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

[kphoger]

I would just use Mexico but that's up to Caltrans. I don't mind how MDOT uses Canada in Detroit.

I just don't get that. After all, I-8 would also get you to places in Mexico

Then only use it south of I-8, so there's no confusion.  Oh, wait...

If two highways can have the same control city (but not at the same decision point), then why can't two highways likewise have the same control nation?

[Flint1979]

I would just use Mexico but that's up to Caltrans. I don't mind how MDOT uses Canada in Detroit.

I just don't get that. After all, I-8 would also get you to places in Mexico (as will I-94 in Detroit get you to Canada) - why not be more specific? It's not like Tijuana or Windsor are obscure.

If you are on I-5 south and you see Mexico you wouldn't assume that you would be heading toward where I-5 enters Mexico? You can get to the bridge and tunnel via exits from I-94 but I-94 itself isn't going to get you to the border until you get to Port Huron.

[Sub-Urbanite]

I would just use Mexico but that's up to Caltrans. I don't mind how MDOT uses Canada in Detroit.

I just don't get that. After all, I-8 would also get you to places in Mexico (as will I-94 in Detroit get you to Canada) - why not be more specific? It's not like Tijuana or Windsor are obscure.

If you are on I-5 south and you see Mexico you wouldn't assume that you would be heading toward where I-5 enters Mexico? You can get to the bridge and tunnel via exits from I-94 but I-94 itself isn't going to get you to the border until you get to Port Huron.

But then I guess this gets into the broader "What's the point of control cities" discussion. If you're going to Tijuana, you should be on I-5 south. And for just about the rest of Mexico, 905 is probably a better route.