Freeway name signage/usage practices in California

[TheStranger]

A branch off of several discussions on the forums (and of this older thread - https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3296.msg73839#msg73839 - from 2010), I was thinking about this after my most recent trip to Southern California.

Pullthrough signage

The classic "SoCal" approach dating to the 1950s - very similar to what Chicagoland expressways use today - freeway name is given importance for through travelers on the route itself.  Was actively deprecated from the late 1970s to early 2000s, but newer resigning projects have retained the format on gantries that were already utilizing it (instead of supplanting it, as many 1990s sign replacements did).

Two newer name designations - the Capital City Freeway in Sacramento (Business 80) and Martin Luther King Jr. Freeway in San Diego (Route 94) - received this style at times as well, in order to strongly encourage local usage of the route names.

EXAMPLES:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/10399829413/in/set-72157636676683316 I-5/Golden State Freeway north at I-10 (East Los Angeles Interchange)

http://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/10794976934/in/set-72157637545399534 110/Harbor Freeway south through downtown Los Angeles (NOTE: signed as Interstate 110 on the main pullthroughs from the Four-Level Interchange south, but signed on the local lanes as state Route 110)

http://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/10794979264/in/set-72157637545399534 US 101 north transitioning from the Hollywood Freeway to the westbound Ventura Freeway

http://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/6829356068/in/set-72157629567436591 I-405/San Diego Freeway at Route 22 near Long Beach

http://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/10794979564/in/set-72157637545399534 US 101/Ventura Freeway just west of the Hollywood Split

http://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/4770171357/in/set-72157624279252253 Business 80/Capital City Freeway westbound at Route 160

http://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/10340307064/in/set-72157636676683316 Route 204/Golden State Avenue south at Buck Owens Boulevard

http://www.flickr.com/photos/southerncalifornian/17419135/ Route 94/Martin Luther King Jr. Freeway west at I-5/Montgomery Freeway

Advanced Exit Signage

A little more common than pullthroughs these days, most of the examples listed are in Southern California, though the two modern named freeways listed above (MLK and Capital City) have similar treatment.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/10794981784/in/set-72157637545399534 US 101/Ventura Freeway eastbound at I-405/San Diego Freeway

http://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/10794891316/in/set-72157637545399534 Route 55/Costa Mesa Freeway northbound at I-5/Santa Ana Freeway

http://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/10794861445/in/set-72157637545399534 I-605 southbound at Route 91/Artesia Freeway

http://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/10794864215/in/set-72157637545399534 I-605 northbound at I-5/Santa Ana Freeway

http://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/10795005814/in/set-72157637545399534 I-110/Harbor Freeway northbound at I-10/Santa Monica Freeway

http://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/6975480553/in/set-72157629567436591 I-405/San Diego Freeway northbound towards Route 55/Costa Mesa Freeway

http://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/10795093023/in/set-72157637545399534 US 101/Santa Ana Freeway northbound approaching transition to Hollywood Freeway at the Four-Level

http://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/10399654355/in/set-72157636676683316 I-5/Santa Ana Freeway northbound approaching I-710/Long Beach Freeway

http://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/10399640044/in/set-72157636676683316 Santa Ana Freeway northbound approaching transition to US 101, and I-5/Golden State Freeway

http://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/10399811023/in/set-72157636676683316 I-710/Long Beach Freeway southbound at I-405/San Diego Freeway

http://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/10399629155/in/set-72157636676683316 US 101/Santa Ana Freeway southbound approaching transition to I-5 and Route 60/Pomona Freeway

http://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/10399596035/in/set-72157636676683316 Route 170/Hollywood Freeway southbound approaching Route 134/Ventura Freeway

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=2295.msg56924#msg56924 I-280/Junipero Serra Freeway approaching Route 87/Guadalupe Parkway

http://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/4770809760/in/set-72157624279252253 - I-80 west approaching Business 80/Capital City Freeway

http://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/4780972493/in/set-72157624279252253 - I-5/West Side Freeway northbound approaching Business 80/US 50/Capital City Freeway
http://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/4780972999/in/set-72157624279252253

http://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/4792532592/in/set-72157624279252253 - I-80 east approaching Business 80/US 50/Capital City Freeway


Roadside signage, common-use name

The one way that one will generally encounter freeway names in the Bay Area, though it does see some usage in Southern California as well.  This might be how the Foothill Freeway is signed in this day and age.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/4839636615/in/set-72157624519667042 - I-80 & I-580/Eastshore Freeway approaching I-580/MacArthur Freeway

http://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/5024356568/in/set-72157624531453370 - I-280 northbound approaching US 101/Bayshore Freeway (might be the only Bayshore Freeway sign in current use)

https://www.aaroads.com/california/images580/i-580_wb_exit_034_01.jpg - I-580 westbound approaching I-238 connector to I-880/Nimitz Freeway (only Nimitz sign?)

http://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/5437657063/in/set-72157625897610841 - I-5/Montgomery Freeway northbound (one of a few left of a name that dates to the US 101 days)

http://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/10842860683/ - Aliso Street at US 101/Santa Ana Freeway (one of two signs I've encountered that acknowledge 101's southernmost three miles as the northern extent of the Santa Ana; from what I've seen on Google Street View, CalTrans actually got it wrong on Route 60 weestbound)

https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Aliso+Street,+Los+Angeles&hl=en&ll=34.058364,-118.248001&spn=0.002659,0.002387&sll=37.269174,-119.306607&sspn=14.706592,19.555664&hq=Aliso+Street,&hnear=Los+Angeles,+Los+Angeles+County,+California&t=h&z=19&layer=c&cbll=34.058519,-118.247853&panoid=HAaNduU1FwgV5zPPfg_2RQ&cbp=12,47.3,,3,-0.81 - another example of US 101/Santa Ana Freeway signage, this time at the southeast corner of the Four Level Interchange, at Temple and Hope

https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Aliso+Street,+Los+Angeles&hl=en&ll=34.056427,-118.241217&spn=0.001329,0.001194&sll=37.269174,-119.306607&sspn=14.706592,19.555664&hq=Aliso+Street,&hnear=Los+Angeles,+Los+Angeles+County,+California&t=h&z=20&layer=c&cbll=34.056427,-118.241217&panoid=qEVXVLYcmm8HT_jD1Xdb7Q&cbp=12,240.8,,3,-3.59 - US 101/Santa Ana Freeway signage on southbound Spring Street at Aliso

In that vein, downtown LA has plenty of signs for the Harbor Freeway as well.


Roadside signage, commemorative name

Names that never catch on with the public and usually have one or two signs total on the entire route, often named after a person and signed after 1960 (as the well-known Nimitz moniker for I-880 dates to 1958).

I usually think of this whenever I see those "John F. Foran" signs on 280 in SF, or "James Lick" on the Bayshore Freeway segment of 101 in the city.  Probably would add "Sinclair Freeway" and "Rumford Freeway" to this category too, or this example from metro Los Angeles:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/csampang/10794860035/in/set-72157637545399534 I-105/Glenn Anderson Freeway

Common use names, unsigned

Several routes seem to fall into this category, particularly in Northern California (Central Freeway, Eastshore Freeway, the WX segment of US 50, El Dorado Freeway). The Cabrillo Freeway in San Diego might be in this category too. Would the Golden State Freeway north of I-5, along Route 99 in Bakersfield, count as well?

The Embarcadero Freeway absolutely is in this category, at least when it did exist.   The Cypress Freeway name for 880 between 80 and 980 did for years, but fell out of use once its replacement was constructed several miles away from what had been Cypress Street (now Mandela Parkway).

[SignBridge]

Looking at some, but not all of your photos, it appears that most of the signs with freeway names on them are older signs. I believe (someone correct me if I'm wrong) that the current Caltrans practice is to not show freeway names, but just the route number, direction and destination as specified in the MUTCD.

[SSOWorld]

from a visual perspective I would agree with SignBridge.  they have, though, still put new cover on some signs saying 'freeway' - such as on the 210 exit of the 5 truck lane SB.  Most of the 'FWY' mentioning is in LA.  Not so much in any other area.

[andy3175]

It seems to me that the three most well-used names (at least in terms of newer signage placed by Caltrans) are the Capital City Freeway (Business Loop 80), MLK Freeway (SR 94 in San Diego and Lemon Grove), and Arroyo Seco Parkway (SR 110 northeast of downtown LA). I haven't seen many new signs that contain other, long-standing names.

Regards,
Andy

[J N Winkler]

A related practice, which is much more prevalent in the new contractor-furnished signing Caltrans erects, is to use legend of the form "[Route shield] Freeway" or "[Route shield] Fwy" on advance guide, exit direction, and interchange sequence signs.  This is used even when the freeway has a widely understood common name--a quick look through my collection of Caltrans signing sheets turns up multiple examples for I-605, SR 22, I-405, SR 91, etc., as well as more marginal examples like SR 118 (does anyone actually call that the "Simi Valley Freeway" or even the "Ronald Reagan Freeway"?).  In the signing plans I collect, I see perhaps ten instances of this usage for every one I see of the full freeway name.

I also see this particular usage only in southern California.  Expressions of the form "[Route shield] Freeway" do exist on guide signs in northern California, but the only ones I see in signing plans as new or replacement installs in that part of the state are all part of G21 signs, which Caltrans uses as crossroads signs.

[TheStranger]

A related practice, which is much more prevalent in the new contractor-furnished signing Caltrans erects, is to use legend of the form "[Route shield] Freeway" or "[Route shield] Fwy" on advance guide, exit direction, and interchange sequence signs.  This is used even when the freeway has a widely understood common name--a quick look through my collection of Caltrans signing sheets turns up multiple examples for I-605, SR 22, I-405, SR 91, etc., as well as more marginal examples like SR 118 (does anyone actually call that the "Simi Valley Freeway" or even the "Ronald Reagan Freeway"?).  In the signing plans I collect, I see perhaps ten instances of this usage for every one I see of the full freeway name.

This makes it notable that replacement-in-place (i.e. San Diego Freeway notation from 710) does occur with the retroreflective signs, rather than wholesale switching out to "[shield] FWY".  I would say this is even more so the case now than in the 80s-90s when freeway names were completely eschewed.

I also see this particular usage only in southern California.  Expressions of the form "[Route shield] Freeway" do exist on guide signs in northern California, but the only ones I see in signing plans as new or replacement installs in that part of the state are all part of G21 signs, which Caltrans uses as crossroads signs.

I've seen way more examples of "JCT (shield)" or "Junction (shield)" in Northern California (i.e. 92/101, 80/101) on newer sign installations.

[J N Winkler]

This makes it notable that replacement-in-place (i.e. San Diego Freeway notation from 710) does occur with the retroreflective signs, rather than wholesale switching out to "[shield] FWY".  I would say this is even more so the case now than in the 80s-90s when freeway names were completely eschewed.

I wonder how much of that signing consists of in-house work.  I had to hedge my last post a bit since I don't really have access to documentation on in-house work.  The common denominator in Caltrans signing is the sign installation order--in theory, every single sign that is installed by Caltrans maintenance forces or a contractor working on behalf of Caltrans has a SIO.  I have heard that District 7 has built a SIO database that is accessible through a Web application, but it seems to be internal only (intranet?), with no general public access.  I have long suspected that a lot of the "carbon copy" installs, including many which have received heavy criticism on this board, are in fact in-house jobs installed by Caltrans maintenance personnel.

I've seen way more examples of "JCT (shield)" or "Junction (shield)" in Northern California (i.e. 92/101, 80/101) on newer sign installations.

Same here--differentiating the route so signed as a freeway seems to be more important in southern than in northern California.

[TheStranger]

This makes it notable that replacement-in-place (i.e. San Diego Freeway notation from 710) does occur with the retroreflective signs, rather than wholesale switching out to "[shield] FWY".  I would say this is even more so the case now than in the 80s-90s when freeway names were completely eschewed.

I wonder how much of that signing consists of in-house work.  I had to hedge my last post a bit since I don't really have access to documentation on in-house work.  The common denominator in Caltrans signing is the sign installation order--in theory, every single sign that is installed by Caltrans maintenance forces or a contractor working on behalf of Caltrans has a SIO.  I have heard that District 7 has built a SIO database that is accessible through a Web application, but it seems to be internal only (intranet?), with no general public access.  I have long suspected that a lot of the "carbon copy" installs, including many which have received heavy criticism on this board, are in fact in-house jobs installed by Caltrans maintenance personnel.

This makes me curious what spurs that on, i.e. what situations would lead to a legend change for a replacement sign, as opposed to those that retain previous legend.  In the case of the latter, after having traversed it for the first time last week, I now see to some extent why the 91 signage off of 405 for Artesia Boulevard was retained in newer installations: enough 91 shields west of there to navigate out to Redondo Beach!

I've seen way more examples of "JCT (shield)" or "Junction (shield)" in Northern California (i.e. 92/101, 80/101) on newer sign installations.

Same here--differentiating the route so signed as a freeway seems to be more important in southern than in northern California.

I THINK with Northern California, "jct" is almost a direct analogue for the "Fwy" usage in Southern California, as for surface-street state routes, they receive an appellation of a street name.

At the Four-Level and at I-5, there is also a recent emphasis to note state Route 110 as "Pkwy", in contrast to I-110's "Fwy".  Though the truck restriction is the obvious rationale, that alone doesn't highlight that difference (as Guadalupe Parkway in San Jose is a full freeway) and the NO TRUCKS banners still are used too.

[myosh_tino]

At the Four-Level and at I-5, there is also a recent emphasis to note state Route 110 as "Pkwy", in contrast to I-110's "Fwy".  Though the truck restriction is the obvious rationale, that alone doesn't highlight that difference (as Guadalupe Parkway in San Jose is a full freeway) and the NO TRUCKS banners still are used too.

Building off TheStranger's quote, I find it interesting that the Guadalupe Parkway (Route 87) allows truck traffic while the West Valley Freeway (Route 85) does NOT allow truck traffic. 

[TheStranger]

At the Four-Level and at I-5, there is also a recent emphasis to note state Route 110 as "Pkwy", in contrast to I-110's "Fwy".  Though the truck restriction is the obvious rationale, that alone doesn't highlight that difference (as Guadalupe Parkway in San Jose is a full freeway) and the NO TRUCKS banners still are used too.

Building off TheStranger's quote, I find it interesting that the Guadalupe Parkway (Route 87) allows truck traffic while the West Valley Freeway (Route 85) does NOT allow truck traffic. 

AND the MacArthur Freeway (I-580) in Oakland...only allows truck traffic at certain times, due to a ban that was grandfathered from when the route was US 50!

[myosh_tino]

AND the MacArthur Freeway (I-580) in Oakland...only allows truck traffic at certain times, due to a ban that was grandfathered from when the route was US 50!

Actually, the truck ban on I-580 is in place 24/7.  The only time the ban is temporarily lifted is when there are issues on I-880 like a major accident or unplanned construction/maintenance.

The Route 85 truck ban was the result of a concession made to the residents of Cupertino, Saratoga and San Jose to reduce road noise from the new freeway.

[mrsman]

I clearly believe that the old style was clearly the best: Route number, direction, name, control city.  All the information that one needed to know, in a concise enough way that one could understand it at 65 MPH.  I'm not a believer in the new FHWA standards that so severely limits some of this information in the name of readability

In some cases, I would even add a second control city.  But it's nice that California limits the number of multiplexes.

Every freeway should be named, ideally by the name of the city to where it leads.

[SignBridge]

Mrsman, the MUTCD standard specifying route shield, direction, and destination, without road names is definitely not new. It has been in the Manual since at least the 1971 edition.

There are several reasons for that specification, but the major ones are I believe, keeping the sign legend as brief and concise as possible, and orienting sign messages to drivers unfamiliar with local areas.

Some other reasons might be because road and freeway names often change from one county or municipality to another whereas the route number more often remains constant. Another non-published reason is that it makes for smaller signs, which reduces overall costs of signing. But yes, reducing costs might defeat the purpose of signing if the message conveyed is not useful to the average driver.

One point where I have lately come to agree with you is that in some cases it might be useful to show 2 destinations where space permits, such as one near destination and one far destination for added orientation.

BTW Mrsman, I note that you are from Silver Spring, Md. I have driven the Beltway in your area, and I have seen the exit signs there that have both the route shield, and the road name printed in smaller size lettering than the destinations, so I guess you're used to that practice.   

[TheStranger]

Some other reasons might be because road and freeway names often change from one county or municipality to another whereas the route number more often remains constant. Another non-published reason is that it makes for smaller signs, which reduces overall costs of signing. But yes, reducing costs might defeat the purpose of signing if the message conveyed is not useful to the average driver.

In California, I can think of two ways where local practice offers a different approach to those two situations:

1. Constant sign height on all overhead assemblies (very much unlike other states) makes sizing somewhat moot; whether a freeway name is or isn't mentioned on the legend has little bearing on vertical dimensions

2. By 1971, most of the signed/popularly used freeway names in use today throughout California had been established firmly; of what was already built then, there haven't been many changes:

- Costa Mesa Freeway (which is signed) replacing "Newport Freeway" on Route 55
- Gardena Freeway (not signed much) supplanting "Redondo Beach Freeway" (also not signed much) over Route 91 west of I-5, which when signed for name, has more mentions of the longstanding Artesia Freeway moniker
- the 1990s changes (Route 94 becoming Martin Luther King Jr. Freeway, Business 80 in Sacramento becoming Capital City Freeway on its entire length - supplanting several unsigned route names)
- the restoration of the Arroyo Seco Parkway name to state route 110/former US 66

[SignBridge]

Stranger, isn't this a great discussion topic? So many valid viewpoints both for and against displaying of road names! Re: the sign size issue, I was referring to width of the sign only. Showing only route shield and city names, makes for narrow signs which is useful when an overhead sign width has to be limited to one lane, which I agree is less of an issue in Calif. than say New York as Calif. has wider freeways and more multi-lane exits.

Re: well established names, isn't it a common practice in Calif. to refer to freeways as "the 405" or "the 101", more than the "San Diego Fwy" or the "Hollywood Fwy"? That's what I used to hear when I travelled out west.

Also, this "Arroyo Seco Pkwy" I keep hearing about. Was that originally the "Pasadena Fwy" or am I mistaken about that?

[andy3175]

Stranger, isn't this a great discussion topic? So many valid viewpoints both for and against displaying of road names!

I believe that the decision on which routes get freeway names clearly signed routinely is based on the political will to spend tax funds for that purpose. When honoring a specific individual, if there is political will, you will see more signage to that effect. When SR 94 became the MLK Freeway, not only was the freeway name added to nearly every overhead sign for SR 94 between SR 125 and I-5, but it was also added to nearly every route marker and freeway entrance shield assembly. I've not seen so many signs reminding people of the official name in California as I've seen for the MLK Freeway.

Other routes, like the Capital City Fwy and Arroyo Seco Pkwy, get their signs too, but not nearly to the level that SR 94 did. I've not seen other routes named after people get the same treatment, either. So it seems to me like the situation varies depending on who is honored and how much officials want to spend money to publicize the name choice.

Regards,
Andy

[TheStranger]

Stranger, isn't this a great discussion topic? So many valid viewpoints both for and against displaying of road names! Re: the sign size issue, I was referring to width of the sign only. Showing only route shield and city names, makes for narrow signs which is useful when an overhead sign width has to be limited to one lane, which I agree is less of an issue in Calif. than say New York as Calif. has wider freeways and more multi-lane exits.

Most pullthrough signs are at least three lanes wide out here - even when there is no control city (i.e. the infamous "THRU TRAFFIC" overheads on 605).

Re: well established names, isn't it a common practice in Calif. to refer to freeways as "the 405" or "the 101", more than the "San Diego Fwy" or the "Hollywood Fwy"? That's what I used to hear when I travelled out west.

I wonder when that shift to numbers in common usage occurred - early 1980s?  Traffic reporters both in NorCal and SoCal still refer to the established names (i.e. Eastshore Freeway, San Diego Freeway) regularly, as well as some of the newer ones (Capital City Freeway).

Also, this "Arroyo Seco Pkwy" I keep hearing about. Was that originally the "Pasadena Fwy" or am I mistaken about that?

The route was named Arroyo Seco Parkway from its construction as US 66 in 1943 until the mid-1950s, when it became "Pasadena Freeway."  Though it was historically acknowledged under its original moniker in the 1990s, the Pasadena Freeway name remained until a sign replacement project about 2 years ago.

Some threads on this:
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=4876.0
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=2835.0

[SignBridge]

Thanks Stranger for the CA-110 update.

Andy, I think we're talking about 2 different categories of freeway names. You're probably right about it being a political issue when a road is named after someone famous. We have the same issues in New York with the Queensboro Br. now being the Ed Koch Br. and the Triboro Br. is now the RFK Br. The signing has changed gradually over the past few years.

I was actually talking earlier about roads with place type names like the Ventura, San Diego and Hollywood Freeways and the pros and cons of displaying those kinds of names. And again we have the same issues in New York with the Long Island Expwy, NY Thruway, etc.

[andy3175]

I was actually talking earlier about roads with place type names like the Ventura, San Diego and Hollywood Freeways and the pros and cons of displaying those kinds of names. And again we have the same issues in New York with the Long Island Expwy, NY Thruway, etc.

If you're talking about those for California, they are generally not posted nearly as much as they were back at the inception of such freeways. Sometimes a "carbon copy" sign will retain the freeway name, but usually the newer sign omits the freeway name.

Regards,
Andy

[andy3175]

Traffic reporters both in NorCal and SoCal still refer to the established names (i.e. Eastshore Freeway, San Diego Freeway) regularly, as well as some of the newer ones (Capital City Freeway).

For Capital City Freeway, unequivocally yes, that is the name I've heard on the radio, on TV, in the newspaper, etc. It's hard to find anyone who calls the Cap City anything other than that. Business 80, US 50, WX, etc. have less frequent use. When the Sacramento Bee discussed the WX viaduct section of the Cap City, it called the road the "Camellia City Viaduct" section of the "Capital City Freeway." Neither BL 80 nor US 50 were listed.

For many of the Southern California freeways, there has been a change on radio reporting (1070 KNX, 640 KFI). Twenty years ago, when I first moved to Southern California, I recall the names being much more prevalent when mentioned on a traffic report back in the 1990s. Numbers were sometimes omitted. Nowadays, I routinely hear 405 or 210 rather than San Diego Fwy or Foothill Fwy (respectively). Sometimes they will say both the number and the name, but the number is almost always mentioned. Back in the 1990s, this was not the case and the names were more common.

Even the 94 King Fwy is listed in San Diego with both name and number by traffic reporters (600 KOGO, 760 KFMB, etc.).

Regards,
Andy

[J N Winkler]

Andy, I think we're talking about 2 different categories of freeway names. You're probably right about it being a political issue when a road is named after someone famous. We have the same issues in New York with the Queensboro Br. now being the Ed Koch Br. and the Triboro Br. is now the RFK Br. The signing has changed gradually over the past few years.

These are essentially memorial names and abound in California (e.g., the SR 24 freeway in Oakland is called the Rumford Freeway after the first African-American to be elected to any public office in northern California), but are rarely integrated into the core guide signing (pull-throughs, advance guide signs, and exit direction signs).

I was actually talking earlier about roads with place type names like the Ventura, San Diego and Hollywood Freeways and the pros and cons of displaying those kinds of names. And again we have the same issues in New York with the Long Island Expwy, NY Thruway, etc.

Not all of these names are based on cities the freeway goes to.  Some are based on features the freeway parallels:  e.g. San Gabriel River Freeway (I-605), Los Angeles River Freeway (I-710) (now the Long Beach Freeway), Ramona Freeway (parallel to Ramona Boulevard--now the I-10 San Bernardino Freeway).  There is also at least one example of a freeway taking its planning name after a person, but not really in a memorial signing context (e.g. unbuilt Allesandro Freeway).

These names tend to be more closely integrated into the core signing in southern California and have continued to be so to some degree despite being deprecated since the early to mid-1960's.  TheStranger quotes some reasons ridding signs of freeway names would not be considered a priority (and there is another:  the excess durability of porcelain-on-enamel signs), but in at least some cases I believe they persist because an unified route is often under multiple numbers (e.g. Hollywood Freeway is US 101 and SR 134, Santa Ana Freeway is I-5 and US 101) or under the same number but on different systems (e.g. Harbor Freeway is I-110 and SR 110).  Also, there is a logic to the freeway names (most radiate from features within or near important interchanges like the Four Level, the East Los Angeles Interchange, etc.) that has traditionally been used for navigation but would be obscured by route numbers that continue unchanged through the origin point.

The fact remains, though, that when Caltrans installs new signing in southern California as part of turnkey construction contracts (not stand-alone sign replacement jobs), it is pretty uncommon for freeway names to be included in the core signing.

[TheStranger]

Not all of these names are based on cities the freeway goes to.  Some are based on features the freeway parallels:  e.g. San Gabriel River Freeway (I-605), Los Angeles River Freeway (I-710) (now the Long Beach Freeway), Ramona Freeway (parallel to Ramona Boulevard--now the I-10 San Bernardino Freeway).  There is also at least one example of a freeway taking its planning name after a person, but not really in a memorial signing context (e.g. unbuilt Allesandro Freeway).

Is the Artesia Freeway named for the city along its route, or the fact it supplants old pre-1964 Route 14 (Artesia Boulevard)?

Also, there is a logic to the freeway names (most radiate from features within or near important interchanges like the Four Level, the East Los Angeles Interchange, etc.) that has traditionally been used for navigation but would be obscured by route numbers that continue unchanged through the origin point.

On a more general level, "downtown" seems to be the origin point for many of the named routes of today: the Santa Monica, Pomona, Santa Ana, Golden State, Harbor, Arroyo Seco, Long Beach (notwithstanding the future route to Pasadena) and Hollywood.

(e.g. Hollywood Freeway is US 101 and SR 134, Santa Ana Freeway is I-5 and US 101) or under the same number but on different systems (e.g. Harbor Freeway is I-110 and SR 110). 

The former is actually 101/170 (Ventura Freeway is 101/134).

The latter of course leads to that long thread on 110 that I've posted in on this forum!

Interestingly, these sort of name-and-number switch things date back to before the freeways were even built, particularly how Foothill Boulevard was 66 on one end and 118 on the other, or how Figueroa Street was 66 on the north end (parallel to today's Arroyo Seco Parkway) and 6 on the south end (parallel to today's Harbor Freeway) but was all Route 11.

[DTComposer]

Not all of these names are based on cities the freeway goes to.  Some are based on features the freeway parallels:  e.g. San Gabriel River Freeway (I-605), Los Angeles River Freeway (I-710) (now the Long Beach Freeway), Ramona Freeway (parallel to Ramona Boulevard--now the I-10 San Bernardino Freeway).  There is also at least one example of a freeway taking its planning name after a person, but not really in a memorial signing context (e.g. unbuilt Allesandro Freeway).

Is the Artesia Freeway named for the city along its route, or the fact it supplants old pre-1964 Route 14 (Artesia Boulevard)?

I would have to think it's named after the street, since the city itself is fairly small (15,000), and that it was named in the same manner that the Foothill Freeway, Sepulveda Freeway (the original stretch of I-405 in West Los Angeles), Newport Freeway (since renamed Costa Mesa Freeway) and the (never official as far as I know, but the common-usage name) Century Freeway were named, as well as the unconstructed Olympic Parkway and others I can't think of right now. You could even argue that the Ventura Freeway was named as much for the street that it superseded as its destination.

[TheStranger]

I would have to think it's named after the street, since the city itself is fairly small (15,000), and that it was named in the same manner that the Foothill Freeway, Sepulveda Freeway (the original stretch of I-405 in West Los Angeles), Newport Freeway (since renamed Costa Mesa Freeway) and the (never official as far as I know, but the common-usage name) Century Freeway were named, as well as the unconstructed Olympic Parkway and others I can't think of right now. You could even argue that the Ventura Freeway was named as much for the street that it superseded as its destination.

Here's a whole article from 1987 on how locals insisted on calling the project the "Century Freeway" even when it was originally to be officially named the "Norwalk Freeway" and "El Segundo Freeway" (before the Anderson name was bandied about)

http://articles.latimes.com/1987-08-02/news/hl-562_1_century-freeway

(Also, while the corridors are parallel, the distance between where 105 is - along 119th Street - and the Century Boulevard alignment (named for being the 100th street in the numbered grid) is not quite as close together as the Ventura Freeway/Boulevard and Artesia Freeway/Boulevard pairings are.)
---
For routes officially named for a nearby road...

Foothill Freeway seems to also be named after its parallel street, the former Route 118 and US 66.  The segment of former Route 134 that wasn't incorporated into the Ventura Freeway, that was part of a Colorado Freeway IIRC.

Similar thing happened in the Bay Area with Macarthur and Eastshore and Bayshore and Junipero Serra, all of which were surface streets prior to freeway construction in the 1940s and 1950s. 

"Golden State Freeway" also could be seen in this light, especially north of the Grapevine.

---

BTW, how different was the proposed Olympic Parkway to what ultimately became the Santa Monica Freeway?

[SignBridge]

I never knew there was such a long history of name changes re: Calif. freeways. I knew I-105 as the Century Fwy. from back when I saw it being built circa 1987. Well, the heck with all arguments about the name. I'll just call it "The 105"