| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Ventura Freeway article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 365 days  |
 | This article was nominated for deletion on 28 March 2010. The result of the discussion was Withdrawn by nom. . |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Disputed? edit
The entire Ventura Freeway is not built to freeway standards ...
This doesn't explain why it is not considered a freeway. If it were not to be built to Interstate standards, then what would be present along the highway are at-grade junctions, and median crossovers. That is my opinion. Despite the fact that the route is more likely to be a freeway, it may have been inconsistent enough to have be built upon Interstate standards. I do consider the Ventura Freeway built to those standards. 2600:1700:8A32:B530:8561:2B66:1D13:FD67 (talk) 01:33, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
- I added a reference about a 2013 project that removed the last cross-over at La Conchita. The article focuses on the bike path improvements and does not specifically address the freeway standards issue. Fettlemap (talk) 03:53, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
- The freeway definitely contains portions which do not conform with Interstate standards, such as requiring a shoulder within the center median in both directions, which almost the entirety of the freeway lacks thereof. Fluffy89502 (talk) 22:42, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
- I thought I read somewhere that almost all of the Greater Los Angeles freeways have an exception for inadequate center median shoulders as the cost of widening in the urban area is so high. The entire Ventura Freeway no longer has signals or at grade crossings that allow left turns off and onto the freeway across traffic. As I mentioned above, the La Conchita project was the last. Future projects will mostly be replacing old bridges or improving the existing which almost always includes some widening. I think it is generally complete and recognized as a limited access freeway but I doubt if it will ever meet a perfect interstate standard. Fettlemap (talk) 22:57, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
- The Ventura Fwy is definitely a freeway now, as it is completely controlled access. Yes, the freeway is not built to Interstate standards but it still is a freeway since it is controlled access, as the definition of “freeway” and the Wikipedia article about freeways states. The sentance is wrong without a doubt, but it would be correct if the word “freeway” was replaced with “Interstate.” (talk) 17:04, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
- US 101 is a part of the United States Numbered Highway System as opposed to the Interstate Highway System, so it does not necessarily have to conform to Interstate standards. I believe the word substitution is appropriate. Trackinfo (talk) 05:59, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
- The Ventura Fwy is definitely a freeway now, as it is completely controlled access. Yes, the freeway is not built to Interstate standards but it still is a freeway since it is controlled access, as the definition of “freeway” and the Wikipedia article about freeways states. The sentance is wrong without a doubt, but it would be correct if the word “freeway” was replaced with “Interstate.” (talk) 17:04, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
- I thought I read somewhere that almost all of the Greater Los Angeles freeways have an exception for inadequate center median shoulders as the cost of widening in the urban area is so high. The entire Ventura Freeway no longer has signals or at grade crossings that allow left turns off and onto the freeway across traffic. As I mentioned above, the La Conchita project was the last. Future projects will mostly be replacing old bridges or improving the existing which almost always includes some widening. I think it is generally complete and recognized as a limited access freeway but I doubt if it will ever meet a perfect interstate standard. Fettlemap (talk) 22:57, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
The statement was posted when there were still at-grade intersections at La Conchita and Mussel Shoals. The best indicator now would be if all the "Begin Freeway" and "End Freeway" signs were removed from the route. (I just checked Google Street View, and I did not see any of them there anymore) Of course, Wikipedia's policy on verifiability only applies to information within Wikipedia articles -- there is no penalty for the omission of information. So in either case, we can probably remove the statement now. Zzyzx11 (talk) 04:49, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support Fettlemap (talk) 05:01, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support I believe this to be accurate. Ventura Freeway only goes to the Santa Barbara County line and I will verify that with WP:OR on Saturday. North of Santa Barbara, it still alternates multiple times. Trackinfo (talk) 06:04, 20 March 2019 (UTC)