Having decided to look for an alternative to the I-710 corridor, we followed much the same process we used when initially selecting and evaluating I-710.
We returned to the preliminary data we had gathered on corridors in the Los Angeles area, which added detailed quantitative information to our basic selection criteria.
Consulting with stakeholders
We met again with project stakeholders (Caltrans District 7, Caltrans Headquarters, LA Metro, PATH team) to review possible options. Satisfied that Caltrans District 7 still offered the best prospects for a suitable corridor, the group reviewed both the preliminary assessment data and the concerns that had emerged about I-710.
Choosing an alternative corridor
Our stakeholder discussions produced a consensus that I-210 had good potential for an ICM project.
We then conducted a detailed evaluation of I-210, as we had for I-710, to get a better sense of its characteristics and suitability for the project. This included analyses of:
Click the slides to see the types of data we gathered and evaluated:
Our evaluation revealed that I-210, in contrast to I-710, possessed more advantages than disadvantages for an ICM project. In particular:
- It is a multi-modal corridor with advanced arterial signal systems and ramp metering.
- It includes light rail, commuter rail, transitway, and HOV lanes.
- It has multiple express commuter transit services and numerous distributed parking facilities.
Click the images below to see the results of our comparison:
Based on our evaluation of I-210 and its comparison with I-710, the Connected Corridors team and stakeholder partners agreed to go forward with the ICM pilot on I-210.