California Highways (www.cahighways.org): Route 240

Post-1964 Legistlative Route Graphic ▸In 1963, Route 240 was defined as “Route 1 near Seal Beach to Route 405.”

During the 1964 State Highway Renumbering, Route 35 was repurposed over what was Sign Route 5 in the Santa Cruz Mountains. The entirety of LRN 170 and the San Gabriel River Freeway was broken up into three designations. Chargeable I-605 was from "Route 405 to Route 10 near the San Gabriel River." The planned San Gabriel River Freeway south of I-405 to Route 1 became Route 240. The planned San Gabriel River Freeway north of I-10 to I-210 and the Foothill Freeway became Route 243. Until the new I-605 was completed, the previous surface route of the original Sign Route 35 was temporarily designated as LRN 605. In 1964, construction of the Route 240 portion of the San Gabriel River Freeway to Route 22 was partially financed, with a planned completion in late 1966.
(Source: Gribblenation Blog (Tom Fearer), "Former California State Route 240", 4/5/2023)

▸In 1968, Chapter 282 repealed the definition of Route 240, transferring the routing to Route 605.

Pacific Coast Freeway - Orange County The Pacific Coast Freeway in Orange County, as of 1966, turned south from Route 22 on 7^th Street, skirting the wetlands inland from Seal Beach, and passing by Huntington Harbor to the then-proposed Route 39 freeway, which extended due N-S between Beach Blvd. and Golden West Avenue. The likely rationale behind this odd routing was that the portion between the I-405/I-605/Route 22 interchange and Route 39 needed to avoid Huntington Harbor; hence, it stayed well inland. When it intersected the Route 39 freeway alignment, it turned south following the Route 39 trajectory for a mile or so before turning SE again to parallel Pacific Coast Highway (PCH)—but slightly inland to avoid (a) the wetlands immediately north of PCH and (b) the Edison power plant in SE Huntington Beach. Prior to the mid '70's, when the deletions took place, the Route 1 adopted alignment in L.A. and Orange counties was hardly linear in nature; it twisted around to avoid obstacles along or near its projected alignment (refineries in Torrance and Wilmington, business districts and CSULB in Long Beach, Huntington Harbor and the more densely-developed parts of Huntington Beach, etc.). Interestingly, the original route that was formally adopted in the '60's showed the adopted route directly south of the I-405/I-605/Route 22 interchange as Route 240; it is unclear if Route 1 was to remain on PCH between Route 22 and Route 240—or whether any conceptual freeway corridor paralleling PCH was under study or discussion; no map ever showed a future alignment anywhere near that section of PCH. [A study the City of Long Beach did in the mid-'70s regarding this corridor (in which they recommended the Division of Highways drop the proposed freeway route), Route 1 would have used the Route 240 corridor. An alternate routing that used the PCH corridor between 7^th Street and Seal Beach would have been feasible, since there was almost no development along that corridor until the mid-'70s. ] It would have likely been a non-starter in any case, since it would have passed through Belmont Shores, a proverbial "poster child" for upscale NIMBY activity. This arrangement was different by 1971, when Route 243 (the original designation of the northern extension of I-605 between I-10 and I-210) was added to the Interstate system that year while the extension was under construction (it was never signed as anything but I-605); Route 240 also disappeared that year, replaced by Route 1. The original adopted route did pass through the US Navy facility, which at that time contained the wetlands yet to be protected by the future Coastal Commission. But any activity toward development of this alignment was dead by the late '70's (Gianturco + Coastal Commission = no new freeways anywhere near the coast). It's probable that the section through Navy land was never formalized by an agreement between the two entities (Navy & the Division of Highways), so it was likely left off the 1969 state map until such an accord could be reached—a point made moot by the overall route deletion a few years later. The 1981 map's depiction of the corridor was likely due to mis-or non-communication between the Gousha researchers and state agencies, since by that time the deletion of both the Route 1 and Route 39 freeways had taken place. The whole notion of deploying a freeway through Navy territory, coastal wetlands, and anywhere in the vicinity of Huntington Harbor always seemed to be an exercise in futility. Even before the mass adopted-route deletions of 1978-82, the only viable freeway arrangement in the area was to let traffic remain on I-405 to the Route 39 freeway alignment, and take it down to/near the beach from there. Obviously even that concept would have been dead meat by the end of the '70's. In any case, all of these routes, along with the adopted section of the Route 39 freeway between Route 1 and I-5 near Buena Park was deleted soon after the Long Beach segment. The Route 1 freeway would have veered inland near Fountain Valley, and would have intersected Route 55 in Costa Mesa right about 19th Street, where the current Route 55 freeway ends. Curiously, the original projected path east of there is similar to the present location of the Route 73 toll road; both closely bypassed UC Irvine to the south of campus.
(Source: Scott Parker (Sparker) at AARoads, 8/12/2016; 8/13/2016; 8/13/2016; DTComposer at AAroads, 8/14/2016)

In 1957, Chapter 24 defined LRN 240 to be “[LRN 4] near Glendale to [LRN 26] near the east boundary of Los Angeles County on a route to be selected by the California Highway Commission, which route may include all or portions of any existing state highway route or routes”. The urgency clause noted this was related to a circumferential freeway around Los Angeles.

This route runs from I-5 near Glendale to I-10 near the east boundary of Los Angeles County. This LRN was used for the future freeway routings of Route 134 between present-day I-5 and I-210, and I-210 between Route 134 and Route 57, and Route 57 between I-210 and I-10. Portions of the route duplicated the paths of LRN 161 and LRN 9. The portion between the post-1998 Route 210/Route 57 junction and I-10 was originally also I-210.

Between the 1962 and 1963 state highway maps, the portion LRN 240 W of Figueroa appears to have been planned to transition to LRN 161.

Between San Dimas and US 60/US 70/US 99, LRN 240 was to have been designated Route 71 (the signed Route 71 at this time ran to the east along LRN 19).

California Highways:
www.cahighways.org

Former State Route 240

Routing

Post 1964 Signage History

Pre 1964 Signage History

Other WWW Links

Pre-1964 Legislative Route