30]

In August 2011, it was reported that the Long Life Pavement Project will require a number of closures in late Summer 2011. Specifically, I-710 between I-105 and the Atlantic Boulevard exit will be completely shut down for several hours at a time two times per weekend on 10 consecutive weekends from August 5 through October 17, 2011. There will be no construction on Labor Day weekend. The full freeway closures in both directions will begin each weekend at 11:59 p.m. Fridays and run through 6 a.m. on Saturdays. They will begin again Sundays at 11 p.m. and run through 5 a.m. on Mondays. During the initial closure each weekend, moveable median barriers will be installed. They will guide motorists to shift to the northbound side of the freeway to commute in a reduced number of lanes while construction crews work on the southbound 710 over the weekend. During the final closure, the moveable median barriers will be removed in time for the Monday morning commute.

The CTC in November 2002 considered $8,540,000 in improvements to local streets in Los Angeles, Alhambra, and South Pasadena (07S-LA-710-26.7/32.1). This would be a grant to the cities to fund improvements.

In August 2011, the CTC approved $190,222,000 in SHOPP funding for I-710 from South Gate to Monterey Park from Los Angeles River Bridge to Ramona Boulevard that will rehabilitate 37 lane miles of roadway to improve safety and ride quality. The project will also replace ramp pavement, widen inside and outside shoulders and nine bridges to standard widths, and replace existing median barrier with concrete barrier. Lastly, the project will construct maintenance pullouts to reduce worker traffic exposure.

Misspelling on I-710In November 2014, it was reported that a subcontractor installed a new sign for the Olympic Boulevard exit that read "Olimpic." A construction crew with the California Department of Transportation spotted the mistake the next morning, but it was too late. The misspelling was hard to miss, and drivers had already snapped and tweeted photographs of the sign. Days later, a black tarp was thrown over the sign in an attempt to cover the misspelling. The sign was one of many improvements underway on I-710 as part of a pavement rehabilitation project. The $120-million project, reaching from the Los Angeles River Bridge to I-10, includes median barrier upgrades, shoulder widening and the installation of fiber optics and precast concrete panels and slabs. All costs associated with the removal, replacement and installation of the Olympic Boulevard sign will be paid by the subcontractor who fabricated the sign, not taxpayers or the state.
(Source: LA Times, 11/24/2014)

Route 710 Completion (Segment from I-10 to I-210)

In May 2007, the Los Angeles Times reported that there are plans for a $20M project to create a connector from the current end of I-710 around Valley Boulevard to Mission Road. Supposedly, the City of Los Angeles will soon (Spring/Summer 2007) release a draft Environmental Impact Report on the project. The connector road would carry traffic another 1,400 feet from I-710 onto Mission Road, possibly sending 40,000 cars daily winding through residential streets like Westminster and Meridian Avenue. The road would alleviate traffic problems through some El Sereno neighborhoods, according to Los Angeles officials, but create others as Mission, a collector street, is not as wide as Valley, an arterial street. This road would be needed only until I-710 is completed and connected to I-210.

The SAFETEA-LU act, enacted in August 2005 as the reauthorization of TEA-21, authorized $2,400,000 for High Priority Project #2193: I-710 Freeway study to evaluate technical feasibility and impacts of a Tunnel Alternative to close I-710 freeway gap. It also authorized $1,600,000 for High Priority Project #3018: Valley Boulevard (former US 60) Capacity Improvement between I-710 Freeway and Marguerita Avenue, Alhambra. This is the route that takes the current end-traffic from I-710.

Originally, construction of the the 6.2 mile, $670 million extension was planned to start after the year 2000. There would be six lanes and two HOV lanes, with room for light rail in the median. Interchanges are planned at Hellman Ave., Valley Boulevard/Alhambra Ave., Huntington Dr., California Blvd, Del Mar Blvd., and Green St. To decrease the impact on South Pasadena, the proposed interchange with I-110 has been removed. There are also two tunnels planned: a 1200-foot "cut and cover" near South Pasadena High School, and a 100-foot tunnel near the Buena Vista district. There may be more tunneling if this speeds the project without destroying homes. In fact, the MTA has asked a consultant to study two parallel, 4.5-mile tunnels to close the gap.

In April 2004, the Pasadena Star News reported that the city of South Pasadena dropped its lawsuit against the state after receiving assurances that the state had withdrawn its approval of the 4.5-mile stretch of road. Although South Pasadena believed this killed the freeway, it actually moved the issue into the Legislature and the Congress. The only thing about which both sides agree is that the California Transportation Commission action put the entire issue back to square one. The California Transportation Commission withdrew its support four months after the Federal Highway Administration issued a letter saying that the state's environmental reviews were outdated, inadequate and had to be redone. Caltrans has said it intends to move forward with the new environmental reviews. Caltrans still holds 600 homes in the 710 corridor, and it still says it intends to demolish them so that the freeway can be built.

According to an article in the Los Angeles Times on 10 August 2005, a potential solution to the completion of I-710 lies in the SAFETEA-LUA bill approved in August. This bill contains an appropriation of $2.4 million to study the possibility of extending the freeway through a five-mile, $2-billion tunnel that would run under South Pasadena and part of Pasadena. This would be the longest continuous highway tunnel in the United States. After the feasibility study would be environmental impact reports, engineering plans and financial wrangles. Part of the problem is real estate values. Over the last 30 years, Caltrans purchased more than 500 homes that occupy the potential freeway right of way, many at prices in the $50,000 range. One was recently appraised for $780,000. Building a tunnel would allow Caltrans to sell most of the homes, although a change in state law would be needed to sell them at full-market prices. If the freeway were to be completed above ground, an additional 400 homes would need to be purchased, at a price of about $1 million each. These costs (or income), combeind with new techniques pioneered in Europe that lower the price of tunneling and the cost to taxpayers of putting the road 100 feet to 200 feet below ground may be not much more expensive than building on the surface. The five-mile tunnel, if built, would begin where the freeway ends in a stump on Valley Boulevard in Alhambra. It would surface between California and Del Mar avenues in Pasadena before connecting to a mile strip of the freeway that already exists south of the Foothill Freeway. Engineers said the tunnel would be unbroken, except for a possible interchange at Huntington Drive in El Sereno. The route would be nearly twice as long as Boston's Big Dig or a similarly long passageway in Alaska, the longest road tunnels in the United States. Exhaust from the underground roadway would be released and filtered through an elaborate venting system at ground level. The so-called air scrubbers would filter enough of the exhaust that it could actually result in cleaner emissions than with a surface freeway. Engineers said the tunnel could have two levels – one for northbound traffic, the other for southbound traffic. The tunnel idea has already been the subject of a study by the Southern California Council of Governments, which enlisted help from consultants who built the Chunnel that links England and France below the English Channel. The consultants believed the tunnel could be built using a technique popular in Europe in which a large machine bores through the Earth and coats the tunnel way with a steel membrane That technique is considered less expensive than other tunnel-digging methods.

According to the Los Angeles Times in June 2006, there are three possible routes for twin 4½-mile tunnels that would connect I-210 in Pasadena with current terminus of I-710 in Alhambra. The proposed tunnel routes are:

  • Along the same path that had been suggested for the street-level extension, known as the Meridian alignment because it runs mostly along Meridian Avenue. At four miles, it is the shortest and most direct route. It would be built under more than 1,000 homes in Pasadena, South Pasadena and the El Sereno district of Los Angeles.

  • A slightly longer path that would pass under the existing Fremont Avenue corridor. It also would be under mostly residential and some commercial property.

  • A more eastern path that would follow under the Huntington Drive and Fair Oaks Avenue corridor, a mix of residential and commercial property.

The tunnels would be as much as 72 feet in diameter to handle four lanes of traffic, and would be the world's largest. Parsons Brinckerhoff compared the proposal to giant tunnels being built underneath Seattle, Paris and Barcelona, Spain, and calculate that the L.A. tunnels would take nine to 11 years to construct. The study recommended that trucks be allowed to use the tunnels and that a proposed freeway exit at Huntington Drive be abandoned as too costly at an estimated $1 billion. The tunnels may require a toll to help pay for construction. The full report can be found at

In April 2008, a radical proposal surfaced regarding Route 710. This proposal would have the underground highway funded entirely by the private sector. Metro officials have confirmed they have been approached by a financial broker representing major international corporations interested in investing in the plan, which would use giant tunnel-boring machines to build a completely subterranean 6-mile, multi- lane roadway. The route would link the current terminus of the northbound I-710 in Alhambra with a short northern Route 710 segment of the freeway in Pasadena. The discussions are very preliminary and more details about the plan need to be hashed out before a private-partnership could even be considered. Under some public-private partership agreements, the private contractor pays for and builds the infrastructure in exchange for future revenues, such as fees collected through tolls. This latest proposal addresses all the concerns of South Pasadena residents and elected officials, by being entirely subterranian, not cut and cover. However, Route 710 extension plans also have to contend with opposition from nearby La Cañada Flintridge, which has objected to any proposed tunnel plans because of officials' fears of increased traffic on I-210 through their city.
[Source: Whittier Daily News, April 7, 2007]

In January 2009, Caltrans and the LA MTA conducted geotechnical exploratory borings in two locations in the City of Alhambra. This is part of the Exploration Program phase of the two-year I-710 Tunnel Technical Study that will involve research, exploration and technical analysis of the soil and sub-surface conditions found while tunneling at depths of more than 250 feet. The net goal is to see whether construction of the I-710 tunnels is feasible. The map of the routes being explored is as follows:

[710 Tunnel Study]

The purpose of the study is to examine the possibility of constructing a tunnel to complete the route between the northern I-710 termini and the Foothill Freeway (I-210). The study is being conducted in a route neutral manner. This means that all reasonable and practicable alternatives for completing the route are being considered within the Study area, which encompasses the cities of Alhambra, Glendale, La Cañada-Flintridge, Los Angeles, Monterey Park, San Marino, South Pasadena and Pasadena. Information gathered throughout the Study will describe soil and sub-surface conditions and will determine the feasibility of building a tunnel to complete I-710.

In 2009, the LA Times (11/17/2009) reported that the tunnel study was completed. The study explored five zones, and concluded that a tunnel would be feasible (which is a far way from the start of construction). The draft report will be finalized in 2010, was based on the assumption that the tunnel would be about 200 feet below ground and about 50 feet in diameter. It looked at five potential construction zones:

Zone 1 (Northeast L.A.): There is one Superfund site in the northwest portion of the zone which could be a source of contaminated soil and groundwater in the tunnel. There is also a possibility of encountering naturally occurring gases such as methane and hydrogen sulfide. There are no active faults in the zone.

Zone 2 (Northeast L.A.): The active Raymond fault crosses the zone and there is also the potential of encountering naturally occurring gases. Some soil and groundwater contamination could result in hazardous materials being encountered.

Zone 3 (South Pasadena/Pasadena): The Raymond and San Rafael faults are groundwater barriers in this area, and there is one active and two potentially active faults in the area. There are two places with minor soil contamination in the northern limits of the zone.

Zone 4 (San Marino/Pasadena): Active faults that cross the zone are the Raymond and Alhambra Wash faults. There is one Superfund site in the southwestern end of the zone. There are also six other sites with various levels of soil contamination.

Zone 5 (Alhambra/San Gabriel/Temple City): The active Alhambra Wash fault is in this zone and so are the perennial Rio Hondo and San Gabriel rivers. There is one Superfund site in the south-central portion of the zone and seven other sites with various levels of soil and groundwater contamination.

The Glendale News Press reported in February 2010 that the debate over the alternative, an underground tunnel, was reinvigorated in late 2009 when Caltrans and Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority released a $6-million route feasibility study. The report showed tunneling was feasible within five potential route zones, which include connections to I-210 and Route 2. That sparked a wave of renewed protest from local stakeholders, who said the perception that plans for a 710 connector was too far flung and expensive didn’t match with what was happening in political circles. Already, $780 million in Measure R sales tax revenue has been earmarked for the connector. And in January 2010, the MTA instructed officials to explore private partnerships for additional funding. The next step is a series of community meetings for the final draft of the technical study, which will be presented this spring to the MTA and California Transportation Commission, which will decide whether to move forward with more in-depth environmental studies. Tunnel opponents argue there are better ways to address what they contend is largely a commercial freight issue. Assemblyman Anthony Portantino (D-Pasadena) said moving to the environmental study process would be a misuse of millions in taxpayer dollars. He also criticized the technical study for lacking important details on how and why tunneling is feasible, including costs and construction methods. La Cañada and South Pasadena are in court fighting the use of Measure R funds for tunnel studies or construction, and the Glendale City Council joined the legal fight in early March.

Details on the Tunnel Study may be found at

In October 2011, it was reported that LA Metro approved a $37.3 million contract to CH2MHill to examine a range of alternatives, prepare technical assessments, and environmental and engineering studies about alternatives to close the gap between the Route 210 and Route 710 freeways. The studies are expected to be completed in the fall of 2014.

In January 2012, it was reported that South Pasadena was lobbying to kill the surface routing of Route 710. LA Metro was indicating they had no plans to construct a surface routing, but didn't want to pull it off the table as an option quite yet. The city is also lobbying Caltrans to sell the more than 500 homes the agency bought decades ago along the proposed route in preparation for building the Route 710 Freeway extension to connect with I-210. In particular, at the request of Assemblyman Anthony Portantino (D-La Cañada Flintridge), a Joint Legislative Audit Committee is conducting an inquiry into Caltrans’ continued ownership of the homes. The state stands to gain $500 million if it sells the homes in Pasadena, South Pasadena and Los Angeles. However, Caltrans is not able to sell the homes until the Federal Highway Administration accepted the proposed route for a tunnel or whatever project was approved and the state determined which properties were "excess" and therefore available to be sold. If they are sold, under a state law passed in 1979, current tenants and past owners would be the first in line to buy them.

In May 2012, it was reported that debate was still going on regarding alternatives. There are currently twelve alternative concepts to relieve traffic congestion, including a “no build” freeway option and other projects still listed in the Regional Transportation Plan. Those options include alternate bus, light rail and freeway routes, highway and street artery concepts, non-infrastructure improvements and hybrid combinations of the other plans. All of the freeway alternative concepts will connect the terminus of I-710, north of I-10. The alignment can be a tunnel, depressed, at-grade, elevated or any combination. The LRT-4 concept proposes a partially subterranean light rail line that would travel from the East LA Civic Center Gold Line station to the Fillmore station, go north on Mednick at street level and it could stop at Cal State LA. The rail is a tunnel on the north end; the concept also includes two bus routes. The freeway alternatives are:

  • Alternative Concept F-2: Connects to Route 2 (Glendale Freeway) between Verdugo Road and Route 134 with a new interchange. Performs well for traffic operations across the board, although somewhat weaker at addressing the north-south travel needs because of the alignment. Results in different impacts than the other freeway alternatives because of its location.
  • Alternative Concept F-5: Connects to Route 134 at a new interchange— just north of the intersection of Colorado Blvd/Avenue 64. Performs well for operations, similar to the other freeway alternatives. Results in different environmental and community impacts compared to the other alternative concepts.
  • Alternative Concept F-6 and F-7: Share the same alignment—between the north and south terminus of the existing Route 710. F-7 is the tunnel alignment, although it has depressed and at-grade sections at the north/south ends, and performs well for travel time and travel served, and improves regional and local traffic operation. .F-6 is surface/depressed alignment (at-grade) very similar with even better operations and mobility, but results in more negative physical impacts.
  • Alternative Concept H-6: This alignment is between the termini on Huntington Drive, Fair Oaks Avenue, Columbia Street, Pasadena Avenue and St. Johns Avenue. Improvements would carry Route 710 traffic over Valley Boulevard and then connect directly to Huntington Drive between Lowell Avenue and Sheffield Avenue. Performs well in traffic and transit operations, and was the strongest overall of the highway/arterial alternatives. It provides additional capacity as a direct route for north-south travel in the study area.
  • Alternative Concept H-2: This alignment is situated to the west, but generally serves north-south traffic: Concord Avenue, Fremont Avenue, Monterey Road, Ave 64, Colorado Blvd. Improvements would carry Route 710 traffic over Valley Boulevard and the railroad, and then connect with Concord Avenue. Performs well in traffic and transit operations, serves a variety of different trips, and improves a wide range of roads. It has fewer impacts than H-6.

In August 2012, Metro and Caltrans eliminated 5 routes from the list of 12 possible routes:

  • F-2: Route from SR 2 (Glendale Freeway) between Verdugo Road and Route 134 with a new interchange.
  • F-5: Route to SR 134 at a new interchange—just north of the intersection of Colorado Blvd/Avenue 64.
  • F-6: Route from north and south terminus of the existing I-710 to I-210
  • H-2: Route from Concord Avenue, Fremont Avenue, Monterey Road, Ave 64, Colorado Blvd.
  • H-6: Route between the termini on Huntington Drive, Fair Oaks Avenue, Columbia Street, Pasadena Avenue and St. Johns Avenue.

The five remaining proposals include routes using bus rapid transit, light rail, or freeway tunnel and intelligent traffic systems (which includes strategies such as ride sharing and encouraging off peak traffic). The remaining alternatives are:

  • “No build” option.
  • Bus rapid transit route (BRT-6): from Los Angeles to Pasadena.
  • Light Rail (LR-4): route from East Los Angeles to Pasadena.
  • Intelligent traffic systems option: is considered a “low build” alternative (TSM TDM), for example light synchronization; enhanced bus line enhancements.
  • F-7: tunnel alignment, although it has depressed and at-grade sections at the north/south ends. Route would go from the north and south terminus of the existing I-710, to north terminus at I-210.

In September 2012, the Los Angeles city council voted to opposed any extension option -- surface or tunnel.

Concept for Route 710 TunnelsIn January 2013, the LA MTA released its analysis of the first options above. In June 2013, MTA voted to block fast-track funding for the the route extension over the next 10 years. While the proposal to extend I-710 to I-210 will be prevented from getting a share of the $9.4 billion in accelerated funding, studies on five alternatives for closing the gap, including a controversial proposal for a tunnel, will continue. The studies are expected to be completed in 2015, but money to move forward after that has not been identified. Officials are using money generated by Measure R, a county-wide half-cent sales tax approved by voters in 2008, to pay for the studies.

In October 2013, a bill was approved directing Caltrans to sell some of the nearly 500 properties it owns in Los Angeles, South Pasadena and Pasadena. The homes are located in the so-called 710 gap, where transportation officials are studying a 4.5-mile tunnel that would connect the Long Beach (Route 710) and Foothill (I-210) freeways. The bill adds a change to existing law so that the homes may be sold “as is,” at prices set according to their condition, as opposed to having to be repaired and sold at market value. Almost 400 homes are occupied by tenants, but many others remain vacant and in disrepair. The bill also states the current tenants of the homes will get the first chance to purchase them. The properties were acquired by Caltrans over the past several decades in anticipation of the possible construction of a surface freeway to close the gap between Route 710 and I-210 freeways. The new law also states that the surface freeway route will be taken off the table as an option in any state environmental documents on the project (the original surface routing is shown at the top of this entry).
(Source: Glendale News-Press, 10/2/13)

In October 2014, it was reported that authorities are considering completing Route 710 with 4.9-mile-long twin tunnels. Light rail, enhanced bus service and wider streets are also being explored. The 4.9-mile-long tunnel would be longer than any other in California for auto traffic. As of October 2014, the longest is the Wawona Tunnel in Yosemite National Park, which is less than 1 mile long. Caltrans and Metro will release a draft environmental report in February 2015 evaluating the freeway tunnel, mass transit and street-widening options; the public will have three months to provide comment.
(Source and Graphic: Los Angeles Times, 10/20/2014)

In March 2015, it was reported that any major modifications to the unfinished Route 710 Freeway would cost billions of dollars and take years to complete. The Draft EIR provides a number of options to address the 4.5-mile gap through Alhambra and South Pasadena, including a bus system, a light-rail line, a freeway tunnel and a range of upgrades to the existing route, as well as the required "no build" option. Building an underground freeway would be the most expensive option. Tunneling between I-10 Freeway and the current stub Route 210/Route134 junction in Pasadena would cost between $3.1 billion and $5.6 billion and would take about five years to complete. This option calls for side-by-side, double-decker tunnels to separate northbound and southbound traffic. The route would feature a 4.9-mile tunnel and 1.4 miles of surface-level freeway. A less expensive option calls for one double-decker freeway tunnel. Northbound traffic would use the two lanes on the upper level, and southbound traffic would use the lower level. The 4.9-mile tunnel would be the longest in California, and almost as long as downtown Boston's 5.1-mile Big Dig tunnel. Under either option, drivers could be charged a toll and trucks could be barred from the tunnels. Alternatively, the bus option provides a 12-mile rapid bus route linking Huntington Drive in San Marino to Whittier Boulevard in Montebello. Buses would have some dedicated lanes, and could run every 10 minutes during peak hours. Adding the bus routes would cost $241 million and take about two years. Lastly, a 7.5-mile light-rail line option would cost $2.4 billion and would add seven stops to Los Angeles County’s growing rail system, connecting the Gold Line’s Fillmore Station in Pasadena with the East L.A. Civic Center stop. The route would run underground through Pasadena and South Pasadena, then run on elevated tracks through Monterey Park and East Los Angeles. Construction would take about six years. The cheapest option would be to make the existing freeways and roads more efficient without major construction. That could include meters for on-ramps, synchronized traffic signals, and lanes that change direction during peak hours. Those options would cost about $105 million and take two years to complete. Caltrans was scheduling a number of open forums to get comments from the public.
(Source: LA Times, 3/6/2015)

In June 2015, it was reported that Beyond the 710, a coalition of community organizations, environmental attorneys, five San Gabriel Valley cities, and the National Trust for Historic Preservation, had submitted a plan that eschewed additional highways and tunnels, and proposed instead the notion that expanding bus service, improving surface streets, adding bicycle routes and developing more walkable communities would better address traffic congestion, air pollution and the transportation needs of the west San Gabriel Valley. Instead of constructing the extension, Beyond the 710 envisions building several local surface-street projects, including a four-lane thoroughfare called Golden Eagle Boulevard that would head 1.9 miles north from the southern stub of Route 710 to Fremont Street in Alhambra. Golden Eagle would intersect Valley Boulevard, Alhambra Avenue and East Mission Road, allowing traffic to be distributed to other surface streets, thus protecting residential neighborhoods. The northern stub of Route 710 in Pasadena would be filled in, providing35 acres of open space or developable land for homes and commercial buildings. They also proposed a north-south transit corridor that meanders along the Route 710 route and would connect to major destinations as well as Metrolink service, the El Monte busway and the MTA’s Gold, Green and Blue light-rail lines.
(Source: LA Times, 5/28/2015)

In June 2015, the CTC received the opportunity to provide comments in response to the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for the Route 710 North Study Project. The opportunity came with numerous letters from community officials and citizens recommending that the CTC take no position until a preferred alternative had been selected by Caltrans. These included letters from Assemblyman (Ret.) Anthony J. Portantino, the City of South Pasadena, the City of La Canada-Flintridge, the West Pasadena Residents Association, Gloria Valladolid, Melissa Michelson, and the No 710 Action Committee. The recommendation, which was accepted, was that the CTC make no comments regarding the environmental issues addressed in the DEIR. The recommendation also noted that the CTC should send a letter to Caltrans stating that (a) The Commission has no comments with respect to the alternatives or environmental impacts addressed in the DEIR; (b) The final environmental document should not be brought forward to the Commission for project funding decisions or other purposes until a cost benefit analysis is distributed through a process that ensures sufficient opportunity for the public to review and provide comment; (c) Early communication and coordination with the Commission is encouraged if it is anticipated that the Commission will be requested to approve the project for delivery through a public private partnership or for construction approval to allow for financing and tolling approval by the California Transportation Financing Authority; and (d) If, in the future, funds or other actions under the purview of the Commission are anticipated ,notification should be provided to the Commission as a Responsible Agency. The initial letter from Caltrans noted that the project is not fully funded: it has $780,000,000 in local funding available and the agency is working to identify additional funds. Depending on the alternative selected, the total estimated project cost is between $105,000,000 and $5,650,000,000.

In August 2015, it was reported that the South Coast Air Quality Management District said the draft environmental impact report for the proposed Route 710 Freeway extension failed to estimate emissions of carbon monoxide and airborne particulates and that the tunnel project would raise the cancer risk to unacceptable levels. The eight-page letter from Ian MacMillan, the anti-smog district’s planning and rules manager, says the lack of basic air quality analysis renders the draft EIR useless to the agency or those deciding on a tunnel or other transit options. One part of the EIR places the cancer risk of the project at 149 chances per million people exposed to pollutants, well above the district’s standard threshold of 10 chances per million. Yet, the report concludes that the cancer risks are “less than significant” based on faulty data. The agency has requested that Caltrans and the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority or Metro, which paid $40 million for the study released in March, revise the air quality portion of the document.
(Source: SGV Tribute, 8/13/2015)

In August 2015, it was also reported that group representing San Gabriel Valley cities has removed the Route 710 freeway tunnel proposal from its wish list of projects that might be funded by a new transportation sales tax. The decades-old idea of extending Route 710 Freeway north from its Alhambra terminus near Cal State Los Angeles to I-210 Freeway in Pasadena via an underground tunnel has been divisive. Alhambra wants a tunnel, Pasadena doesn't. Other cities have taken sides. Now all 31 San Gabriel Valley cities united in taking the tunnel and other proposals for speeding traffic through the western valley off the list of projects that would have priority for funding with a potential new transportation sales tax. The vote by the San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments does not kill the tunnel idea, but it has the potential for limiting the means of paying for its construction, estimated by Caltrans at more than $5 billion.
(Source: KPCC, 8/24/2015)

Lastly, also in August 2015, it was reported that Caltrans was preparing to sell a number of properties it acquired for the right of way of the Route 710 completion. In the 1950s and '60s, Caltrans began buying up houses and plots of land for what was expected to be the path of the I-710 Freeway. But in the decades that followed, the 6.2-mile project was stalled by lobbying, lawsuits and legislation. Earlier in 2015, closing the door on one portion of the long-fought battle, officials decided that if anything is to be built to close the transportation network gap from El Sereno to I-210 in Pasadena, it will be underground. Those options include a light-rail line, a bus rapid-transit system or a freeway tunnel. The final decision is expected in 2016. The land occupied by many of the state's 460 properties along the corridor will no longer be needed. Caltrans has made slow progress this summer in preparing to sell some of those homes — many occupied, and some on the National Register of Historic Places. Officials say if the state approves the sale regulations quickly, most of the homes could go on the market as soon as January 2016, and some sooner. A document prepared by Caltrans earlier in 2015 suggested that dozens of tenants could be priced out. Under a 1979 law, low-income renters will receive a discounted rate, as could tenants who make less than 150% of the county's median income: $45,350 for a single person, or $64,800 for a family of four. Former owners and current tenants receiving a reduced rate would have the first chance to buy the property. The next turn would go to affordable housing development companies, then to tenants who would pay market price, then to former tenants in reverse order of occupancy. The final option would be a public auction. More than 35 Caltrans-owned homes are considered uninhabitable, according to agency data, and residents have complained of break-ins, mold and vermin infestations.
(Source: Los Angeles, 8/31/2015)

In August 2015, the CTC was provided the opportunity to comment on the DEIR regarding the sale of Route 710 properties. The transmittal from Caltrans noted that the DEIR proposed the sale of Department-owned surplus properties that are not impacted by the project alternatives being evaluated in the Route 710 (SR 710) North Study Draft Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Impact Statement for sale in the cities of Pasadena, South Pasadena, and the El Sereno neighborhood in the city of Los Angeles. These surplus properties are to be offered for sale in a manner that will preserve, upgrade, and expand the supply of housing available to affected persons and families of low or moderate income, in accordance with Senate Bill (SB) 86 (Roberti, 1979), SB 416 (Liu, 2014) and the Affordable Sales Program (ASP) regulations. Senate Bill 416 requires proceeds from the sale of surplus properties to be allocated to the SR 710 Rehabilitation Account for the rehabilitation of surplus single family homes being sold to low- and moderate-income occupants for which lenders of government housing assistance programs require repairs. The SR 710 Rehabilitation Account is continuously refilled with each sale. When the balance of this accounts reaches $500,000, additional proceeds go to the State Highway Account and are to be allocated by the California Transportation Commission exclusively for projects located in Pasadena, South Pasadena, Alhambra, La Canada Flintridge, and the 90032 Zip code area of Los Angeles (El Sereno). There were two options: selling or not selling. The CTC had no comments with respect to the DEIR’s purpose and need, the alternatives studied and the evaluation methods used.



The portion of this route between Route 1 and the northern end of Harbor Scenic Drive, from Harbor Scenic Drive to Ocean Boulevard, from Ocean Boulevard west of its intersection with Harbor Scenic Drive to its junction with Seaside Boulevard, and from Seaside Boulevard from the junction with Ocean Boulevard to Route 47 is not officially named.

The portion of I-710 that runs between Pico Avenue and the Pacific Coast Highway (Route 1) in the City of Long Beach is named the "Senator Jenny Oropeza Memorial Freeway". It was named in memory of Jenny Oropeza, who passed away on October 20, 2010. Oropeza was a lifelong public servant who was active in her community and was elected first to the Long Beach Unified School District Board of Education, then to the Long Beach City Council and the Assembly of the State of California, and finally to the Senate of the State of California. During her time as a Member of the Legislature, Jenny Oropeza was a champion for public transportation, health care, education, clean air, equality, and the prevention of cancer. Senator Oropeza was so admired by her constituents and community that she was posthumously awarded the Political Leadership Award in 2011 by the Democratic Women’s Study Club in Long Beach, which has renamed that award the Jenny Oropeza Political Leadership Award. The Long Beach Community Hispanic Association (Centro CHA) posthumously awarded Senator Oropeza the Create Change Community Service Excellence Award in 2011, which will in future years be called the Create Change: Jenny Oropeza Community Service Excellence Award. In recognition of Senator Oropeza, the Long Beach Lambda Democratic Club created the Jenny Oropeza Ally of the Year Award, which was first awarded in 2011. As a tribute to Senator Oropeza’s dedication to fostering protections for key state public health programs, the Los Angeles County Affiliate of Susan G. Komen for the Cure, in joint collaboration with the six other California-based Komen affiliates, known as “the California Collaborative,” established the Senator Jenny Oropeza Public Policy Internship position. The City of Long Beach named the community center in Cesar E. Chavez Park the Jenny Oropeza Community Center and the Los Angeles Unified School District dedicated the Jenny Oropeza Global Studies Academy at the Rancho Dominguez Preparatory School. Shortly after taking office in 2000, then Assembly Member Oropeza became aware that the Alameda Corridor would open in 2002 and that all the planned bridges, designed to prevent cars from having to wait for trains to pass at street level, would be completed, except for the bridge on the Pacific Coast Highway (Route 1) in the community of Wilmington, which was the busiest route along the Alameda Corridor. The bridge to be built at that location would bisect the Equilon Refinery and was therefore the most complicated and expensive bridge to build, and there was not enough funding to complete the bridge. Senator Oropeza brought together the interested parties, including the Department of Transportation, the Alameda Corridor Transportation Authority, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (LACMTA), the Equilon Refinery, the Union Pacific Railroad, and the City of Los Angeles to solve this problem of completing the bridge and was able to help facilitate $107 million in funding from a combination of sources that included state transportation funds, state Proposition 116 bond funds, federal demonstration funds, LACMTA funds, and railroad funds. (Note that the indicated bridge on Route 1 is also named after her) Named by Senate Concurrent Resolution 115, Resolution Chapter 130, on August 28, 2014.

The bicycle pedestrian path on the replacement Gerald Desmond Bridge on Route 710, in the County of Los Angeles, is named the "Mark Bixby Memorial Bicycle Pedestrian Path". It was named in memory of Mark Llewellyn Bixby, who was a member of one of the founding families of the City of Long Beach. Bixby was also a past president of the Long Beach Rotary Club, which was instrumental in raising money to build Rotary Centennial Park, located on Pacific Coast Highway (Route 1) and Junipero Avenue in the City of Long Beach. Bixby was also the director of the BikeFest Tour of Long Beach and was a vocal proponent of adding bicycle lanes to the replacement Gerald Desmond Bridge. Tragically, Mark Bixby lost his life in a plane crash in 2011 at 44 years of age. Named by Assembly Concurrent Resolution 100, Resolution Chapter 109, on September 4, 2012.

The portion of this route from Wardlow Road to the Pacific Coast Highway in the City of Long Beach is named the "Los Angeles County Deputy Sheriff Maria Cecilia Rosa Memorial Highway". It was named in memory of Deputy Maria Cecilia Rosa of the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department, who was killed in the line of duty on March 28, 2006 at the age of 30, in the City of Long Beach. Deputy Rosa was a resident of the City of Long Beach and was deeply committed to education. She was due to graduate from the California State University, Long Beach, with her Bachelors Degree. Deputy Rosa is remembered as a young woman who strived for perfection in life. She had a captivating smile that would brighten even the darkest of days. She was an extremely caring individual who was always willing to go the extra mile to cheer up a friend. In addition, she was a woman who committed her life to her family, friends, and her career to Los Angeles County and the safety of its residents. Named by Assembly Concurrent Resolution (ACR) 34, Resolution Chapter 48, on 6/9/2009.

The portion of this route from Route 1 to Route 5 is named the "Long Beach Freeway". It was named by the State Highway Commission on November 18, 1954. Long Beach refers to the route's terminus in Long Beach. Long Beach was first applied to the development (because of its beaches) in the boom year, 1887. The route was originally to be called the "Los Angeles River Freeway".

The portion of I-710 between East Cesar E. Chavez Avenue and Route 60 in the County of Los Angeles is named the Ruben Salazar Memorial Highway. This segment was named in memory of Ruben Salazar, who was born in Ciudad Juarez, Chihuahua, across the Rio Grande from El Paso on March 3, 1928. Eleven months later his parents, Luz Chavez and Salvador Salazar, a watch repairman, moved across the river to El Paso, Texas, where Ruben was raised. After high school he entered the United States Army, where he served a two-year tour of duty just before the Korean conflict. Out of the service and now an American citizen, Salazar entered the University of Texas at El Paso (UTEP) and received his bachelor of arts in journalism in 1954. During his last two years as a student at UTEP he worked as a reporter for the El Paso Herald Post, where he demonstrated both great interest and skill in investigative reporting, While working as a reporter at the El Paso Herald Post, he became deeply aware of police mistreatment of Mexicans and wrote extensively on the brutality against Mexican-Americans in Texas prisons. After graduation, Salazar took a job with the Press Democrat in Santa Rosa, California. Three years later, he left the staff of the Press Democrat for a reportorial position with the San Francisco News. Having served his seven years of apprenticeship, in 1959 he moved south as a reporter on the city staff of the Los Angeles Times. During his six years at the Los Angeles Times in the city room, he persuaded his superiors to allow him to write a column, sometimes troublesome for the Times, in which he gave voice to the problems and concerns of eastside Chicanos. He continued to give evidence of his ability as a reporter, writing a series of articles on the Los Angeles Latino community in 1963, for which he received an award from the California State Fair, the Los Angeles Press Club, and the Equal Opportunity Foundation. In addition to his awards, the series also earned him a well-deserved reputation for conscientious and objective reporting. In 1965, Salazar was sent to cover the civil war in the Dominican Republic, where he described the views of the rebels and the reaction to the U.S. involvement. Later that year, Salazar was sent by the Times to Vietnam as a foreign correspondent to cover the rapidly escalating American involvement there, of special interest to the Latino community because of the proportionately large number of Mexican-Americans in the U.S. forces and among the casualties. He was one of two Times correspondents in Vietnam during the period of increased U.S. involvement. In late 1966, Ruben Salazar left Vietnam and was called back by the Times and placed as the bureau chief in Mexico City, thus becoming the first Mexican-American to hold such a position at a major newspaper. He covered stories throughout Latin America including the first conference of the Latin American Solidarity Organization in Cuba in 1967. In 1968, he covered a student demonstration in Mexico City when Mexican soldiers opened fire. In late 1968, Salazar returned to Los Angeles with a special assignment to cover the Mexican-American community, in which the Chicano movement was beginning to move into high gear. Aware of the increasing importance and rising militancy of Mexican-Americans, in the following year the Times took steps, involving Salazar, to focus more sharply on the Chicano community. In early 1970, he began writing a weekly column featured on the Friday Opinion page explaining and interpreting Chicano life and culture to the greater Los Angeles community. In January of 1970, Salazar decided to accept a position as news director of station KMEX-TV and planned to leave the Times. The response of the Times was to suggest that in his new position Salazar continue writing his weekly column. He decided he could handle both jobs and subsequently used both forums to articulate the many grievances that Mexican-Americans had nursed for so long. A political moderate, he nevertheless spoke out fearlessly, condemning racism, prejudice, and segregation. Abuses by the police became the special target of his hard-hitting weekly essays, and he repeatedly pointed out in his column the much higher than average Mexican-American casualty rate in the Vietnam War. As a result of his articles, he was under investigation by the Los Angeles Police Department and the FBI, and pressure was put on him to tone down his language. When the National Chicano Moratorium, a committee of Chicanos who opposed the Vietnam War, called a march for August 29, 1970, in Los Angeles, Ruben Salazar naturally was present at the event in his dual capacity. Approximately 20,000 members from all over the United States had gathered to decry the Vietnam War since Chicanos had the highest number of casualties in proportion to their population. With his crew from KMEX he covered the march from Belvedere Park to Laguna Park. As trouble began at a nearby liquor store, it quickly led to a confrontation between the police and marchers, which led to rioting and looting covering 28 blocks. The violence led to 200 arrests, 60 injured, and three deaths. As the day grew late into the afternoon, the riot moved east on Whittier Boulevard toward the Silver Dollar Cafe. Attempting to avoid the riot-ridden streets, Ruben Salazar and his news crew stopped to have a drink in the Silver Dollar Cafe. Shortly after they entered the Silver Dollar Cafe, a deputy fired a high-velocity 10-inch tear gas projectile meant for piercing walls, into the cafe and hit Salazar in the head. Ruben Salazar was killed instantly, suffering a projectile wound of the temple area causing massive injury to the brain. The subsequent 16-day coroner's inquest ruled Salazar's death a homicide, but there was never any legal action. Salazar's tragic death was a consequence of the contentious and often racially heated period of time. His informed, articulate, and level-headed voice for social change inspired many in the Latino community, and his legacy has encouraged Latinos to enter the field of journalism. In 1971, he was posthumously awarded a special Robert F. Kennedy Journalism Award for his columns, which communicated the culture and alienation of Chicanos effectively and compassionately. He received the highest Raza accolade, a corrido describing his contributions to La Raza . Ruben Salazar's life and death has been recognized and honored with awards, scholarships, public schools, and community centers in his name. Most notably, after the controversy of his death had subsided, Laguna Park was renamed Salazar Park in his honor. In July of 1976, Salazar was honored by the California State University of Los Angeles in the renaming of South Hall to Ruben Salazar Memorial Hall. On the 10th anniversary of his death, his widow, Sally Salazar, was the guest of honor at the dedication of the Ruben Salazar Library in Santa Rosa, California. Named by Senate Concurrent Resolution (SCR) 37, Resolution Chapter 78, on 7/12/2005.

Before 1954, the route was named the "Los Angeles River Freeway". The first segment opened in 1952. The Los Angeles River was named Rio de Porciuncula by the Portolá expedition, August 2, 1769, for it was the day of Nuestra Señora de los Angeles de Porciúncula (Our Lady of the Angels of Portiuncula). Portiuncula was the chapel in Assisi, Italy, cradle of the Franciscan Order. The full name of the river was recorded by Palou, December 10, 1773. The pueblo was founded in 1781 with the name Reina de los Angeles, but almost invariable appeared on maps and often in documents as Pueblo de los Angeles. Various forms of the name were used ("City of the Angels" in 1847) until the county and city became officially Los Angeles in 1850.

The portion of this route from Route 5 to Route 210 (not all constructed) is not officially named.


Named Structures

Bridge 53-958 on I-710, the I-710/Route 91 interchange, is named the "Edmond J. Russ Interchange". It was built in 1985, and was named by Assembly Concurrent Resolution 135, Chapter 162. [Note: According to the CalTrans logs, this bridge is actually on Route 110; thus the named interchange is at the Route 110/Route 91 junction.] Ed Russ is a former mayor of Gardena; during his term (which ended in 1982) he was able to push for the extension of the then Redondo Beach Freeway to the Route 110. This extension relieved the traffic that plagued Atresia Blvd from the end of the freeway at Broadway to Route 110. When the extension was completed in 1985, it was given the legislative name in his honor, but it was up to the private sector to produce the funds to make and install the signs for the interchange. It wasn't until 1998-99 that a group of Gardena businesspeople and citizens, led by the Gardena Valley News, began a campaign to raise the money needed. The signs were installed in the latter half of 1999.

The I-5/I-710 interchange in Los Angeles County is officially named the "Marco Antonio Firebaugh Interchange". This interchange was named in memory of Marco Antonio Firebaugh, who at the age of 39 years was running for the California State Senate when he succumbed to health ailments on March 21, 2006. Born in Tijuana, Mexico on October 13, 1966, Firebaugh emigrated to the United States when he was a young boy. He worked hard to pay his own way through school and earned his bachelor of arts degree in political science from the University of California, Berkeley and a law degree from the UCLA School of Law. He was the first in his family to attend college and was committed to the notion that free universal public education is the cornerstone of our democratic society and worked hard to improve educational opportunities for all California students. Firebaugh was elected to the California State Assembly at the age of 32 years; and he served in the California State Assembly from 1998 to 2004, representing the 50th Assembly District located in southeast Los Angeles County. During his tenure in the Assembly, Firebaugh was recognized for his impressive legislative and advocacy record on behalf of California's working families and their children, establishing him as a leader and role model in the Latino community. He demonstrated outstanding leadership in introducing legislation aimed at improving the lives of immigrants and low-income families including undocumented immigrants who come to California to work and give their children a better life. He authored air quality legislation that provides funding for the state's most important air emissions reductions programs and that ensures that state funding be targeted to low-income communities that are most severely impacted by air pollution. He also authored legislation funding a mobile asthma treatment clinic known as a Breathmobile to provide free screenings and treatment for school children in southeast Los Angeles and fought hard in the Legislature to make California the first state to outlaw smoking in a vehicle carrying young children to protect them from the hazards created by breathing secondhand smoke. In 2002, he championed AB540, which allowed undocumented California high school students to pursue a college education and pay in-state tuition fees. From 2002 to 2004, Firebaugh served as Chairman of the California Latino Legislative Caucus where he was responsible for managing the development of the Latino Caucus' annual "Agenda for California's Working Families" as a policy document that focuses on issues affecting California's diverse population. Because of his effectiveness both as a policymaker and political leader, Marco Antonio Firebaugh was appointed Majority Floor Leader in 2002, and served as Floor Leader from 2002 to 2004, making him the highest ranking Latino in the Assembly and one of the chief negotiators for Assembly Democrats. Firebaugh also served six years on the State Allocation Board, which provides funding for public school construction and modernization. Named by Assembly Concurrent Resolution (ACR) 142, Resolution Chapter 132, on 9/7/2006.

Near Route 710, although not on Route 710, is the Gerald Desmond Bridge". Gerald Desmond was a prominent Long Beach civic leader who served on the Long Beach City Council and as Long Beach City Attorney.


Commuter Lanes

HOV lanes are planned between I-10 and I-210.


Classified Landcaped Freeway

The following segments are designated as Classified Landscaped Freeway:

County Route Starting PM Ending PM
Los Angeles 710 6.80 9.82
Los Angeles 710 11.86 12.55
Los Angeles 710 12.80 17.34
Los Angeles 710 17.66 21.01
Los Angeles 710 21.76 22.17
Los Angeles 710 22.37 22.67
Los Angeles 710 22.91 25.44
Los Angeles 710 26.40 26.53
Los Angeles 710 R26.53 R27.19
Los Angeles 710 R32.34 R32.72


Interstate Submissions

State Shield Interstate Shield Under Construction Approved as 139(a) non-chargeable interstate in 1983; the portion from Ocean Blvd in Long Beach to Route 710 was approved as 139(b) non-chargeable milage in 1984. The portion from Route 10 to Route 210 is a subject of a long legal battle and is not yet constructed, except for the stub Route 710 at the I-210/Route 134/Route 710 interchange.




Other WWW Links



[SHC 253.1] Entire route. Added to the Freeway and Expressway system in 1959.


Overall statistics for Route 710:

  • Total Length (1995): 22 miles traversable; 4 miles unconstructed.
  • Average Daily Traffic (1992): 37,000 to 213,000.
  • Milage Classification: Rural: 0; Sm. Urban: 0; Urbanized: 26.
  • Previous Federal Aid Milage: FAP: 20 mi; FAU: 6 mi.
  • Functional Classification: Prin. Arterial: 22 mi.
  • Counties Traversed: Los Angeles.

X-ed Out Pre-1964 State Shield

Former Pre-1964 Signed State Route 740


This number is not assigned to a post-1964 route.


Pre 1964 Signage History

In 1934, Route 740 was signed along the route from Jct. Route 111 near Indian Wells to Jct. US 60 near Riverside, via Perris.

The routing between Riverside and Perris was resigned as US 395 in around 1935.

The portion from Perris to Route 111 was resigned to Route 74 sometime between 1939 and 1956. It was a 1933 extension to LRN 64.

Back Arrow
Highways 305-440
State Highway Routes
Return to State Highway Routes
Forward Arrow
Highways 780-980
© 1996-2012 Daniel P. Faigin.
Maintained by: Daniel P. Faigin <>.