AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Author Topic: Interstate 15E signage in San Bernardino and Riverside Counties?  (Read 884 times)

ACSCmapcollector

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 366
  • Last Login: March 27, 2017, 10:13:01 PM

I know you cahwyguy is going to have a field day with my post here...so here it goes:

Interstate 15E signage in San Bernardino and Riverside Counties?

Interstate 15E, then Interstate 215 another AASHTO decision again, or did Caltrans or both have to do with this?

cahwyguy in your website it says: This route has a complicated numbering history, described below. The original (1947) plan was to have I-15 terminate at I-10, using the present-day I-215 alignment. US 395 would then continue to San Diego. In 1965, the US 395 segment was renumbered as TEMP I-15/US 395. In 1969, that corridor became I-215, and a new western alignment was created for I-15 that used existing Route 71 between US 395 and Route 91, and a new alignment (approximating former Route 31 in portions) between Route 91 and Devore. "I-215" and I-15 rejoined near Temecula. In 1974, I-215 was resigned as I-15E (with a real route number of Route 194), with the expressway portion signed as TEMP I-15E. In 1983, the I-15E signage was changed back to I-215; Route 194 was deleted, and Route 215 was created as non-chargable interstate.

There were also Temporary I-15 signs from the San Diego County line south through Escondido on two-lane old US 395, until it was replaced by four-lane (then quickly expanded to eight-lane) I-15. Note that, for a time, "Temporary I-15" was the only route signage on that road. I-15 was completed through northern San Diego County around 1986.

There may have been Temporary I-15 shields in San Diego, on Murphy Canyon Road between I-8 and Route 163 (former US 395), before it was upgraded to a substandard freeway around 1985, and possibly thereafter until it was completely rebuilt.


Scott C. Presnal
Morro Bay, CA
Logged

cahwyguy

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 134
  • California Highway Guy

  • Age: 57
  • Location: Northridge, CA
  • Last Login: March 24, 2017, 01:36:32 PM
    • California Highways
Re: Interstate 15E signage in San Bernardino and Riverside Counties?
« Reply #1 on: July 12, 2016, 09:22:59 PM »

The mess with Route 15 is uuuuuuugly when you go through the history, and very different than the story with I-5. Presumably, you understand the difference between chargable and non-chargable interstates. If you don't, go read http://www.cahighways.org/itypes.html . I'll wait.

Now you understand why creating I- shields may not be as easy as fixing a map; often, one bumps into federal statutes. But I digress, back to Route 15.

I, too, remember the days when I-5 in the Elsinore and Ontario areas was under construction, and Route 83 was labeled as Temp I-15. I also remember when today's Route 215 was labeled as I-15E (even though legislatively it was another number). Why was it labeled as I-15E. Because, at that time, it wasn't I-15 yet they wanted continuity for I-15 from the Temecula junction, and they didn't want to keep US 395 around.

Once the westernly construction of I-15 was completed, it was signed I-15. The issue then became what to do with I-15E, as AASHTO by that time didn't like suffixed interstates (except in Texas, but Texas is strange. Really strange.) Caltrans got the route renumbered as 215, but they couldn't sign it as 215 because portions were no longer up to interstate standards (in particular, the stretch between Temecula and Riverside was expressway -- I remember driving it a lot when I was going out to Orange Empire Railway Museum in the late 1980s and early 1990s -- if you don't know OERM, visit www.oerm.org). In many cases, Caltrans fudged around that by signing the route "TO I-215" in the NB direction (they couldn't do that SB, and "FROM I-215" just doesn't work  :D ). Eventually, it was all upgraded and was resigned I-215 (but it is non-chargable mileage).

In any case, the history of the routings in that area -- not just Route 15, but what was US 395, were Route 71 went, how Route 74 fit into everything, the strange portion that was Route 371 and such -- is quite convoluted.
Logged
Daniel - California Highway Guy ● Highway Site: http://www.cahighways.org/ ●  Blog: http://blog.cahighways.org/ ● Follow California Highways on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/cahighways

myosh_tino

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2498
  • Silicon Valley Roadgeek

  • Age: 43
  • Location: Cupertino, CA
  • Last Login: Today at 03:53:04 AM
    • Silicon Valley Roads @ Markyville.com
Re: Interstate 15E signage in San Bernardino and Riverside Counties?
« Reply #2 on: July 12, 2016, 11:50:11 PM »

Daniel,

As a frequent visitor, I find your site very fascinating.

I was wondering if you can explain this photo which shows up in the AARoads Shield Gallery...



Although it's blurry, this appears to be a TEMPORARY I-15E shield assembly.  I'm aware of the TEMP I-15 but I was totally unaware of I-15E being signed as TEMP.

EDIT:
Oops, never mind.  I just realized, by reading about I-15 on your site, current-day I-215 still had expressway sections at that time and non-freeway portions carried a TEMPORARY banner until it was upgraded to a full freeway.
« Last Edit: July 13, 2016, 12:40:20 AM by myosh_tino »
Logged
Quote from: golden eagle
If I owned a dam and decided to donate it to charity, would I be giving a dam? I'm sure that might be a first because no one really gives a dam.

MarkF

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 110
  • Location: Orange County, California
  • Last Login: March 25, 2017, 02:15:33 AM
Re: Interstate 15E signage in San Bernardino and Riverside Counties?
« Reply #3 on: July 13, 2016, 01:09:52 AM »

That Temporary 15E sign in the previous post is a crop from a photo I took on a 126 format camera in what would be the Menifee area today.  I think it is just north of Newport Road, you can see the pass to Sun City in the distance.  I remember the road had postmiles for route 194.

Here is the original photo, labeled on the back:
"6/27/78 - northbound TEMP I-15E south of Sun City"
Logged

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1167
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: Today at 04:32:00 AM
Re: Interstate 15E signage in San Bernardino and Riverside Counties?
« Reply #4 on: July 13, 2016, 02:27:48 AM »

I was attending nearby UC Riverside at the time that the I-15 mess unfolded, so I got a front-row seat to the circus!  It all started with the I-15 extension south to San Diego, part of the 1968 1500-mile Interstate expansion legislation.  Originally, the concept was to take I-15 directly south from the original I-10 junction at Colton, continue south on the ridge betwen Reche Canyon and Pigeon Pass, and then descend the mountain near the present east junction of CA 60 & I-215, and then segue onto what was then US 395 south past March AFB and on to San Diego.  That concept didn't last long -- just as long as it took to do a detailed survey of the proposed route -- the mountains in that area are basically a pile of unstable compressed sandstone "rocks"; a construction nightmare.  A more "flatland" approach was explored to the west, diverging from US 395 between Grand Terrace and Highgrove (both between Colton and Riverside), heading south east of Iowa Avenue, then following the Santa Fe rail line along the base of the mountains -- directly behind UCR -- and merging with 60/395 (now 60/215) just north of the present route split in Moreno Valley.  You can guess how that went over with the UCR community -- it would have wiped out a whole nest of apartments serving as student housing -- not to mention being across the street from the Chancellor's official residence!  By the end of 1969, that option was also kaput.

Early in 1970 District 8 planners came up with an alternate that solved more than a few issues -- the proposed CA 31 freeway, extending north from Corona through eastern Ontario before turning northeast along the base of the San Gabriel mountains to intersect I-15 at Devore, the point where the route started climbing Cajon Pass.  Realigning I-15 over this route would cut about 23 miles off the Los Angeles-Las Vegas I-10/15 routing by eliminating the "backtracking" route via San Bernardino.  And, lo and behold, the south end of the 31 freeway continued south of Corona as the CA 71 proposed freeway (actually, about 10 miles of it had been constructed circa 1967 between Corona and Lake Elsinore), which itself merged with US 395 at Murietta, just north of Temecula.  While about ten miles longer than the existing I-15/US 395 route through Riverside and Perris, this reroute concept drew not only attention from the local press but also that in L.A. -- virtually all favorable to the idea.  By mid-1970 the Division of Highways had decided to strongly pursue the CA 31 option.  AASHTO (at that time, without the first "A") concurred, and the matter reached FHWA by the beginning of fall.

At first, FHWA raised an objection to the funding of the former CA 31 section from I-10 north to the existing I-15 at Devore because of the existence of the in-place I-15 through San Bernardino, which had been previously the receipient of chargeable Interstate funds.  But a perusal of the records showed that the segment between I-10 and 5th Street in San Bernardino had commenced construction in early 1956 -- almost a year before Interstate funds were first disbursed; only the segment north of there was actually part of chargeable construction.  Negotiations commenced, and an agreement was finally made near the end of 1970 whereby California would waive any rights to Interstate maintenance or reconstruction funds for the original I-15 segment between I-10 and Devore in exchange for full funding of the entire CA 31/CA 71 corridor as the realigned I-15.  Once that agreement was finalized, the Division accelerated construction of the Devore freeway-to-freeway interchange, already in progress as part of the I-15 Cajon realignment, along with the first couple of miles of the new (then) CA 31 alignment, which opened by the spring of 1971 (this was pre-STIP days, when the Division could do such things without much in the way of outside interference). 

However, as soon as the dust had settled on the reroute, the cities of San Bernardino and Riverside voiced concerns that this new routing, which completely bypassed their city centers, would have a negative effect on their development plans.  Together, these cities had devised a plan whereby the new western route via Corona and Ontario would become I-15W, while US 395 would be renumbered I-15E, regardless of the actual non-Interstate status of the latter route -- but keeping an Interstate route through their midst.  AASHTO quickly shot down the full E/W split, but reserved the notion of at least keeping US 395 through San Bernardino signed as an Interstate until the Ontario-Devore segment of the new alignment could be completed.  And as this was several years prior to the decision to eliminate suffixed Interstate numbers, they approved the signage of the I-10 to Devore segment as I-15E (the Division had the entirety of US 395 from Murietta to Devore redesignated as an unsigned CA 194, a number  previously decommissioned elsewhere).  Initially, I-15E was intended to be a purely temporary designation -- but that it existed at all (signed as such in late 1972) placated the city of San Bernardino for the time being.

However, the city of Riverside did not hesitate to voice their objections to being left out of the Interstate network.  They "lucked out", however due to inadvertently good timing:  the Nixonian "block grant" legislation, passed in early 1973 prior to that administration's functional crippling in the wake of the Watergate scandal, introduced the concept of "chargeable/nonchargeable" Interstate delineation.  Now the 15E concept could, with AASHTO/FHWA consent, be extended south along US 395, rejoining the new I-15 at Murietta, as a nonchargeable route.  With a major push from the local Congressional delegation, this was done by 
the spring of 1974.  I-15E was signed in place of US 395 as far south as the CA 60 split at Moreno Valley; the remainder of the route south to Murietta was signed, by mid-1975, as "Temporary I-15E" and south of the CA 71 merge at Murietta as "Temporary I-15".  This configuration lasted for a few years until the decision to eliminate suffixes was made.

Renumbering of the completed and uncompleted portions of I-15E was proposed circa 1979; Caltrans made one of their rare appropriate renumbering decisions:  to reinstate the number 215, which was an urban surface-street connector in Pomona before it was deleted from the state highway system in 1965.  AASHTO and FHWA vetted the 15E to 215 change by 1981; the renumbering in the field took place in 1982.  Although some sections were technically substandard, the route was by that time mostly full freeway; a short segment between Sun City and Perris still featured a couple of at-grade crossing roads, while the segment from Perris to CA 60 was still a divided facility with numerous at-grade and/or signalized intersections.   The "temporary" designation concept had been dropped by Caltrans at that point; the section between the Murietta I-15 divergence and CA 60 was (IMO somewhat absurdly) signed, as Dan indicated in the previous post, as "TO I-215" northbound, and as CA 215, complete with green shields, southbound.  This unwieldly situation persisted until the two sections featuring cross traffic were upgraded to full freeway in 1995.  The in-city Riverside segment of I-215 featured one of the most underpowered Interstate TOTSO's (in both directions, including a 25mph loop southbound) until 2004, when the southbound I-215 2-lane flyover was completed; the northbound outside ramp still shrinks to a single lane before merging with lanes continuing from the terminating CA 91.  It's still a TOTSO -- but not quite as obnoxious as before!         

   
   
« Last Edit: July 18, 2016, 03:39:25 AM by sparker »
Logged

coatimundi

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 787
  • Age: 35
  • Location: Marina, CA
  • Last Login: March 22, 2017, 10:12:42 PM
Re: Interstate 15E signage in San Bernardino and Riverside Counties?
« Reply #5 on: July 13, 2016, 02:50:18 AM »

Interesting history lesson.
TLDR: It was the 70's; everyone was funding everyone and AASHTO was approving interstates into the ocean and onto Guam.

Seriously though, I do recall reading/hearing about the "TO I-215" signs along the corridor. It's nice to read the why.
Logged

cahwyguy

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 134
  • California Highway Guy

  • Age: 57
  • Location: Northridge, CA
  • Last Login: March 24, 2017, 01:36:32 PM
    • California Highways
Re: Interstate 15E signage in San Bernardino and Riverside Counties?
« Reply #6 on: July 13, 2016, 11:08:43 AM »

Thanks. I'll make a note to grab that history for the next round of updates. If you want credit as something other than your handle here, drop me an email with the particulars.
Logged
Daniel - California Highway Guy ● Highway Site: http://www.cahighways.org/ ●  Blog: http://blog.cahighways.org/ ● Follow California Highways on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/cahighways

Avalanchez71

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 821
  • Location: Middle Tennessee
  • Last Login: March 26, 2017, 10:57:04 PM
Re: Interstate 15E signage in San Bernardino and Riverside Counties?
« Reply #7 on: July 13, 2016, 12:27:02 PM »

Why didn't they just number the at-grade and expressway section as BUS LOOP I-215?
Logged

TheStranger

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3084
  • Last Login: Today at 01:44:36 AM
Re: Interstate 15E signage in San Bernardino and Riverside Counties?
« Reply #8 on: July 13, 2016, 12:58:14 PM »

The issue then became what to do with I-15E, as AASHTO by that time didn't like suffixed interstates (except in Texas, but Texas is strange. Really strange.)


When the suffixed interstates were mostly removed in 1980, there were three sets retained, all parallel loop arrangements:

the Texas I-35 split (as noted)
I-15E for two more years

And the I-35 split in Minnesota that also still exists.

The next set of suffixed numbers would be the non-loop I-69 branches of recent vintage, which IIRC was written into law and not AASHTO designation.


Quote from: Avalanchez71
Why didn't they just number the at-grade and expressway section as BUS LOOP I-215?

Caltrans has never used business loop signage for segments awaiting freeway upgrade, but only for bypassed former (almost always surface) routings.

« Last Edit: July 13, 2016, 01:18:08 PM by TheStranger »
Logged
Chris Sampang

cahwyguy

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 134
  • California Highway Guy

  • Age: 57
  • Location: Northridge, CA
  • Last Login: March 24, 2017, 01:36:32 PM
    • California Highways
Re: Interstate 15E signage in San Bernardino and Riverside Counties?
« Reply #9 on: July 13, 2016, 01:39:56 PM »

Quote
Why didn't they just number the at-grade and expressway section as BUS LOOP I-215?

Because the at-grade and expressway section stretched from Temecula to Riverside. Seriously. Remember we were dealing with upgraded US 395 here, which originally went from Temecula to Elsenore up SSR 71, then across to Perris (home of OERM www.oerm.org  :clap:), then up from Perris to Riverside as expressway (through places like Caljaco and along the edge of March AFB -- used to drive it all the time on the way out to the museum in the 80s), while 74 went S to Sun City and then across to Hemet. Eventually, they built the expressway from Temecula to Sun City.

TLDR: This wasn't a business loop.
Logged
Daniel - California Highway Guy ● Highway Site: http://www.cahighways.org/ ●  Blog: http://blog.cahighways.org/ ● Follow California Highways on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/cahighways

The Ghostbuster

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1451
  • Age: 32
  • Location: Madison, WI
  • Last Login: March 27, 2017, 03:56:55 PM
Re: Interstate 15E signage in San Bernardino and Riverside Counties?
« Reply #10 on: July 13, 2016, 05:12:41 PM »

After Interstate 15 was rerouted, old 15 should have become 215 from the get-go and stayed that way. Unless present day 15 was to have become 15W.
Logged

 


Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.