Regional Boards > Pacific Southwest

Should Tijuana be a Control City on I-5 signs in San Diego?

<< < (9/11) > >>

mgk920:
To me,'BC' has always meant 'British Columbia', thus, the 'BC' abbreviation could be ambiguous here.
  However, the Mexicans don't see a problem with it, so we're stuck with it (for now). 

Mike

pderocco:
Does anyone know what percentage of the traffic going south on I-5 or I-805 actually crosses the border? If it was significant enough to warrant putting Tijuana on the signs, I'd expect the roads to back up for miles. Until you actually get past CA-905, I'll bet most people are going to the massive residential developments in that area, and to the Otay Mesa industrial area.

theroadwayone:
There's that one sign on the 5 near the 905 showing three miles to the border, four to Tijuana and 79 to Ensenada and a similar sign on the 805 with a mile subtracted from the aforementioned distances.

Sub-Urbanite:

--- Quote from: theroadwayone on September 06, 2022, 05:52:45 AM ---There's that one sign on the 5 near the 905 showing three miles to the border, four to Tijuana and 79 to Ensenada and a similar sign on the 805 with a mile subtracted from the aforementioned distances.

--- End quote ---

See, that's what I'm talking about. I feel like at times, our lovely interstate highway system pretends as though the throughput ends at the border checkpoint. But who's kidding themselves at this point that MX1 and I-5 aren't the same corridor? And to that end, just seems like if you were building the system from scratch today, you'd sign Tijuana as far north as San Onofre (for three-deck distance signs for Oceanside / San Diego / Tijuana). Shouldn't Monterrey be signed, even just a bit, on I-35? Heck, MX15 and I-19 aren't just de facto the same corridor, they're de jure part of the CANAMEX corridor  so why not use Hermosillo on distance signs?

/endrant

skluth:

--- Quote from: Sub-Urbanite on September 06, 2022, 12:31:23 PM ---
--- Quote from: theroadwayone on September 06, 2022, 05:52:45 AM ---There's that one sign on the 5 near the 905 showing three miles to the border, four to Tijuana and 79 to Ensenada and a similar sign on the 805 with a mile subtracted from the aforementioned distances.

--- End quote ---

See, that's what I'm talking about. I feel like at times, our lovely interstate highway system pretends as though the throughput ends at the border checkpoint. But who's kidding themselves at this point that MX1 and I-5 aren't the same corridor? And to that end, just seems like if you were building the system from scratch today, you'd sign Tijuana as far north as San Onofre (for three-deck distance signs for Oceanside / San Diego / Tijuana). Shouldn't Monterrey be signed, even just a bit, on I-35? Heck, MX15 and I-19 aren't just de facto the same corridor, they're de jure part of the CANAMEX corridor so why not use Hermosillo on distance signs?

/endrant

--- End quote ---

I'd just sign Nuevo Laredo Tamaulipas once I-35 enters Laredo TX and Heroica Nogales Sonora once I-19 enters Nogales AZ. Monterrey makes sense on I-69W north of Laredo. (Whether I-69W itself makes sense is another discussion already being done elsewhere on AA Roads.)

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version