News:

Thank you for your patience during the Forum downtime while we upgraded the software. Welcome back and see this thread for some new features and other changes to the forum.

Main Menu

Interstate 8 in Arizona - why isn't Yuma a control city westbound?

Started by Pink Jazz, August 24, 2014, 10:06:19 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Pink Jazz

In Casa Grande, the signage for I-8 westbound all include San Diego as a control city, with no mention of Yuma at all.  On a more recent trip to Rocky Point, Mexico heading west on I-8 towards Gila Bend, I did not see any signage that mentioned Yuma as a control city either; all signage had San Diego as their control city.

I was wondering, is there any particular reason why Yuma isn't a control city heading westbound on I-8 in Arizona?  I do believe that Yuma is a control city when heading east on I-8 in California.  After all, Yuma is the largest city in Arizona outside the Phoenix and Tucson metro areas.  Yet the smaller Flagstaff is a control city (on both I-17 and I-40) but Yuma isn't?  That doesn't make any sense at all.


corco

My theory is that there's no interstate junction there and it's a smaller city. Flagstaff is a logical control point because it's the northern terminus of I-17, and then traffic on I-40 heading to Phoenix would pass through there and note Flagstaff. Nogales is the same sort of deal as the southern terminus of I-19 and a well known "navigation" city.

I-8 is San Diego/Phoenix/Tucson, I-10 is Los Angeles/Phoenix/Tucson/El Paso, I-40 is Los Angeles/Flagstaff/Albuquerque, I-19 is Nogales/Tucson, I-17 is Flagstaff/Tucson.

Yuma is probably big enough now, but when I-8 was constructed in the 60s, it was a pretty insignificantly sized city and San Diego would have been much more useful for through traffic.


Pink Jazz

Quote from: corco on August 24, 2014, 10:27:16 PM
My theory is that there's no interstate junction there and it's a smaller city. Flagstaff is a logical control point because it's the northern terminus of I-17, and then traffic on I-40 heading to Phoenix would pass through there and note Flagstaff. Nogales is the same sort of deal as the southern terminus of I-19 and a well known "navigation" city.

I-8 is San Diego/Phoenix/Tucson, I-10 is Los Angeles/Phoenix/Tucson/El Paso, I-40 is Los Angeles/Flagstaff/Albuquerque, I-19 is Nogales/Tucson, I-17 is Flagstaff/Tucson.


Note that in New Mexico, I do believe that Las Cruces (which now has a population over 100,000) is mentioned as a control city on I-10 eastbound (I know it is on I-25 heading south from Albuquerque).  Also, in California, I-40's westbound control city is Barstow (where I-40's actual terminus is located) rather than Los Angeles.

corco

Yeah, Arizona just likes to use "big" cities as their control cities. Flagstaff I think is an exception only because it has to be.

The High Plains Traveler

Arizona still uses El Paso as the eastbound control city for I-10 at Tucson, not Las Cruces. As noted above, it seems to be Arizona's policy to use a large city even if a reasonably sized smaller one is closer.
"Tongue-tied and twisted; just an earth-bound misfit, I."

DJStephens

Note that in New Mexico, I do believe that Las Cruces (which now has a population over 100,000) is mentioned as a control city on I-10 eastbound (I know it is on I-25 heading south from Albuquerque).  Also, in California, I-40's westbound control city is Barstow (where I-40's actual terminus is located) rather than Los Angeles.
[/quote]

las Cruces is probably actually nearing 110,000, if you counted everyone - the students, the farm workers, the transients, etc.  El Paso, TX also is significantly undercounted.   The tidal wave of demographics is most likely going to overwhelm the poorly planned infrastructure in the so called "borderland" area.   

roadfro

Quote from: corco on August 24, 2014, 10:27:16 PM
My theory is that there's no interstate junction there and it's a smaller city.

Small cities without other Interstate junctions can certainly be control cities, though.

I-80 EB in Reno and much of northwest Nevada uses Elko for the eastbound control city. This is despite a population of only about 50,000 (although it's the largest city in at least 100 miles in any direction) and the only major junctions located in the vicinity are a couple state highways. [However, I-80 WB in Utah does not reciprocate, using Reno for the westbound control city despite the AASHTO book suggesting the use of Elko.]
Roadfro - AARoads Pacific Southwest moderator since 2010, Nevada roadgeek since 1983.

corco

Quote from: roadfro on August 25, 2014, 10:11:46 PM
Quote from: corco on August 24, 2014, 10:27:16 PM
My theory is that there's no interstate junction there and it's a smaller city.

Small cities without other Interstate junctions can certainly be control cities, though.

I-80 EB in Reno and much of northwest Nevada uses Elko for the eastbound control city. This is despite a population of only about 50,000 (although it's the largest city in at least 100 miles in any direction) and the only major junctions located in the vicinity are a couple state highways. [However, I-80 WB in Utah does not reciprocate, using Reno for the westbound control city despite the AASHTO book suggesting the use of Elko.]

Well right, some states use small cities and some states use big cities unless they can't. Arizona is a "big city" state. Utah is a "big city" state. Nevada and Idaho and Wyoming aren't. 

hm insulators

Quote from: The High Plains Traveler on August 25, 2014, 11:54:40 AM
Arizona still uses El Paso as the eastbound control city for I-10 at Tucson, not Las Cruces. As noted above, it seems to be Arizona's policy to use a large city even if a reasonably sized smaller one is closer.

Actually, there's not a hell of a lot between Tucson and El Paso, except for some small towns. El Paso is probably a lot more familiar name than Las Cruces.

As for Yuma, it's possible that some day, Arizona will place control signs along westbound I-8 that read, "Yuma--San Diego."

Something that's puzzled me for years--why are there no control signs for Phoenix on I-10 heading east from Los Angeles. Such a sign could read "San Bernardino--Phoenix." East of San Bernardino, the signs could read "Palm Springs--Phoenix." Once east of the California 111 exit, the signs could read "Phoenix" instead of "Other Desert Cities."
Remember: If the women don't find you handsome, they should at least find you handy.

I'd rather be a child of the road than a son of a ditch.


At what age do you tell a highway that it's been adopted?

mrsman

As said earlier, Arizona is a "big city" state.  IMO, that's the way to go.  If a state insists on a small city, then two control cities should be listed on BGSs: the small city and the next upcoming large city.

California's style is very much to prioritize small cities in California over large cities in another state.  You have to go pretty close to the border before you see an Arizona or Oregon control city. CA is happy to use Blythe and Needles.  CA is better about NV control cities, as there are signs for Las Vegas and Reno at least 100 miles away from the Nevada border.

I've always wondered why the eastbound control for I-8 is both Phoenix and Tucson.  It would seem to me that since I-8 travels so much farther south of Phoenix, it would require significant backtracking to get to Phoenix from I-8.  I would leave the control as Tucson only.

TheStranger

Quote from: hm insulators on August 26, 2014, 04:37:45 PM
Something that's puzzled me for years--why are there no control signs for Phoenix on I-10 heading east from Los Angeles. Such a sign could read "San Bernardino--Phoenix." East of San Bernardino, the signs could read "Palm Springs--Phoenix." Once east of the California 111 exit, the signs could read "Phoenix" instead of "Other Desert Cities."

To follow up on mrsman's post in response to this...

CalTrans very much emphasizes large local destinations first over everything - which might be a vestige of the fact much of the urban freeway systems began as local/regional-only connectors, THEN got extended further and further out to borders decades later.

For instance, here are the control cities at the East Los Angeles Interchange:
Sacramento (formerly Bakersfield) for I-5 north
San Bernardino for I-10 east
Santa Monica for I-10 west
Los Angeles Civic Center for US 101 north
Pomona for Route 60 east

Despite being the most important interchange in the metro area, three of the five destinations are within Los Angeles County AND one is less than 4 miles from that junction!

At the US 101/I-80 split, the listed destinations are:
Bay Bridge/Oakland for I-80 east
Golden Gate Bridge for US 101 north
San Jose for US 101 south

Two of the destinations on there (the bridges) are practically in city limits, and the third is approximately 45 minutes away.

In every single one of those cases though, the "obvious" long-distance destinations were not connected by an all-freeway (or in 101's case, an all-freeway-or-expressway route without stoplights) routing until at least the late 1960s.  And once that occurred, CalTrans chose to continue to use the existing short/medium-distance controls.  (Reno and Vegas, the obvious exceptions, are used because in the latter case, there are few major destinations other than Barstow along 15 north, and in the former case, post-1964 CalTrans chose to deprecate Roseville as a control city except along 160 north.)

Even thinking about newer routes...where 80 DID get signed for Reno from the 1950s onward in Sacramento...why wouldn't, say, 210 be signed for Phoenix or Indio?  210's situation is a lot like the other examples: the complete San Fernando-Redlands route didn't exist until very recently, and the original 210 routing that ended near San Dimas served as a simple bypass of downtown LA that led you to the Pomona area.

Quote from: mrsmanI've always wondered why the eastbound control for I-8 is both Phoenix and Tucson.

I think that's a vestige of when I-8 between San Diego and AZ 85 was US 80 (which then used today's AZ 85 plus a former east-west segment of 85 to reach Phoenix).

Chris Sampang

Interstate Trav

Quote from: mrsman on August 29, 2014, 09:18:45 AM
As said earlier, Arizona is a "big city" state.  IMO, that's the way to go.  If a state insists on a small city, then two control cities should be listed on BGSs: the small city and the next upcoming large city.

California's style is very much to prioritize small cities in California over large cities in another state.  You have to go pretty close to the border before you see an Arizona or Oregon control city. CA is happy to use Blythe and Needles.  CA is better about NV control cities, as there are signs for Las Vegas and Reno at least 100 miles away from the Nevada border.

I've always wondered why the eastbound control for I-8 is both Phoenix and Tucson.  It would seem to me that since I-8 travels so much farther south of Phoenix, it would require significant backtracking to get to Phoenix from I-8.  I would leave the control as Tucson only.

To be fair I-5 North Starts using Portland near Redding all the way up, and Portland is a long distance away.

In Sacramento I-80 East  uses Reno

I-15 has signs mentioning Las Vegas as far south at Temecula, at the 15-215 split.

Needles Makes Sense for I-40 east because what's next After Needles?  Flasgstaff?  Kingman, and are they that much bigger then Needles, not to mention Kingman is on ost mileage sings from Just east of Barstow.

I think the reason San Diego is Signed on all of I-8 Westbound is it makes sense as it is a very large city and most long term traffic is headed there.  I could see using Yuma as a secondary control city but not as primary for Westbound.
As far as Eastbound it does make a little sense, considering how far Tucson is past Yuma, and with Phoenix, that's an Indirect Control City.  Plus both are mentioned on Mileage signs on the 8 east bound from El Centro on.

As far as I-10, Blythe and Phoenix alternate for Control Cities on Mielage signs, but Phoenix is listed from Indio onward.  On the overhead signs on I-10.

I think part of the Reason Las Vegas is listed for I-15 is because of the LA-Las Vegas traffic.  But it makes sense to list Barstow as well considering that's there I-40 east splits off and a lot of truck traffic on I-15 switches to I-40.

I've noticed in Los Angeles and San Francisco they do sign close cities as control points, and probably dating back to the original freeway construction.  But I think the reason the 101 is signed for San Jose and for Ventura in there respective cities is to not encourage through traffic to use 101, but instead 580 -5.  I always figured that.

TheStranger

Quote from: Interstate Trav on August 29, 2014, 12:25:42 PM
But I think the reason the 101 is signed for San Jose and for Ventura in there respective cities is to not encourage through traffic to use 101, but instead 580 -5.  I always figured that.

Except that San Jose-only signage along US 101 in San Francisco dates back to the mid-1950s at the very least (I don't think I've seen it posted on this forum, but I have seen a photo of the Central Freeway north terminus with 101 South/San Jose signage from around 1958)  - when the final alignment of Interstate 5 in the Central Valley had yet to be decided, and 5W (today's 580) in Oakland hadn't been built yet.

In any case, 35 miles south of SF is the first Los Angeles sign on 101 south (at 85/101 in Mountain View) and approximately 55 miles northwest of LA is the first San Francisco sign on 101 north (at Route 33).  This still differs significantly from no Phoenix signage on 210 whatsoever and none on 10 east until at least Indio.
Chris Sampang

Interstate Trav

Quote from: TheStranger on August 29, 2014, 12:36:07 PM
Quote from: Interstate Trav on August 29, 2014, 12:25:42 PM
But I think the reason the 101 is signed for San Jose and for Ventura in there respective cities is to not encourage through traffic to use 101, but instead 580 -5.  I always figured that.

Except that San Jose-only signage along US 101 in San Francisco dates back to the mid-1950s at the very least (I don't think I've seen it posted on this forum, but I have seen a photo of the Central Freeway north terminus with 101 South/San Jose signage from around 1958)  - when the final alignment of Interstate 5 in the Central Valley had yet to be decided, and 5W (today's 580) in Oakland hadn't been built yet.

In any case, 35 miles south of SF is the first Los Angeles sign on 101 south (at 85/101 in Mountain View) and approximately 55 miles northwest of LA is the first San Francisco sign on 101 north (at Route 33).  This still differs significantly from no Phoenix signage on 210 whatsoever and none on 10 east until at least Indio.

Back then was US 50 to US 99 the San Francisco Los Angeles Route, or was 101 considered the route to take?  I'm really actually curiuos about that.
I just figure the reason they keep San Jose signed in SF and Ventura Signed in LA is because the 101 is the Ventura Fwy in parts of LA and to not have that as the through way for LA SF traffic.  I didn't know though that those cities date back to before the Interstates.

210 doesn't sign anything east of Redlans actually.  I think Indio should join 210 East atleast at the 215 jct, and maybe on a mileage sign too, but this might be because of when the freeway was built and it terminates in Redlands.

Personally given how many populated Cities are along 10 East from Los Angeles to Indio it doesn't bother me that Phoenix doesn't show up until Indio.

Plus when I-10 was being built I'm sure Phoenix was sigificantly smaller and not worth mentioning all the way in Los Angeles.


kkt

Quote from: Interstate Trav on August 29, 2014, 05:23:48 PM
Back then was US 50 to US 99 the San Francisco Los Angeles Route, or was 101 considered the route to take?  I'm really actually curiuos about that.

I think US 50 to 99 would have been faster.  A fair amount of 99 was already expressway with limited intersections, while 101 was almost all 2 lane country road outside the towns and ordinary streets in the towns.

TheStranger

Quote from: kkt on August 29, 2014, 05:37:19 PM
Quote from: Interstate Trav on August 29, 2014, 05:23:48 PM
Back then was US 50 to US 99 the San Francisco Los Angeles Route, or was 101 considered the route to take?  I'm really actually curiuos about that.

I think US 50 to 99 would have been faster.  A fair amount of 99 was already expressway with limited intersections, while 101 was almost all 2 lane country road outside the towns and ordinary streets in the towns.


99's last stoplight between northern Sacramento and Wheeler Ridge (in Livingston) lasted until 1997, while 101's last stoplight from SF-LA (Santa Barbara) remained until 1992.

There were plenty of non-expressway alignments of 99 that had to be completely bypassed in the 1960s.  I'd need to do a Historic Aerials map query to figure out where those were.
Chris Sampang

mwb1848

New Mexico's use of control cities on I-10 is laughable Deming, I'm looking at you.

I was thrilled when NMDOT began using Tuscon on signage at the I-10WB/I-25NB split. However, excitement was short-lived; Tucson only appears on one sign and then they're back to directing WB drivers to Deming.

No worse or less useful, I suppose, than Gallup, Santa Rosa, or Raton.


mrsman

Quote from: Interstate Trav on August 29, 2014, 05:23:48 PM
Quote from: TheStranger on August 29, 2014, 12:36:07 PM
Quote from: Interstate Trav on August 29, 2014, 12:25:42 PM
But I think the reason the 101 is signed for San Jose and for Ventura in there respective cities is to not encourage through traffic to use 101, but instead 580 -5.  I always figured that.

Except that San Jose-only signage along US 101 in San Francisco dates back to the mid-1950s at the very least (I don't think I've seen it posted on this forum, but I have seen a photo of the Central Freeway north terminus with 101 South/San Jose signage from around 1958)  - when the final alignment of Interstate 5 in the Central Valley had yet to be decided, and 5W (today's 580) in Oakland hadn't been built yet.

In any case, 35 miles south of SF is the first Los Angeles sign on 101 south (at 85/101 in Mountain View) and approximately 55 miles northwest of LA is the first San Francisco sign on 101 north (at Route 33).  This still differs significantly from no Phoenix signage on 210 whatsoever and none on 10 east until at least Indio.

Back then was US 50 to US 99 the San Francisco Los Angeles Route, or was 101 considered the route to take?  I'm really actually curiuos about that.
I just figure the reason they keep San Jose signed in SF and Ventura Signed in LA is because the 101 is the Ventura Fwy in parts of LA and to not have that as the through way for LA SF traffic.  I didn't know though that those cities date back to before the Interstates.

210 doesn't sign anything east of Redlans actually.  I think Indio should join 210 East atleast at the 215 jct, and maybe on a mileage sign too, but this might be because of when the freeway was built and it terminates in Redlands.

Personally given how many populated Cities are along 10 East from Los Angeles to Indio it doesn't bother me that Phoenix doesn't show up until Indio.

Plus when I-10 was being built I'm sure Phoenix was sigificantly smaller and not worth mentioning all the way in Los Angeles.

That's right.  With 101 you basically have control cities of LA/Ventura, then LA/SF, then San Jose/SF.  Essentially from both cities signed to get you to the major suburb not to the other end of the state.  But Santa Barbara, SLO, Monterey do not get similar treatment and are only mentioned in tandem with LA or SF.

In the LA area, the local destinations (Ventura, San Bernardino, Pomona) are emphasized since those are also the names of the freeways.  The Ventura Freeway will take you to Ventura.  Yes, it also goes to SF, but the emphasis in the LA area is that it's the Ventura Freeway that bypasses Ventura Blvd and leads to Ventura in Ventura County.  Once you pass Ventura, you've now left the LA sphere of influence and it's basically open road (except for a few minor stops like Santa Barbara and SLO) all the way to SF.  Along the Central Coast you only see LA/SF, Ventura and San Jose are largely forgotten.

The really interesting thing about the 10 corridor isn't that they don't mention Phoenix from Downtown LA, it's that they barely mention Phoenix as a pull-through city at all until you are almost at the state line.  If they followed the US 101 system then you should see LA/San Bernardino, LA/Phoenix, Goodyear/Phoenix, but instead AZ signs its control cities for large cities only and CA utilizes "Other Desert CIties". 

DJStephens

Quote from: mwb1848 on August 30, 2014, 06:07:57 PM
New Mexico's use of control cities on I-10 is laughable Deming, I'm looking at you.

I was thrilled when NMDOT began using Tuscon on signage at the I-10WB/I-25NB split. However, excitement was short-lived; Tucson only appears on one sign and then they're back to directing WB drivers to Deming.

No worse or less useful, I suppose, than Gallup, Santa Rosa, or Raton.

That is correct, Tucson should appear on BOTH over heads as a driver nears the I-10 / I-25 split NB. 

adventurernumber1

I have never seen the signage in Arizona but I'm surprised Yuma isn't a control city. It's a fairly sized city alright, and the only big stop right between the Phoenix/Tucson area and the San Diego area. In Atlanta, going northbound on I-75, Marietta appears as a control city, and it's a suburb of Atlanta, having between 50k-100k people.
Now alternating between different highway shields for my avatar - my previous highway shield avatar for the last few years was US 76.

Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/127322363@N08/

YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC-vJ3qa8R-cc44Cv6ohio1g

JustDrive

I was under the impression that it's a relic of when old US 80 was signed in Arizona.  I-10 WB at AZ 85 is signed for both Yuma and San Diego, and that was the route of old US 80.

Also, Yuma isn't signed on EB I-8 in California (aside from mileage signs) until El Centro, some 60 miles from the CA/AZ border.

sdmichael

Yuma is the control city on the mileage sign on I-8 at State 67... so it does get something closer to San Diego.

JustDrive

El Centro is the control city in San Diego County.  Yuma is first mentioned on a mileage sign between El Cajon Boulevard and Main Street and again at the 2nd Street interchange.  But Yuma itself isn't a control city until the Imperial Valley.

sdmichael

Quote from: JustDrive on September 16, 2014, 12:48:02 PM
El Centro is the control city in San Diego County.  Yuma is first mentioned on a mileage sign between El Cajon Boulevard and Main Street and again at the 2nd Street interchange.  But Yuma itself isn't a control city until the Imperial Valley.

I am quite aware. However, the point is that Yuma is on the bottom of the sign and therefore IS a control city at that point, not El Centro. That is why I was specific to the sign and location.

Henry

FWIW, San Diego makes the most sense, as most thru traffic will take I-8 there anyway. Pretty much like Los Angeles does for I-10 and I-40, even though the latter route does not go there at all (but you can still access it via I-15 and I-10!).
Go Cubs Go! Go Cubs Go! Hey Chicago, what do you say? The Cubs are gonna win today!



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.