Any ideas for control cities on california freeways?
The 91 Westbound has Beach Cities, Los Angeles, Artesia and Thru Traffic control city. While 91 Eastbound has Thru Traffic, and Riverside.
A portion of 91 was deleted between SR-1 and Vermont Avenue in 2003.
The 605 put up Thru Traffic and no control cities since its opening.
The 710 Northbound has Pasadena control city South of SR-60 and Valley Boulevard control city North of SR-60.
The 710 is incomplete between I-10 and I-210. The project was scrapped last year.
Source for the 710 gap scrapped: https://www.pasadenastarnews.com/2018/11/14/la-metro-committee-approves-500m-in-710-freeway-gap-closure-dollars-for-local-road-improvements/
The 60 Eastbound control cities are Pomona, Riverside and Indio. While 60 Westbound control cities are Riverside and Los Angeles.
Maybe Cali should take a cue from IL...and use "Suburbs" for a Control on I-605 (I-355 says hello!)
Also, Pacific Ocean or Hawaii, Nevada, and Arizona should be used as Controls, as needed, too, to keep the IL theme going.../sarcasm
I recall it being discussed in several threads before, but it does feel like pre-1970s CalTrans/CDOH really liked using local control cities as much as possible (much of which has made it to the present day, i.e. in downtown and east LA), as opposed to how other states tend to sign long-distance destinations even from downtown interchanges. Part of it has to do with how freeways were originally completed within urban areas first before becoming part of longer-distance corridors, such as the San Bernardino Freeway being a local segment of US 60/70/99 before being incorporated into a transcontinental I-10. Part of it is also an emphasis on major local road junctions (i.e. "Bay Bridge/Oakland" signage for I-80 in SF instead of "Sacramento")
When I-5 was completed on the West Side alignment in the 1970s, this changed somewhat: the original US 99 Golden State Freeway control city of Bakersfield within San Fernando Valley and LA was supplanted by "Sacramento" to reflect I-5 going there and not continuing on the Golden State route.
Quote from: Evillangbuildsmc on March 22, 2019, 12:19:10 AM
Any ideas for control cities on california freeways?
The 91 Westbound has Beach Cities, Los Angeles, Artesia and Thru Traffic control city. While 91 Eastbound has Thru Traffic, and Riverside.
A portion of 91 was deleted between SR-1 and Vermont Avenue in 2003.
The 605 put up Thru Traffic and no control cities since its opening.
The 710 Northbound has Pasadena control city South of SR-60 and Valley Boulevard control city North of SR-60.
The 710 is incomplete between I-10 and I-210. The project was scrapped last year.
Source for the 710 gap scrapped: https://www.pasadenastarnews.com/2018/11/14/la-metro-committee-approves-500m-in-710-freeway-gap-closure-dollars-for-local-road-improvements/
The 60 Eastbound control cities are Pomona, Riverside and Indio. While 60 Westbound control cities are Riverside and Los Angeles.
The big problem in both the LA-OC and Bay Area is that it is often difficult to pick a place to which a road goes that is both meaningful and differentiates that road from others. For instance, both US-101 and I-5 are routes that will eventually get you to San Francisco, but posting "San Francisco" for either one is unhelpful and potentially misleading (since either might be faster depending upon a number of factors that can't be readily determined at the time that one would have to make the choice).
I-5 is the GtFooH route from LA to the north, so signing "Sacramento" is reasonable. Anyone remotely familiar with California geography will understand that "Sacramento" is a surrogate for "anywhere north of the Basin that one probably wants to go".
I-10 serves a similar function to the east. You can sign it "San Bernardino" or "Phoenix" and it will work fine. Once again, anyone remotely familiar with California geography will understand "anywhere east of the Basin one probably wants to go".
It would make sense to sign other eastbound and northbound roads with more local destinations to help one differentiate between Ventura and Pasadena.
If you are headed south, you have choices even from Downtown LA. So, most of the freeways are signed with more local destinations. That may not help anyone choose between El Centro and San Diego, but it will help pick between Disneyland and Pasadena.
If you are headed west, any westbound road (and even many north- and southbound roads) will eventually take you to the Pacific Ocean, so it makes sense to sign more local destinations.
I won't claim that CalTrans does the best job possible, but it could be a lot worse.
Similar things happen in the Bay Area, but things are more clear. "San Jose" is "anywhere south". "Los Angeles" is "anywhere south" because the alternative routes to LA don't present themselves until Gilroy, 50 km south of San Jose. Local destinations are often preferred for everything except US-101 and I-80.
Quote from: Evillangbuildsmc on March 22, 2019, 12:19:10 AM
Any ideas for control cities on california freeways?
The 91 Westbound has Beach Cities, Los Angeles, Artesia and Thru Traffic control city. While 91 Eastbound has Thru Traffic, and Riverside.
A portion of 91 was deleted between SR-1 and Vermont Avenue in 2003.
The 605 put up Thru Traffic and no control cities since its opening.
The 710 Northbound has Pasadena control city South of SR-60 and Valley Boulevard control city North of SR-60.
The 710 is incomplete between I-10 and I-210. The project was scrapped last year.
Source for the 710 gap scrapped: https://www.pasadenastarnews.com/2018/11/14/la-metro-committee-approves-500m-in-710-freeway-gap-closure-dollars-for-local-road-improvements/ (https://www.pasadenastarnews.com/2018/11/14/la-metro-committee-approves-500m-in-710-freeway-gap-closure-dollars-for-local-road-improvements/)
The 60 Eastbound control cities are Pomona, Riverside and Indio. While 60 Westbound control cities are Riverside and Los Angeles.
US-101 North in the Los Angeles Area would have the control city of San Jose. Its just like US-101 South in San Jose would have Los Angeles as a control city.
Yes its similar to Southbound I-5 in Sacramento having Los Angeles as a control city and I-5 North in the Los Angeles area having Sacramento as a control city.
Reno and South Lake Tahoe appears in the Sacramento area as being anywhere East of Sacramento on US-50 or I-80.
Interestingly at the Northbound CA-99 @ I-5 Interchange in Kern County I-5 has Sacramento and San Francisco as the control cities and CA-99 North has Bakersfield and Fresno though and CA-99 @ I-5 meets again in Downtown Sacramento though.
https://www.aaroads.com/california/i-005ni_ca.html
My favorite one is at the half-interchange of US 101 and US 199: Oregon Coast!
Rick
Let's not forget "Indio / other Desert Cities" on I-10 East (with that capitalization!).
Caltrans used to be very reluctant to use out-of-state control cities. I used to think that towns like Truckee, Needles, and Blythe must be important, because they were on so many highway signs. They've gotten somewhat better -- at least they sign "Las Vegas" on I-15 from I-10.
Quote from: ilpt4u on March 22, 2019, 12:35:03 AM
Maybe Cali should take a cue from IL...and use "Suburbs" for a Control on I-605 (I-355 says hello!)
Also, Pacific Ocean or Hawaii, Nevada, and Arizona should be used as Controls, as needed, too, to keep the IL theme going.../sarcasm
Don't forget Mexico! :sombrero:
Quote from: GaryA on March 22, 2019, 12:00:50 PM
Let's not forget "Indio / other Desert Cities" on I-10 East (with that capitalization!).
Caltrans used to be very reluctant to use out-of-state control cities. I used to think that towns like Truckee, Needles, and Blythe must be important, because they were on so many highway signs. They've gotten somewhat better -- at least they sign "Las Vegas" on I-15 from I-10.
I love a good control city discussion thread. Especially when discussing my home state.
I think what you say is correct, the control cities chosen favor local cities and disfavor any cities out of state. Ideally, IMO, I prefer the midwestern style (MO, IL outside of Chicagoland, IN, etc.) where control cities on the interstates are to other cities of national reputation as opposed to local suburbs. But the explanations here are very reasonable.
IMO, the current signage is definitely OK on most of the freeways. I-5's NB control city should be Los Angeles in southern Orange County and not Santa Ana (but I'm not opposed to signing both Santa Ana and Los Angeles if there is room). The control city on I-10 EB should be San Bernardino, then Indio, and then Phoenix. All Ii-15 NB signage with Barstow that still exists should be replaced with Las Vegas. I-40's eastbound control should be Flagstaff.
Some of the local ones, I know we've discussed before, but the preference has to be towards what is helpful.
Anaheim is a bad control city for CA-55 NB but a great one for CA 91 WB in place of Beach Cities. West of CA-55, the proper control is Gardena, even though it's not that big of a city. If the freeway extended to Redondo Beach, that would make more sense, but it doesn't. I would use Anaheim as an EB control between 110 and I-5, instead of Riverside.
I say bring back I-710 NB to LA. (It's never going to Pasadena). north of I-5, the control can be I-710 to CA 60 and I-10 without the use of a city. Alhambra may be OK as well.
I should incorporate a city named Thru Traffic.
Quote from: 1 on March 22, 2019, 04:48:50 PM
I should incorporate a city named Thru Traffic.
Try "Rome" instead. All roads lead to there...LOL!
Rick
I kinda think they go with local destinations because the Greater LA area has grown so large. So that's why "Ventura" is the control city for US-101 North from DTLA. That's also why we have control cities like "Indio" and "Barstow" (although I would say it's a bit of a stretch to call those two cities suburbs of LA).
Also, I don't think the US-101 North control city should be San Jose in Downtown LA at all. At that point, I-5 is the better/faster route to points North, including the Bay Area.
Quote from: GaryA on March 22, 2019, 12:00:50 PM
Let's not forget "Indio / other Desert Cities" on I-10 East (with that capitalization!).
Caltrans used to be very reluctant to use out-of-state control cities. I used to think that towns like Truckee, Needles, and Blythe must be important, because they were on so many highway signs. They've gotten somewhat better -- at least they sign "Las Vegas" on I-15 from I-10.
They've got Phoenix in a few places on I-10 as well. US 395 shows Reno when you get sufficiently north of Bishop (and Susanville/points south). But it's certainly the exception rather than the rule.
On CA 99 I noticed theme tends to be the next major city and next two minor locales past each junction for control cities.
Quote from: ClassicHasClass on March 23, 2019, 10:34:15 PM
Quote from: GaryA on March 22, 2019, 12:00:50 PM
Let's not forget "Indio / other Desert Cities" on I-10 East (with that capitalization!).
Caltrans used to be very reluctant to use out-of-state control cities. I used to think that towns like Truckee, Needles, and Blythe must be important, because they were on so many highway signs. They've gotten somewhat better -- at least they sign "Las Vegas" on I-15 from I-10.
They've got Phoenix in a few places on I-10 as well. US 395 shows Reno when you get sufficiently north of Bishop (and Susanville/points south). But it's certainly the exception rather than the rule.
Reno, did you say Reno? Here's a strange one for you. Central Oregon, by LaPine, is where US 97 intersects SR 31. A sign indicating Reno as a destination is placed approaching the intersection....right in the middle of Oregon...LOL!
Going along I-5. does Sacramento get any love? Nope. San Francisco gets mentioned heading south of Klamath Falls on US 97 unless there has been a changing of signs since I saw this one but no mention of Sacramento. Drive along US 101 and the only California city mentioned is Crescent City with the first sign (unless since removed) being just south of Gold Beach.
Since Caltrans uses Oregon control cities much farther away from the border than Oregon does other than the US 97/SR 31 exception, I do wish that ODOT would respond in kind. The world does not end at the border after all. However prices for everything do go up considerably, especially gas!
Rick
Quote from: nexus73 on March 24, 2019, 10:05:38 AM
Quote from: ClassicHasClass on March 23, 2019, 10:34:15 PM
US 395 shows Reno when you get sufficiently north of Bishop (and Susanville/points south). But it's certainly the exception rather than the rule.
Reno, did you say Reno? Here's a strange one for you. Central Oregon, by LaPine, is where US 97 intersects SR 31. A sign indicating Reno as a destination is placed approaching the intersection....right in the middle of Oregon...LOL!
Actually, there's a reason for this, however tenuous. OR 31 terminates at US 395 in Valley Falls, which (surprise surprise) goes to Reno. In the reverse direction from Valley Falls NB OR 31 is signed for Bend.
https://www.floodgap.com/roadgap/395/u18/#img_30
Quote from: GaryA on March 22, 2019, 12:00:50 PM
Let's not forget "Indio / other Desert Cities" on I-10 East (with that capitalization!).
Caltrans used to be very reluctant to use out-of-state control cities. I used to think that towns like Truckee, Needles, and Blythe must be important, because they were on so many highway signs. They've gotten somewhat better -- at least they sign "Las Vegas" on I-15 from I-10.
My guess on the I-15 north control cities is that there really is nothing between Barstow and Vegas. I can certainly see including signage for Barstow, as that is a major junction (with I-40), but anything north of there would have to be Vegas. I just can't see Baker ever being a control city (I guess you could say Baker/Death Valley, but that would be a stretch).
As has been mentioned previously, I think the control cities were indicative of early freeway development, as in LA, the freeways were like spokes in a wheel with the East LA interchange and downtown in the center.
Want to go east? Take the Pomona or San Bernardino Freeways toward those two cities. Southeast? Santa Ana Freeway. South? Harbor Freeway. West? Santa Monica Freeway. Northwest? Hollywood Freeway. North? Golden State Freeway. The original freeways got you in the direction of the cities the freeways were named for (except the Golden State, which would get you...every non-coastal city of any importance going north).
Now that the use of freeway nomenclature has changed, it's understandable that the original control cities are not necessarily helpful to new residents or tourists who aren't necessarily familiar with the geography of the Southland.
I'm actually looking into moving back to my home state and while I know the geography very well, I'd have to give my New England born-and-raised wife a crash course in the lay of the land (even though we've been there several times).
Quote from: Mark68 on March 25, 2019, 01:22:13 PM
My guess on the I-15 north control cities is that there really is nothing between Barstow and Vegas. I can certainly see including signage for Barstow, as that is a major junction (with I-40), but anything north of there would have to be Vegas. I just can't see Baker ever being a control city (I guess you could say Baker/Death Valley, but that would be a stretch).
If I recall correctly, Baker was indeed the control city on I-15 north of Barstow. Past there, I don't recall whether they used Las Vegas or just "I-15 North".
Quote from: GaryA on March 25, 2019, 01:38:41 PM
Quote from: Mark68 on March 25, 2019, 01:22:13 PM
My guess on the I-15 north control cities is that there really is nothing between Barstow and Vegas. I can certainly see including signage for Barstow, as that is a major junction (with I-40), but anything north of there would have to be Vegas. I just can't see Baker ever being a control city (I guess you could say Baker/Death Valley, but that would be a stretch).
If I recall correctly, Baker was indeed the control city on I-15 north of Barstow. Past there, I don't recall whether they used Las Vegas or just "I-15 North".
At the NB on-ramp for the Lenwood Rd Barstow exit, there is a Helvetica BGS for Las Vegas. Salt Lake City (three states away!) is on several mileage signs north of Baker. With that in mind, there should be an Albuquerque sign on I-40!
I remember seeing a few Portland signs on US 199. Coos Bay is on US 101. Even Burns and Lakeview, OR appear on Us 395. Las Vegas on SR 58. Portland on I-5 from Redding north. Reno on SR 14. California is very good at signing the long distance out of state destinations.
Quote from: Evillangbuildsmc on March 22, 2019, 12:19:10 AM
Any ideas for control cities on california freeways?
The 91 Westbound has Beach Cities, Los Angeles, Artesia and Thru Traffic control city. While 91 Eastbound has Thru Traffic, and Riverside.
A portion of 91 was deleted between SR-1 and Vermont Avenue in 2003.
The 605 put up Thru Traffic and no control cities since its opening.
The 710 Northbound has Pasadena control city South of SR-60 and Valley Boulevard control city North of SR-60.
The 710 is incomplete between I-10 and I-210. The project was scrapped last year.
Source for the 710 gap scrapped: https://www.pasadenastarnews.com/2018/11/14/la-metro-committee-approves-500m-in-710-freeway-gap-closure-dollars-for-local-road-improvements/
The 60 Eastbound control cities are Pomona, Riverside and Indio. While 60 Westbound control cities are Riverside and Los Angeles.
A lot of the freeways are just suburban connectors, so I can't think of a control city that would mean anything in many cases.
I-605 south could be Long Beach, but traffic on I-605 north is mostly just connecting to another freeway heading someone else; I don't think a control city of Duarte would mean anything outside of being technically correct.
CA-91 west technically ends in Artesia, but traffic there is all going to the Beach Cities (Manhattan, Redondo, Hermosa) anyway. There could be a regional control of South Bay, but I can't think of what city out of the group would be more "important" than any other to be a suitable control city.
I-710 north could still work with Pasadena as a control if the proposed surface street upgrades (the alternate to the 710 tunnel) are ever completed.
Quote from: djsekani on March 28, 2019, 03:25:29 PM
I-605 south could be Long Beach, but traffic on I-605 north is mostly just connecting to another freeway heading someone else; I don't think a control city of Duarte would mean anything outside of being technically correct.
I wouldn't suggest Long Beach for I-605 south, since traffic on I-605 isn't anywhere near downtown Long Beach and is not heading in that direction. Imagine coming in from the east -- would the suggested route to Long Beach be I-605 south to I-405 north (and then likely to I-710 south), or to continue until you reach I-710 south in the first place? If there must be a control city allocated to I-605 south, I'd suggest Seal Beach, though only moderately well known, and although I-605 doesn't quite reach it, the next exit on I-405 is Seal Beach Blvd. In fact I-605 still extends on paper to Seal Beach, although any actual construction is extremely unlikely.
Quote from: bing101 on March 22, 2019, 10:23:03 AM
US-101 North in the Los Angeles Area would have the control city of San Jose. Its just like US-101 South in San Jose would have Los Angeles as a control city.
Except that I-5 to CA-152 is shorter and (90% of the time) faster than US-101 for everyone in L.A. County except perhaps Malibu and Agoura Hills. This will become even more so if/when they upgrade CA-152 to four lanes between Casa de Fruta and Gilroy.
The difference the other direction is that everyone leaving San Jose will use US-101 to start to Los Angeles, then you can decide between staying on US-101 or going CA-152 to I-5.
Quote from: GaryA on March 28, 2019, 04:45:22 PM
Quote from: djsekani on March 28, 2019, 03:25:29 PM
I-605 south could be Long Beach, but traffic on I-605 north is mostly just connecting to another freeway heading someone else; I don't think a control city of Duarte would mean anything outside of being technically correct.
I wouldn't suggest Long Beach for I-605 south, since traffic on I-605 isn't anywhere near downtown Long Beach and is not heading in that direction. Imagine coming in from the east -- would the suggested route to Long Beach be I-605 south to I-405 north (and then likely to I-710 south), or to continue until you reach I-710 south in the first place? If there must be a control city allocated to I-605 south, I'd suggest Seal Beach, though only moderately well known, and although I-605 doesn't quite reach it, the next exit on I-405 is Seal Beach Blvd. In fact I-605 still extends on paper to Seal Beach, although any actual construction is extremely unlikely.
When going back and forth from downtown Long Beach to Claremont, I always used I-710/I-105/I-605 (unless traffic dictated otherwise).
I've always been OK with two control cities (one local, one distant) or the use of regions (although "Beach Cities" is a little vague given that almost every city between Santa Monica and the San Diego County line ends in "Beach").
On I-605 north, I would use "Whittier/San Gabriel Valley" until Whittier Boulevard, then "West Covina/El Monte" until I-10. I would use them as secondary controls for I-10 (i.e., "El Monte/Los Angeles" and "West Covina/San Bernardino"). North of there on I-605 I would be OK with "To I-210."
Southbound, I'd be OK with using Long Beach until I-710 or CA-91, then have supplemental signs saying "Downtown Long Beach use CA-91 west to I-710" or something like that. South of there on I-605 I would be OK with "To I-405," "Orange County Beaches," or even "Irvine/San Diego" if the I-405 signage gets more consistent.
With regards to control cities I believe 605 controls should be seal Beach and duarte
Agree with comments that Long Beach is confusing since 6:05 does not go near downtown. While duarte is small it is at least well-known locally for City of Hope hospital.
For a long time I assumed beach cities referred to Manhattan Hermosa and Redondo, but it could just as easily refer to Huntington and Newport. Keep in mind that 55 north control City for a long time is Riverside so the converse is that the highway leading away from Riverside leads to Newport Beach. none-the-less beach cities is only signed in the inland empire to distinguish between 91 + the other highways that go directly towards Los Angeles. Once you are in Orange county 91 westbound control is Los Angeles. I think using Anaheim instead of beach cities is far better.
Nexus 5X
Quote from: DTComposer on March 28, 2019, 06:09:20 PM
Quote from: bing101 on March 22, 2019, 10:23:03 AM
US-101 North in the Los Angeles Area would have the control city of San Jose. Its just like US-101 South in San Jose would have Los Angeles as a control city.
Except that I-5 to CA-152 is shorter and (90% of the time) faster than US-101 for everyone in L.A. County except perhaps Malibu and Agoura Hills. This will become even more so if/when they upgrade CA-152 to four lanes between Casa de Fruta and Gilroy.
The difference the other direction is that everyone leaving San Jose will use US-101 to start to Los Angeles, then you can decide between staying on US-101 or going CA-152 to I-5.
Quote from: GaryA on March 28, 2019, 04:45:22 PM
Quote from: djsekani on March 28, 2019, 03:25:29 PM
I-605 south could be Long Beach, but traffic on I-605 north is mostly just connecting to another freeway heading someone else; I don't think a control city of Duarte would mean anything outside of being technically correct.
I wouldn't suggest Long Beach for I-605 south, since traffic on I-605 isn't anywhere near downtown Long Beach and is not heading in that direction. Imagine coming in from the east -- would the suggested route to Long Beach be I-605 south to I-405 north (and then likely to I-710 south), or to continue until you reach I-710 south in the first place? If there must be a control city allocated to I-605 south, I'd suggest Seal Beach, though only moderately well known, and although I-605 doesn't quite reach it, the next exit on I-405 is Seal Beach Blvd. In fact I-605 still extends on paper to Seal Beach, although any actual construction is extremely unlikely.
When going back and forth from downtown Long Beach to Claremont, I always used I-710/I-105/I-605 (unless traffic dictated otherwise).
I've always been OK with two control cities (one local, one distant) or the use of regions (although "Beach Cities" is a little vague given that almost every city between Santa Monica and the San Diego County line ends in "Beach").
On I-605 north, I would use "Whittier/San Gabriel Valley" until Whittier Boulevard, then "West Covina/El Monte" until I-10. I would use them as secondary controls for I-10 (i.e., "El Monte/Los Angeles" and "West Covina/San Bernardino"). North of there on I-605 I would be OK with "To I-210."
Southbound, I'd be OK with using Long Beach until I-710 or CA-91, then have supplemental signs saying "Downtown Long Beach use CA-91 west to I-710" or something like that. South of there on I-605 I would be OK with "To I-405," "Orange County Beaches," or even "Irvine/San Diego" if the I-405 signage gets more consistent.
Having the control for southbound 605 as San Diego south of the 91 is very interesting. It reminds me of the control for 680 North being Sacramento. However for obvious reasons it only works well south of i-5 because I thought I would be more direct if you are north of i-5.
Nexus 5X
Quote from: GaryA on March 28, 2019, 04:45:22 PM
Quote from: djsekani on March 28, 2019, 03:25:29 PM
I-605 south could be Long Beach, but traffic on I-605 north is mostly just connecting to another freeway heading someone else; I don't think a control city of Duarte would mean anything outside of being technically correct.
I wouldn't suggest Long Beach for I-605 south, since traffic on I-605 isn't anywhere near downtown Long Beach and is not heading in that direction. Imagine coming in from the east -- would the suggested route to Long Beach be I-605 south to I-405 north (and then likely to I-710 south), or to continue until you reach I-710 south in the first place?
Long Beach is more than just downtown. I take 605 south all the time to get to Cal State, Naples, and the various other neighborhoods on the east side of the city.
Even for downtown traffic 605 to 7th Street is a much more direct route than that freeway loop you suggested, especially if you're coming from the SGV and points east and don't want to deal with the ridiculous truck traffic on the 710.
Quote from: djsekani on March 29, 2019, 10:08:10 AM
Quote from: GaryA on March 28, 2019, 04:45:22 PM
Quote from: djsekani on March 28, 2019, 03:25:29 PM
I-605 south could be Long Beach, but traffic on I-605 north is mostly just connecting to another freeway heading someone else; I don't think a control city of Duarte would mean anything outside of being technically correct.
I wouldn't suggest Long Beach for I-605 south, since traffic on I-605 isn't anywhere near downtown Long Beach and is not heading in that direction. Imagine coming in from the east -- would the suggested route to Long Beach be I-605 south to I-405 north (and then likely to I-710 south), or to continue until you reach I-710 south in the first place?
Long Beach is more than just downtown. I take 605 south all the time to get to Cal State, Naples, and the various other neighborhoods on the east side of the city.
Even for downtown traffic 605 to 7th Street is a much more direct route than that freeway loop you suggested, especially if you're coming from the SGV and points east and don't want to deal with the ridiculous truck traffic on the 710.
I believe that the control cities listed on highways should direct people towards the downtowns of their respective cities. That is certainly the way it is in California. In fact, you will commonly see a control in California that is used, even while you are in the city limits. With regards to Long Beach you can see this at the 405/710 interchange, well within LB city limits but still directing you south to reach Long Beach. And of course there are countless examples in LA of the same thing.
If everything else were equal, the best way to reach Downtown LB from the east would be to continue on 10,60, or 91 to 710.* Of course, if there is a traffic problem, it may be better to take 605 to 7th street as you suggested. But, if traffic is moving well, we shouldn't direct traffic along 4 miles of surface street with traffic signal unnecessarily.
You are correct that LB is more than just Downtown, the same way LA is more than just Downtown. But I would never use LA as a control on 405, even though there are many important LA destinations in the Westside. The convention is that a "Los Angeles" control if followed to its conclusion from whereever you are will lead you to the 4 level interchange. The "Long Beach" control leads you to Downtown and the Port.
* Of course, the 210 does not connect with the 710, so a trip to Long Beach from the 210 east would start with the 605 and then probably a transfer to the 105 or 91 to the 710. But that is not enough justification for using a Long Beach control, even at the 210.
In the Sacramento area CA-99 and I-5 will have different control cities for the south bound directions I-5 South in Sacramento has Los Angeles as the control city and CA-99 south has Fresno as the control city and CA-99 and I-5 Meets again at the south end of the San Joaquin Valley.
D7 still refers to this 1982 map, with reference to 1964, when working on sign projects in 2019. Go figure.
When discussing the new signs along the Hollywood and Santa Ana (US-101) freeways in downtown they decided to remove Hollywood and put Ventura. (https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190330/8f8e5f97930b640f893beb0ccafd7bb2.jpg)
Sacramento on 405 and 210 have to be some of the farther 3di control cities out there.
Just saw a video about the opening of the Sepulveda Pass portion of I-405 back at 1962. Apparently the control city at that part of the interstate was Bakersfield at the time. It's at 4:21
Watching that video made me think if there was a need for 8 lanes at that time, we might just need 16 now. With the new flexsteel, building an overhead set of lanes that can cope with a SoCal earthquake might be the way to use the space available.
Loved the US 99 mention too.
Rick
Quote from: nexus73 on March 31, 2019, 01:17:20 AM
Watching that video made me think if there was a need for 8 lanes at that time, we might just need 16 now. With the new flexsteel, building an overhead set of lanes that can cope with a SoCal earthquake might be the way to use the space available.
Loved the US 99 mention too.
Rick
IIRC they knew it was underbuilt at the time, so the plan was for another freeway through the Laurel Canyon area. That's one of many L.A. freeways that was never built for reasons.
Quote from: Techknow on March 31, 2019, 12:29:44 AM
Just saw a video about the opening of the Sepulveda Pass portion of I-405 back at 1962. Apparently the control city at that part of the interstate was Bakersfield at the time. It's at 4:21
Some of the I-5 Grapevine exits still have old Bakersfield signs at the on-ramps. Before there was a complete "West Side Freeway," Bakersfield would be the obvious NB 405 control city.
Quote from: pdx-wanderer on March 31, 2019, 04:14:45 PM
Some of the I-5 Grapevine exits still have old Bakersfield signs at the on-ramps. Before there was a complete "West Side Freeway," Bakersfield would be the obvious NB 405 control city.
There are still several in Burbank:
https://goo.gl/maps/6ViV6saAFjz
Fixed quoting. –Roadfro
I feel slightly conflicted about i-5 control City. It made perfect sense to use Bakersfield originally because that was the next major city along u.s. 99. And it also matches with the LA custom of using a control into the next county such as the Ventura Santa Ana and San Bernardino. And because of cost considerations if it were up to me I would have left the controls alone even once I 5 was built along the west side of the valley.
but given my general preference for using larger cities as controls I do like having Sacramento there because it's very clear that using a road with a Sacramento control take you far to the North and then reach the north side of the city and beyond. In my opinion it is proper for the northbound control of 405 and 170 to match the northbound control by 5 so Sacramento's appropriate even though 405 and 170 don't go nearly as far. With respect to the 210 I am sad to see that they are getting rid of San Fernando for Sacramento, I don't feel this changes necessary or warranted.
Nexus 5X
Quote from: bing101 on March 29, 2019, 11:40:47 PM
In the Sacramento area CA-99 and I-5 will have different control cities for the south bound directions I-5 South in Sacramento has Los Angeles as the control city and CA-99 south has Fresno as the control city and CA-99 and I-5 Meets again at the south end of the San Joaquin Valley.
IIRC, Fresno is the control only in the immediate Sacramento and Stockton areas only to distinguish I-5 from CA-99. In other areas, even well north of Fresno, Los Angeles is the southbound control for south 99.
Here is a picture from Lodi:
https://www.google.com/maps/@38.1162336,-121.2585635,3a,75y,79.49h,77.43t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sJeSjjuA01ZX1SZAvPL0XaA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
So, if I had to qualify it, I would say that the control cities for both 99 and I-5 in the Central Valley are Sacramento and Los Angeles. In areas where both are present (Wheeler Ridge, Stockton, Sacramento) CA 99 will use Bakersfield and/or Fresno instead to distinguish.
A similar situation exists with 101 and 280. For all intents and purposes, the controls on both highways between their two junctions (southern SF and southern SJ) are SF and San Jose. But to distinguish the two highways, occasionally I-280 will see a control of "Daly City" or "Downtown San Jose".
And finally, within the San Fernando Valley, the control cities for both I-5 and CA-170 are Sacramento - Los Angeles for both of them. To distinguish between them at the 5/170 split, 170's southbound control is Hollywood. But it is only used there. At every on-ramp onto southbound CA-170 from a surface street, Los Angeles is the control to the extent that it is signed.
Here's an example at Roscoe Blvd:
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.2216067,-118.4109758,3a,75y,78.3h,82.8t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sWgWQdFP4-ZlVZz8mf1jxOw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Contrast that with how US 101 treats Hollywood. Until recent sign changes, Hollywood was the official first control city on US 101 north from Downtown LA. You'd see Hollywood used at on-ramps in surface streets Downtown, at the 4-level, at some of the entrances to surface streets in Echo Park area, and surprisingly on the 110 at the I-10 interchange* nearly three miles away from the 101 ramp. See:
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0298217,-118.2742833,3a,75y,354.65h,96.23t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sP1CfciZ_BLOZGfB2oCyEwQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Of course, there is a movement to replace all Hollywood signs with Ventura as Hollywood is not a real control city in D7's eyes. At some point soon, the only place you'd see Hollywood on a freeway sign would be at the 5/170 split.
* If it were up to me, I would sign Downtown LA - Pasadena instead of Pasadena - Hollywood here. IMO, while you are close to Downtown at this point, you are not yet in Downtown until you reach the exits for 4th, 6th, and 9th streets.
Hollywood is not famous enough to be a control city. So says Caltrans...LOL!
Rick
Quote from: nexus73 on April 04, 2019, 10:56:27 AM
Hollywood is not famous enough to be a control city. So says Caltrans...LOL!
Rick
Or has a large enough population (77,000). But Ventura (110,000) apparently does. While in the process of "updating" signs and control cities, D7 also ignores that Oxnard is now the biggest city in Ventura County with 210,000.
Quote from: Occidental Tourist on April 04, 2019, 11:17:32 AM
Quote from: nexus73 on April 04, 2019, 10:56:27 AM
Hollywood is not famous enough to be a control city. So says Caltrans...LOL!
Rick
Or has a large enough population (77,000). But Ventura (110,000) apparently does. While in the process of "updating" signs and control cities, D7 also ignores that Oxnard is now the biggest city in Ventura County with 210,000.
101 only skirts the edge of Oxnard. 101 goes through the heart of Ventura.
Quote from: mrsman on April 04, 2019, 02:04:10 PM
Quote from: Occidental Tourist on April 04, 2019, 11:17:32 AM
Quote from: nexus73 on April 04, 2019, 10:56:27 AM
Hollywood is not famous enough to be a control city. So says Caltrans...LOL!
Rick
Or has a large enough population (77,000). But Ventura (110,000) apparently does. While in the process of "updating" signs and control cities, D7 also ignores that Oxnard is now the biggest city in Ventura County with 210,000.
101 only skirts the edge of Oxnard. 101 goes through the heart of Ventura.
And size notwithstanding, Ventura is the county seat, the historic and cultural center of the region, and the bigger tourist draw. Same reason they wouldn't (and shouldn't) replace San Francisco with San Jose.
Quote from: mrsman on April 04, 2019, 02:04:10 PM
101 only skirts the edge of Oxnard. 101 goes through the heart of Ventura.
The 60 barely touches Pomona's southern border. I-10 goes through more of Pomona. And Downtown Pomona is the same distance from the 60 as Downtown Oxnard is from the 101. Downtown Pomona is closer to the 10. Yet Pomona is the control city on the 60.
Quote from: DTComposer on April 04, 2019, 07:55:23 PM
And size notwithstanding, Ventura is the county seat, the historic and cultural center of the region, and the bigger tourist draw. Same reason they wouldn't (and shouldn't) replace San Francisco with San Jose.
The county seat argument is the only one consistent with Caltrans signing history. For example, Indio–where the courthouse and county offices for the region are located–gets signed on I-10 even though Palm Springs is the historic and cultural center of the Coachella Valley.
Quote from: Occidental Tourist on April 05, 2019, 01:07:15 AM
Quote from: mrsman on April 04, 2019, 02:04:10 PM
101 only skirts the edge of Oxnard. 101 goes through the heart of Ventura.
The 60 barely touches Pomona's southern border. I-10 goes through more of Pomona. And Downtown Pomona is the same distance from the 60 as Downtown Oxnard is from the 101. Downtown Pomona is closer to the 10. Yet Pomona is the control city on the 60.
Quote from: DTComposer on April 04, 2019, 07:55:23 PM
And size notwithstanding, Ventura is the county seat, the historic and cultural center of the region, and the bigger tourist draw. Same reason they wouldn't (and shouldn't) replace San Francisco with San Jose.
The county seat argument is the only one consistent with Caltrans signing history. For example, Indio–where the courthouse and county offices for the region are located–gets signed on I-10 even though Palm Springs is the historic and cultural center of the Coachella Valley.
It's a fair point, but I would argue that Indio/Palm Springs is more the exception rather than the rule. Compare that to the continued use of San Luis Obispo vs. Santa Maria (or even Santa Barbara vs. Santa Maria). And like Oxnard/Ventura, I-10 goes directly into Indio, as opposed to skirting 5 miles north of Palm Springs.
I'm not going to defend Caltrans' signing practices, but if you were to have a checklist of a) population, b) governmental center, c) cultural/tourism center, d) proximity to route, then Ventura "wins" over Oxnard, Indio "wins" over Palm Springs, San Luis Obispo "wins" over Santa Maria. San Jose
maybe "ties" San Francisco, but that's only recently, and San Francisco's dominance as a governmental and cultural center way overshadows San Jose's higher population. Santa Ana "won" over Anaheim when I-5 (née US-101) was built, but Anaheim has since overtaken Santa Ana on at least two of those categories, and I've always been in favor of switching that control.
Quote from: Occidental Tourist on April 05, 2019, 01:07:15 AM
Quote from: mrsman on April 04, 2019, 02:04:10 PM
101 only skirts the edge of Oxnard. 101 goes through the heart of Ventura.
The 60 barely touches Pomona's southern border. I-10 goes through more of Pomona. And Downtown Pomona is the same distance from the 60 as Downtown Oxnard is from the 101. Downtown Pomona is closer to the 10. Yet Pomona is the control city on the 60.
I think in part this is because I-10 (but in particular US 70/99 east of Kellogg Hill) was given the "San Bernardino Freeway" name early on, with the old 60 route splitting off to go to Pomona (via Route 71/Mission Boulevard). It almost feels like "Pomona Freeway" got its name simply to differentiate it from the San Bernardino corridor, though really neither name is super accurate for the ultimate destinations of both routes (see below).
Having said that, 210 is the route that actually gets into the heart of San Bernardino! But it didn't exist in any form in that city until the 1990s. I-10 barely skirts the San Bernardino city limits; I recall that 215 north of Colton was originally also part of the "San Bernardino Freeway" route though I don't think that name was ever used much by the public for that stretch of road.
Quote from: TheStranger on April 05, 2019, 02:23:08 AM
Quote from: Occidental Tourist on April 05, 2019, 01:07:15 AM
Quote from: mrsman on April 04, 2019, 02:04:10 PM
101 only skirts the edge of Oxnard. 101 goes through the heart of Ventura.
The 60 barely touches Pomona's southern border. I-10 goes through more of Pomona. And Downtown Pomona is the same distance from the 60 as Downtown Oxnard is from the 101. Downtown Pomona is closer to the 10. Yet Pomona is the control city on the 60.
I think in part this is because I-10 (but in particular US 70/99 east of Kellogg Hill) was given the "San Bernardino Freeway" name early on, with the old 60 route splitting off to go to Pomona (via Route 71/Mission Boulevard). It almost feels like "Pomona Freeway" got its name simply to differentiate it from the San Bernardino corridor, though really neither name is super accurate for the ultimate destinations of both routes (see below).
Having said that, 210 is the route that actually gets into the heart of San Bernardino! But it didn't exist in any form in that city until the 1990s. I-10 barely skirts the San Bernardino city limits; I recall that 215 north of Colton was originally also part of the "San Bernardino Freeway" route though I don't think that name was ever used much by the public for that stretch of road.
The names of most of the freeways in the LA area that have been in use until relatively recently are based on their destination. Hence, Santa Ana Fwy, San Bernardino Fwy, Santa Monica Fwy. During this era, it made perfect sense for the outbound control city to match the name of this highway. And this is what is done. As mentioned earlier, I-10 has a San Bernardino control even though the 210 goes more directly there. But 210's extension to SB is recent. So even though 10 only skirts the edge of SB, and signage directs you to continue on 215 north to reach the heart of SB, it is still the SB Fwy with a SB control on eastbound I-10 from Downtown LA until the 215.
In an earlier era of freeway planning, the name of the highway was not the destination, but the name of the street that is closely paralleled. There are references to the unbuilt Normandie Parkway for example. The SM Fwy was known as the Olympic Pkwy, The SBFwy as the Ramona Pkwy. The 60 Freeway parallels a street known as Pomona Blvd in East Los Angeles. It already had the planning name of Pomona Fwy for a very long time, even though as mentioned I-10 goes more directly to Pomona then the 60. As an even more recent example, I-105 as the Century Fwy. after Century Blvd. AFAIK, it was never known as the Airport Fwy. Its official name of Glenn Anderson, after a local congressman who helped with the funding.
There are other sources of confusion because of this. The unbuilt CA-2 Beverly Hills Fwy was known as the Santa Monica Pkwy as it parallels SM Blvd, in the era that I-10 was known as the Olympic Pkwy. Some times it takes a little bit of insight to determine whether CA-2 or I-10 is referenced in some old documents referring to the Santa Monica Fwy.
Likewise, there are some inaccuracies with the names used, as others have mentioned:
I-210 is more direct than I-10 for San Bernardino (yet I-210 does not reach Downtown LA). Perhaps the 210 should've been the SB Fwy.
I-10 is more direct than 60 for Pomona. Perhaps I-10 should've been Pomona Fwy. Perhaps SB should not even be a control on I-10 and Indio should be used east of Pomona.
60 connects LA to Riverside. 91 connects the South Bay and OC to Riverside. Should 60 be the Riverside Fwy instead? Should Riverside be the only EB control on 60 from Downtown LA?
The western part of 91 is already known as the Artesia Fwy, Artesia is a very small city, but the freeway (west of I-5) does parallel Artesia Blvd. The freeway east of I-5 came first though. Perhaps this should've been the Anaheim Fwy.
57 is the Orange Fwy, yet has a control of Santa Ana. It only reaches the SA city limits, but traffic can continue directly from 57 to I-5 south. (A different control like Huntington Beach may have been used if this freeway was ever extended south of the 57/5/22.) It also only skirts the Orange city limits. Perhaps this should have been the Anaheim Fwy, or named after a nearby road as it doesn't head to LA, like Brea Canyon Fwy.
I-210 goes through more of Pasadena then the 110. But since the 110 connects LA to Pasadena, the name Pasadena Fwy is appropriate. It is no longer used as it is now known as the Arroyo Seco Pkwy.
CA-2 only skirts the eastern edge of Glendale. CA-134 heads to the heart of Glendale and probably would've been better named as the Glendale Fwy instead of the Ventura Fwy. (Yes, I know that it connects directly with 101, but technically you are exiting 101 when taking the 134, so they should be different freeways by name as well.)
And why o why is the I-405 the San Diego Fwy. I know that the name hops onto I-5 south of El Toro, and San Diego is a good control south of Long Beach, but I've always had problems with the name, particularly in LA County. I preferred the old name of Sepulveda Pkwy.
QuoteHaving said that, 210 is the route that actually gets into the heart of San Bernardino!
I'm not sure I buy that. The Crosstown Fwy segment is really through the residential areas north of the city centre and the only highway that goes by the downtown is the 215 (and the rump remainder routing of CA 66). Historically this makes sense anyway: modern I-215 had all the regional through routes on it at one point, i.e., CA 18/US 66/US 91/US 395, which is what you would expect rather than the relatively minor routing CA 30 was back then.
I saw a map at one point that even signed the San Bernardino Fwy designation from I-10
north into San Bernardino along US 395, and then switched to the Barstow Fwy designation after crossing CA 30. I don't think this was ever common public understanding, though.
For US 101 went it reaches CA-170's southern terminus and CA-134's western terminus, its control city is Ventura. I feel like it could also include something like Thousand Oaks, or Oxnard, or maybe a city in between CA-134's western terminus and I-405 interchange. Then again, it's called the Ventura Freeway
Quote from: Occidental Tourist on April 04, 2019, 11:17:32 AM
Quote from: nexus73 on April 04, 2019, 10:56:27 AM
Hollywood is not famous enough to be a control city. So says Caltrans...LOL!
Rick
Or has a large enough population (77,000). But Ventura (110,000) apparently does. While in the process of "updating" signs and control cities, D7 also ignores that Oxnard is now the biggest city in Ventura County with 210,000.
No one's going to bring up the little detail that Hollywood is not a city?
Quote from: djsekani on April 08, 2019, 12:37:14 PM
Quote from: Occidental Tourist on April 04, 2019, 11:17:32 AM
Quote from: nexus73 on April 04, 2019, 10:56:27 AM
Hollywood is not famous enough to be a control city. So says Caltrans...LOL!
Rick
Or has a large enough population (77,000). But Ventura (110,000) apparently does. While in the process of "updating" signs and control cities, D7 also ignores that Oxnard is now the biggest city in Ventura County with 210,000.
No one's going to bring up the little detail that Hollywood is not a city?
I still think Hollywood can be a control city. Like Ventura Freeway, the Hollywood Freeway and Hollywood as the control city kind of just make sense and go well. I heard in other places counties are used as control cities! Hollywood is a big and famous district in LA so Hollywood would be appropriate as a control city as most motorists will recognize it and know where they are heading. Control cities dont always have to be an actual city, they can be a region or a district.
Quote from: djsekani on April 08, 2019, 12:37:14 PM
Quote from: Occidental Tourist on April 04, 2019, 11:17:32 AM
Quote from: nexus73 on April 04, 2019, 10:56:27 AM
Hollywood is not famous enough to be a control city. So says Caltrans...LOL!
Rick
Or has a large enough population (77,000). But Ventura (110,000) apparently does. While in the process of "updating" signs and control cities, D7 also ignores that Oxnard is now the biggest city in Ventura County with 210,000.
No one's going to bring up the little detail that Hollywood is not a city?
Doesn't this also apply to control destinations that were formerly but aren't separate cities now, i.e. Brooklyn/Staten Island? Granted, both districts geographically are WAY more substantial than Hollywood, though Hollywood is of equal or higher renown nationally.
I-605: other beach cities/other valley cities :-D
Quote from: TheStranger on April 09, 2019, 11:05:14 AM
Quote from: djsekani on April 08, 2019, 12:37:14 PM
Quote from: Occidental Tourist on April 04, 2019, 11:17:32 AM
Quote from: nexus73 on April 04, 2019, 10:56:27 AM
Hollywood is not famous enough to be a control city. So says Caltrans...LOL!
Rick
Or has a large enough population (77,000). But Ventura (110,000) apparently does. While in the process of “updating” signs and control cities, D7 also ignores that Oxnard is now the biggest city in Ventura County with 210,000.
No one's going to bring up the little detail that Hollywood is not a city?
Doesn't this also apply to control destinations that were formerly but aren't separate cities now, i.e. Brooklyn/Staten Island? Granted, both districts geographically are WAY more substantial than Hollywood, though Hollywood is of equal or higher renown nationally.
Hollywood isn't the only LA neighborhood that is used as a freeway control city. San Pedro and Echo Park are also within city limits. The Echo Park control once said Hollywood (as the control for 2 south at I-5) but was changed to Echo Park when plans to build the Beverly Hills Fwy were cancelled.
Quote from: AndyMax25 on March 30, 2019, 11:56:28 AM
D7 still refers to this 1982 map, with reference to 1964, when working on sign projects in 2019. Go figure.
When discussing the new signs along the Hollywood and Santa Ana (US-101) freeways in downtown they decided to remove Hollywood and put Ventura. (https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190330/8f8e5f97930b640f893beb0ccafd7bb2.jpg)
Not a fan of the way this map lays out control cities. For one, it seems to indicate that the control for the Hollywood-101 Fwy is Sacramento (not Ventura or Hollywood). The pull through signs on US 101 never say Sacramento, nor should they.
This led to this error. Both on the control city and the spelling of Alvarado.
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0725133,-118.2666872,3a,75y,235.25h,86.53t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s_10fFGtebF3-FbNb36Wb_g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Fortunately, the control has since been corrected to Ventura on more recent updates to the sign.
Also, noteworthy about the map (and about the highways in general) is how many freeways have LA as a control. This begs the qn, which freeways in So Cal are radial (emanating from LA) and which ones are tangential? The radial freeways should all have LA as an inbound control.
Radial freeways:
101 Hollywood
(freeways that emanate from that like 170 Hollywood and 101 Ventura)
101 Santa Ana and 5 Santa Ana
(freeways that emanate from that like 710 Long Beach (S of I-5), 91 Riverside (E of I-5))
(It would be a stretch to include any fwy going south or east of the diagonal, like I-605 S of I-5, although quite a bit of I-5 traffic uses the 605, since that is where the I-5 narrows. I-605 is almost always viewed as a tangential fwy.)
110 Pasadena
110 Harbor
5 Golden State (except S of 110)
(freeways that emanate from that north or west of the diagonal like:
(2 Glendale, 118 Simi Valley, 14 Palmdale, and 126 Ventura, although not a freeway in LA Co)
60 Pomona
10 San Bernardino
(freeways that emanate from that like 71 from Corona and I-15 from Las Vegas)
10 Santa Monica
(1 from Oxnard, La Cienega "freeway" that is signed as a 405 to 10 east connector)
210 E of 605 behaves like a radial freeway. It connects to LA via 605 and 10. Yer, it should not get an LA control under any circumstances.
Quote from: mrsman on April 10, 2019, 02:02:36 AM
5 Golden State (except S of 110)
(freeways that emanate from that north or west of the diagonal like:
(2 Glendale, 118 Simi Valley, 14 Palmdale, and 126 Ventura, although not a freeway in LA Co)
I'm actually of the mind that signing 5 south of 110 for LA has some use because trucks cannot use 110 from there to reach downtown. Maybe something like one advance saying informing trucks to use either Route 2 or I-10.
Quote from: mrsman on April 10, 2019, 02:02:36 AM
210 E of 605 behaves like a radial freeway. It connects to LA via 605 and 10. Yer, it should not get an LA control under any circumstances.
Couldn't an LA control city at least help in encouraging drivers to avoid 10 west and 60 west unless necessary? (Kinda like how I-20 east near Fort Worth has Dallas as a control city even though it does not directly reach the latter city's downtown in its current iteration as a southern bypass) Like say signing 210 between 15 and 605 as Pasadena/Los Angeles and then directing people to use 605 then 10 to reach LA.
This is assuming of course that control city LA only refers to the downtown core; one continuing on the direct west trajectory from 210 to 134 would reach the San Fernando Valley and Hollywood in short order.
Quote from: TheStranger on April 10, 2019, 05:28:01 AM
Quote from: mrsman on April 10, 2019, 02:02:36 AM
5 Golden State (except S of 110)
(freeways that emanate from that north or west of the diagonal like:
(2 Glendale, 118 Simi Valley, 14 Palmdale, and 126 Ventura, although not a freeway in LA Co)
I'm actually of the mind that signing 5 south of 110 for LA has some use because trucks cannot use 110 from there to reach downtown. Maybe something like one advance saying informing trucks to use either Route 2 or I-10.
This is one of many reasons why I beleive there should be some signage at 5/170 directing some Downtown LA traffic to use the 170. If trucks don't use 170, they would have to backtrack to head Downtown. (I recommend that both 5 and 170 have Los Angeles controls with Burbank/LA for 5 and Hollywood/LA for 101.) Of course, most trucks over 3 tons aren't headed for Bunker Hill skyscrapers or City Hall, so I-5 leads them pretty close to the wherehouses. I don't think anyone will be happy encouraging trucks to take the 2 and then surface streets like Glendale Blvd.
There really isn't good truck signage. There are signs on 110 north telling trucks that they can't use 110 north of 101, and that they should transfer to 101, but no directive how to get to Pasadena from that point. What is the best way for trucks? Nobody really knows.
Quote from: TheStranger on April 10, 2019, 05:28:01 AM
Quote from: mrsman on April 10, 2019, 02:02:36 AM
210 E of 605 behaves like a radial freeway. It connects to LA via 605 and 10. Yer, it should not get an LA control under any circumstances.
Couldn't an LA control city at least help in encouraging drivers to avoid 10 west and 60 west unless necessary? (Kinda like how I-20 east near Fort Worth has Dallas as a control city even though it does not directly reach the latter city's downtown in its current iteration as a southern bypass) Like say signing 210 between 15 and 605 as Pasadena/Los Angeles and then directing people to use 605 then 10 to reach LA.
This is assuming of course that control city LA only refers to the downtown core; one continuing on the direct west trajectory from 210 to 134 would reach the San Fernando Valley and Hollywood in short order.
The convention in California is to use the downtown as the control city. There are many areas well within the city of Los Angeles, some within 3 miles of Downtown, that still point you to Los Angeles by taking the freeway. See my post earlier regarding Alvarado/101. You are within walking distance of Downtown, yet you are still directed to take the freeway to get to Los Angeles.
A Pasadena control is very good for 210 (all the way from Redlands). It is clear by using Pasadena that the 210 is the key route to get you to the northern SGV and SFV (and by extension, a decent shot at even the northern parts of the LA basin).
210's radial nature is of course due to it taking over the US 66 corridor. US 66, of course used to go to Downtown LA. Nowadays, there is a missing freeway connection from 210 to 110, so signing LA isn't appropriate - although many people will happily drive a few blocks on surface streets in Pasadena to avoid worse congestion on the 10 and 60.
The 91 has a similar problem. The 91's control is Los Angeles, except at 15 and 215 where Beach Cities is used. I recommend that Anaheim be used instead since Beach Cities is ambiguous.
EDIT: Fixed a quote. –Roadfro
In my view, there are three main indications of what is the control city along a highway.
a) The main one is the pull-through signage on BGS. The mainline BGS as well as the control that may be seen from the intersecting highway. In some rare cases, the control city is not the same at different panels, even at the same interchange.
b) The next indication is the city used on signage at the street near an on-ramp.
c) The final indication is on mileage signs on the highway. The control city is usually the last of 3 cities displayed.
WIth that being said, while I know that LA is not used as a control based on criteria a or c, LA is a control based on criteria b at certain signs.
Take a look at this:
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.145963,-117.2805405,3a,75y,274.17h,80.83t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sKkBCrnFRZMYhczZ1yZI43A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
(On-ramp from CA-18 to 210 in San Bernardino uses Los Angeles and Riverside as controls. Presumably, this sign existed before the completion of 210 and directed travelers on the then-30 freeway to use 215 to 10 to reach LA._)
IMO Pasadena works better for most signage on the rest of the corridor.
Quote from: ClassicHasClass on April 05, 2019, 12:03:34 PM
QuoteHaving said that, 210 is the route that actually gets into the heart of San Bernardino!
I'm not sure I buy that. The Crosstown Fwy segment is really through the residential areas north of the city centre and the only highway that goes by the downtown is the 215 (and the rump remainder routing of CA 66). Historically this makes sense anyway: modern I-215 had all the regional through routes on it at one point, i.e., CA 18/US 66/US 91/US 395, which is what you would expect rather than the relatively minor routing CA 30 was back then.
I saw a map at one point that even signed the San Bernardino Fwy designation from I-10 north into San Bernardino along US 395, and then switched to the Barstow Fwy designation after crossing CA 30. I don't think this was ever common public understanding, though.
I want to say that I've seen I-215 between I-10 and CA 259 labeled as the SBD Frwy in at least one Thomas Brothers atlas, and north(west) of CA 259 was the Barstow Frwy. CA 259 itself was just 'Frwy', though as far as I'm concerned, could have been the northernmost fringe of the SBD.
Quote from: mrsman on April 11, 2019, 01:58:02 AM
In my view, there are three main indications of what is the control city along a highway.
a) The main one is the pull-through signage on BGS. The mainline BGS as well as the control that may be seen from the intersecting highway. In some rare cases, the control city is not the same at different panels, even at the same interchange.
b) The next indication is the city used on signage at the street near an on-ramp.
c) The final indication is on mileage signs on the highway. The control city is usually the last of 3 cities displayed.
WIth that being said, while I know that LA is not used as a control based on criteria a or c, LA is a control based on criteria b at certain signs.
Take a look at this:
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.145963,-117.2805405,3a,75y,274.17h,80.83t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sKkBCrnFRZMYhczZ1yZI43A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
(On-ramp from CA-18 to 210 in San Bernardino uses Los Angeles and Riverside as controls. Presumably, this sign existed before the completion of 210 and directed travelers on the then-30 freeway to use 215 to 10 to reach LA._)
IMO Pasadena works better for most signage on the rest of the corridor.
As a kid, my family used to always take that route to visit my grandmother in Lake Arrowhead.
I wonder if that BGS on 30th St is showing LA/Riverside because that ramp leads to the old 30 Freeway that really only connected to 259 South to I-215? That interchange existed WELL before the 210 was completed to the Inland Empire (I believe that stretch of old CA 30 was built in the late 60s?), so Pasadena would never have been a control at that point. All roads led south.
Yes, the sign itself is new(er)--I remember the old button copy signs there at the Waterman/CA 18 interchange with CA 30--but maybe it would have been too much of a hassle (too expensive?) to change to Pasadena.
In fact, if you look at the overhead sign on 30th just east of Waterman, you'll see the button copy there still. The only difference is the addition of the newer 210 shield. Same with the BGS on Waterman north of 30th. It always has said "Los Angeles" & "Riverside".
But...if you look at the sign over NB Waterman just south of 30th, there's a new 210 shield AND a new Pasadena overlay (over Los Angeles).
Quote from: Mark68 on April 11, 2019, 01:20:49 PM
Quote from: mrsman on April 11, 2019, 01:58:02 AM
Take a look at this:
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.145963,-117.2805405,3a,75y,274.17h,80.83t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sKkBCrnFRZMYhczZ1yZI43A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
(On-ramp from CA-18 to 210 in San Bernardino uses Los Angeles and Riverside as controls. Presumably, this sign existed before the completion of 210 and directed travelers on the then-30 freeway to use 215 to 10 to reach LA._)
IMO Pasadena works better for most signage on the rest of the corridor.
As a kid, my family used to always take that route to visit my grandmother in Lake Arrowhead.
I wonder if that BGS on 30th St is showing LA/Riverside because that ramp leads to the old 30 Freeway that really only connected to 259 South to I-215? That interchange existed WELL before the 210 was completed to the Inland Empire (I believe that stretch of old CA 30 was built in the late 60s?), so Pasadena would never have been a control at that point. All roads led south.
Yes, the sign itself is new(er)--I remember the old button copy signs there at the Waterman/CA 18 interchange with CA 30--but maybe it would have been too much of a hassle (too expensive?) to change to Pasadena.
In fact, if you look at the overhead sign on 30th just east of Waterman, you'll see the button copy there still. The only difference is the addition of the newer 210 shield. Same with the BGS on Waterman north of 30th. It always has said "Los Angeles" & "Riverside".
But...if you look at the sign over NB Waterman just south of 30th, there's a new 210 shield AND a new Pasadena overlay (over Los Angeles).
Is this the sign you're referring to? http://www.floodgap.com/roadgap/30-18-259/1/#img_54
As far as the on-ramp on 30th Street, it's pretty much a straight replacement of what was there before, and it did indeed say Los Angeles-Riverside then as well (but signed for CA 30).
Quote from: ClassicHasClass on April 11, 2019, 11:47:00 PM
Quote from: Mark68 on April 11, 2019, 01:20:49 PM
Quote from: mrsman on April 11, 2019, 01:58:02 AM
Take a look at this:
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.145963,-117.2805405,3a,75y,274.17h,80.83t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sKkBCrnFRZMYhczZ1yZI43A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
(On-ramp from CA-18 to 210 in San Bernardino uses Los Angeles and Riverside as controls. Presumably, this sign existed before the completion of 210 and directed travelers on the then-30 freeway to use 215 to 10 to reach LA._)
IMO Pasadena works better for most signage on the rest of the corridor.
As a kid, my family used to always take that route to visit my grandmother in Lake Arrowhead.
I wonder if that BGS on 30th St is showing LA/Riverside because that ramp leads to the old 30 Freeway that really only connected to 259 South to I-215? That interchange existed WELL before the 210 was completed to the Inland Empire (I believe that stretch of old CA 30 was built in the late 60s?), so Pasadena would never have been a control at that point. All roads led south.
Yes, the sign itself is new(er)--I remember the old button copy signs there at the Waterman/CA 18 interchange with CA 30--but maybe it would have been too much of a hassle (too expensive?) to change to Pasadena.
In fact, if you look at the overhead sign on 30th just east of Waterman, you'll see the button copy there still. The only difference is the addition of the newer 210 shield. Same with the BGS on Waterman north of 30th. It always has said "Los Angeles" & "Riverside".
But...if you look at the sign over NB Waterman just south of 30th, there's a new 210 shield AND a new Pasadena overlay (over Los Angeles).
Is this the sign you're referring to? http://www.floodgap.com/roadgap/30-18-259/1/#img_54
As far as the on-ramp on 30th Street, it's pretty much a straight replacement of what was there before, and it did indeed say Los Angeles-Riverside then as well (but signed for CA 30).
The Floodgap website is very interesting about this topic. It has photo proof that the controls for southbound 259 from the old 30 freeway (now 210) were Riverside/Los Angeles as that was the way to get to 215 and eventually to 10. Just like the SB Fwy name went from the 10 to the 215 to reach into SB, the control city on the opposite side seems to do the same thing, in order to guide people from the mountains back to Los Angeles.
I don't believe any part of I-215 itself ever had a Los Angles control though.
I-15 does have an LA control at the two I-215 interchanges (Devore, Murietta) but only as a way to guide traffic away from SB and Riverside. IMO, the SB I-15 should have an LA control all the way from Las Vegas to I-10/I-15. At 15/210, the Los Angeles control should only be seen on the mainline I-15, not the exits from 210. (The existing control of San Diego should also be displayed on all the signs beginning at Devore.
I also believe that given current routing, the 259 freeways should be renumbered as an extension of CA 18. This means removing signage and decommissioning any CA-18 signs on surface streets in SB south of the 210 freeway. The 18 should be signed from Waterman to the 210 freeway to the 259 freeway and end at the 259/215 interchange. Then, the 259 number can be removed for good and replaced with 18. NB signed as CA 18 to 210 East: Highland, Mtn Resorts. SB signed as CA 18 to 215 south Riverside. I like when freeways are signed with their correct number, and that freeways be part of longer highways to the extent possible, and not just some forgettable random number like 259.
(There are quite a few other similar small freeway stubs that are unsigned. The stub at teh I-80/Biz-80 interchange to Auburn Way in NE Sacramento and whatever number is assinged to the Tower Bridge in Sacramento also come to mind.)
Quote from: mrsman on April 12, 2019, 12:52:17 PM
(There are quite a few other similar small freeway stubs that are unsigned. The stub at teh I-80/Biz-80 interchange to Auburn Way in NE Sacramento and whatever number is assinged to the Tower Bridge in Sacramento also come to mind.)
The former is Route 244 and has zero exits between 80/Business 80 and Auburn Boulevard. Essentially an offramp, though a pretty useful one.
The Tower Bridge numbering, Route 275, now only applies to the bridge itself (for years it also covered the short former US 99W/US 40 freeway west to I-80 in West Sacramento, and Capitol Mall east to the state capitol itself in downtown Sacramento, where 40/99W and at one point Route 16 all used to turn off to other surface streets). The portion of road between the Jefferson Boulevard interchange and the bridge is no longer freeway though, due to a late-2000s conversion project to surface boulevard.
QuoteI don't believe any part of I-215 itself ever had a Los Angles control though.
Never seen one, no. It was always I-15 even in the I-15E/CA 215 days that was signed "to LA."
Quote from: ClassicHasClass on April 11, 2019, 11:47:00 PM
Quote from: Mark68 on April 11, 2019, 01:20:49 PM
Quote from: mrsman on April 11, 2019, 01:58:02 AM
Take a look at this:
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.145963,-117.2805405,3a,75y,274.17h,80.83t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sKkBCrnFRZMYhczZ1yZI43A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
(On-ramp from CA-18 to 210 in San Bernardino uses Los Angeles and Riverside as controls. Presumably, this sign existed before the completion of 210 and directed travelers on the then-30 freeway to use 215 to 10 to reach LA._)
IMO Pasadena works better for most signage on the rest of the corridor.
As a kid, my family used to always take that route to visit my grandmother in Lake Arrowhead.
I wonder if that BGS on 30th St is showing LA/Riverside because that ramp leads to the old 30 Freeway that really only connected to 259 South to I-215? That interchange existed WELL before the 210 was completed to the Inland Empire (I believe that stretch of old CA 30 was built in the late 60s?), so Pasadena would never have been a control at that point. All roads led south.
Yes, the sign itself is new(er)--I remember the old button copy signs there at the Waterman/CA 18 interchange with CA 30--but maybe it would have been too much of a hassle (too expensive?) to change to Pasadena.
In fact, if you look at the overhead sign on 30th just east of Waterman, you'll see the button copy there still. The only difference is the addition of the newer 210 shield. Same with the BGS on Waterman north of 30th. It always has said "Los Angeles" & "Riverside".
But...if you look at the sign over NB Waterman just south of 30th, there's a new 210 shield AND a new Pasadena overlay (over Los Angeles).
Is this the sign you're referring to? http://www.floodgap.com/roadgap/30-18-259/1/#img_54
As far as the on-ramp on 30th Street, it's pretty much a straight replacement of what was there before, and it did indeed say Los Angeles-Riverside then as well (but signed for CA 30).
That's the one. Current GSV (April 2018) shows a 210 overlaying the previous 30 and Pasadena overlaying the previous LA. But that's the only sign at that interchange that shows Pasadena.
https://goo.gl/maps/FtZe6XMWgtP2
The one over here appears to be quite new (i.e. they didn't simply replace the 30 shield with a 210 shield)
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.145963,-117.2805405,3a,75y,287.09h,93.77t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sKkBCrnFRZMYhczZ1yZI43A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Here is another example of questionable use of control city.
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0426449,-118.2162849,3a,75y,309.56h,87.32t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1se4cDrsLBS6HjWEPritYr9A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
This shot was taken on E. 4th Street in Boyle Heights at the I-5 onramps. Signage indicates going straight for I-5 south to Santa Ana and turning right for I-5 north to Los Angeles.
This is incorrect for multiple reasons. First, you can reach Downtown directly by just keep driving on 4th street (which leads to 3rd street) for 1.5 miles. Second, if you want to take a freeway to the heart of Downtown, you need to take US 101, not I-5. You can't reach Us 101 by going on this ramp at this point. You will need to take 4th to Boyle to 1st to the 101 north. Third, as an alternate to Downtown you can also use the I-10 Santa Monica Freeway*, but to reach I-10 from this point, you will need to take I-5 south, not I-5 north.
Of course, as most on here know, the proper control for this section of I-5 Golden State Fwy is Sacramento, not L.A.
* By convention, the Santa Monica Freeway does not have a westbound control of Los Angeles from the E LA interchange through the wherehouse districts. This is because at the time of construction, I-10 was built through the industrial southern edge of Downtown and US 101 already reached the Civic Center and the heart of the business district. But now, the popular parts of Downtown have expanded to reach I-10 and beyond, so it is not out of the question to use I-10 to reach the southern parts of Downtown like Staples Center. Upthread, it was mentioned that some trucks coming down I-5 from Burbank would need guidance in this area to take I-5 south to I-10 west to Downtown, because they are not allowed to use CA-110.
I remember I-80 in San Francisco at the James Lick freeway had at one time had the control city of "US-101 Civic Center" for the northbound direction but that was when a double Decker section of the Central Freeway was there.
What I find most interesting is that on my visit to Southern California in 1988 I-10 had several control cities going EB from LA. San Bernardino, Riverside, Palm Springs, and Indio. In San Diego I-5 going SB had none, and coming from Tijuana at the I-5 and I-805 split that I-805 gets no control city at all!
Then I-405 uses local places but heading north out of LA it uses a far away city such as Sacramento. Then I-5 also uses Sacramento going NB but uses Santa Ana going SB instead of San Diego.
They are alot like NC using different points along the way with no consistency.
^ I think you can attribute the lack of consistency to a couple different Caltrans district offices overseeing projects on the various highways, without having a agency-wide standard for determining control cities.
Quote from: roadman65 on April 16, 2019, 10:57:27 PM
What I find most interesting is that on my visit to Southern California in 1988 I-10 had several control cities going EB from LA. San Bernardino, Riverside, Palm Springs, and Indio. In San Diego I-5 going SB had none, and coming from Tijuana at the I-5 and I-805 split that I-805 gets no control city at all!
Then I-405 uses local places but heading north out of LA it uses a far away city such as Sacramento. Then I-5 also uses Sacramento going NB but uses Santa Ana going SB instead of San Diego.
They are alot like NC using different points along the way with no consistency.
I believe there is no control city on I-805 because it spends the entirety of its existence within the city limits of San Diego.
Quote from: bing101 on April 16, 2019, 10:40:15 PM
I remember I-80 in San Francisco at the James Lick freeway had at one time had the control city of "US-101 Civic Center" for the northbound direction but that was when a double Decker section of the Central Freeway was there.
80 west has 8th Street marked as the "Civic Center" exit and US 101 north/Central Freeway with a control of "Golden Gate Bridge."
Quote from: Mark68
I believe there is no control city on I-805 because it spends the entirety of its existence within the city limits of San Diego.
805 does pass through a significant portion of the suburb of Chula Vista, as well as the eastern half of National City.
Quote from: TheStranger on April 17, 2019, 01:47:56 PM
Quote from: Mark68
I believe there is no control city on I-805 because it spends the entirety of its existence within the city limits of San Diego.
805 does pass through a significant portion of the suburb of Chula Vista, as well as the eastern half of National City.
Yeah, you're right about that. I had completely forgotten/wasn't looking at a map at the time. One thing they *could* do is sign control cities on I-805 (or routes like it) like CDOT does here--in other words, as a short cut to another freeway that gets you somewhere (like both ends of 805 could be signed to El Cajon, since it is a shorter route from points north and south to get to 54/94/I-8/52, or 805 Northbound could be signed to Riverside at least until I-15).
Fixed quote. –Roadfro
Quote from: Mark68 on April 17, 2019, 03:14:08 PM
Yeah, you're right about that. I had completely forgotten/wasn't looking at a map at the time. One thing they *could* do is sign control cities on I-805 (or routes like it) like CDOT does here--in other words, as a short cut to another freeway that gets you somewhere (like both ends of 805 could be signed to El Cajon, since it is a shorter route from points north and south to get to 54/94/I-8/52, or 805 Northbound could be signed to Riverside at least until I-15).
805 would work nicely signed for say like Santa Ana/Los Angeles as far south as the San Ysidro split, then for connecting suburbs like El Cajon. Could even use I-15's control of Escondido too as 805 is the most direct way to reach 15 from the border.
I think some of the things that affected LA control city choices - freeways being built from the downtown core first towards other suburbs - also to an extent exist in San Diego, where local destinations are preferred over long-distance ones except for LA and El Centro.
Quote from: TheStranger on April 17, 2019, 01:47:56 PM
Quote from: bing101 on April 16, 2019, 10:40:15 PM
I remember I-80 in San Francisco at the James Lick freeway had at one time had the control city of "US-101 Civic Center" for the northbound direction but that was when a double Decker section of the Central Freeway was there.
80 west has 8th Street marked as the "Civic Center" exit and US 101 north/Central Freeway with a control of "Golden Gate Bridge."
If you Look at this 1992 video at :16 I-80 and US-101 used to have a control city of "Civic Center" in San Francisco once you reach the former CA-480 @ I-80 interchange on James Lick though. Also 3:18 is where Civic Center is its control city along with Golden Gate Bridge on US-101 when Central Freeway was there.
Quote from: bing101 on April 17, 2019, 06:27:18 PM
If you Look at this 1992 video at :16 I-80 and US-101 used to have a control city of "Civic Center" in San Francisco once you reach the former CA-480 @ I-80 interchange on James Lick though.
Watching the video, the I-80/US 101 co-signage at what is now the Fremont Street exit doesn't specify anything about US 101 north or south. (I have always suspected that that was a vestige of the brief 1960s period when 101 and 80 were planned to run concurrent on the Central Freeway up to Fell Street). The offramp at 8th, as is still the case today, is signed Ninth Street/Civic Center. However, the 101 San Jose/Civic Center JUNCTION 1 MILE sign approaching the offramp seems to be long gone - with 80 west generally signed past Fremont Street as "US 101 SOUTH San Jose" now.
At least one of the new southbound BGSs at the northern 5-805 split has Chula Vista as a control city for 805 south. Other BGSs along the same stretch have no control city listed.
Sort of like the new signage along the 10 and 60 for the 57. Most list no control city for the 57. One lists "to 210" . But one advance BGS on the 60 east lists San Dimas as a control city as does a BGS on the transition road from the 10 east.
Quote from: Mark68 on April 17, 2019, 03:14:08 PM
Quote from: TheStranger on April 17, 2019, 01:47:56 PM
Quote from: Mark68
I believe there is no control city on I-805 because it spends the entirety of its existence within the city limits of San Diego.
805 does pass through a significant portion of the suburb of Chula Vista, as well as the eastern half of National City.
Yeah, you're right about that. I had completely forgotten/wasn't looking at a map at the time. One thing they *could* do is sign control cities on I-805 (or routes like it) like CDOT does here--in other words, as a short cut to another freeway that gets you somewhere (like both ends of 805 could be signed to El Cajon, since it is a shorter route from points north and south to get to 54/94/I-8/52, or 805 Northbound could be signed to Riverside at least until I-15).
I note that is the "Midwestern" approach to control cities for Beltways. Take St. Louis for instance. The 2di's in StL are all pointed to fairly large control cities like Chicago, Kansas City, Memphis, Tulsa, Indianapolis, and Louisville. The beltway is also signed for some of these cities, depending upon where you get it, even though of course the beltway doesn't actually reach those cities - but gets you to a2di that does. Atlanta is another good example of this type of control city designation.
In California, to an extent, the 405 does the same thing. The 405's main controls of Sacramento, Santa Monica, Long Beach*, and San Diego are not reached by driving on the highway itself. Rather, driving on the 405 will lead you to another freeway that will get you to that city (I-5 north, I-10 west, I-710 south or CA 22 west, and I-5 south).
* Yes, the 405 does go through Long Beach, but doesn't reach Downtown. In current signing practice traffic to LB is directed to either 710 south or 22 west.
Fixed quote. –Roadfro
Quote from: Occidental Tourist on April 17, 2019, 09:12:31 PM
At least one of the new southbound BGSs at the northern 5-805 split has Chula Vista as a control city for 805 south. Other BGSs along the same stretch have no control city listed.
Sort of like the new signage along the 10 and 60 for the 57. Most list no control city for the 57. One lists "to 210" . But one advance BGS on the 60 east lists San Dimas as a control city as does a BGS on the transition road from the 10 east.
San Dimas is a fine control for 57 north and should be used on the mainline and from 60 EB and 10 EB.
From 10 WB, I'll go out on a limb and say that the [primary] control should be Pasadena. This was the control when this section of road was I-210. Since the road didn't change (only the number), the road can still get you to Pasadena as before and given the 710 gap remains the best way to reach Pasadena coming from the eastern 10. It's too much backtracking to be considered on WB offramaps of 10.
At the I-8 junction, I-805 is signed for Nat'l City and Chula Juana Vista.
Quote from: ClassicHasClass on April 18, 2019, 07:45:40 AM
At the I-8 junction, I-805 is signed for Nat'l City and Chula Juana Vista.
Those are fine controls for 805. Those can be the southbound controls fro, I-5 to CA 54. Even though I-5 also goes through those cities (and arguably goes closer to the downtown of those cities) by signing those cities at the northern 5/805, you are denoting that 805 is a bypass of Downtown SD to access those cities.
For those familiar with Delaware, there is similar signage where 95 and 495 split. 95 to Wilmington [denoting the route to Downtown W] and 495 to Philadelphia (or Baltimore if SB) denoting the bypass route. Both 95 and 495 can be used at the split to reach Philadelphia (or Baltimore if SB) but 495 is the bypass of Downtown W.
In a similar vein, 805's NB control should be L.A. for its entire length (even at the Mexican border).
Quote from: AndyMax25 on March 30, 2019, 11:56:28 AM
D7 still refers to this 1982 map, with reference to 1964, when working on sign projects in 2019. Go figure.
When discussing the new signs along the Hollywood and Santa Ana (US-101) freeways in downtown they decided to remove Hollywood and put Ventura. (https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190330/8f8e5f97930b640f893beb0ccafd7bb2.jpg)
One thing I don't get about this is if I-105 can get El Segundo and Norwalk, how come I-605 can't get Duarte and Seal Beach? They're all suburbs.
Quote from: SeriesE on April 19, 2019, 01:38:54 AM
Quote from: AndyMax25 on March 30, 2019, 11:56:28 AM
D7 still refers to this 1982 map, with reference to 1964, when working on sign projects in 2019. Go figure.
When discussing the new signs along the Hollywood and Santa Ana (US-101) freeways in downtown they decided to remove Hollywood and put Ventura. (https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190330/8f8e5f97930b640f893beb0ccafd7bb2.jpg)
One thing I don't get about this is if I-105 can get El Segundo and Norwalk, how come I-605 can't get Duarte and Seal Beach? They're all suburbs.
You are right. IMO, control cities should be large well known cities. But where none exist on the routing, using a suburb, even if not well known, is far better than using nothing.
Another question would be whether if Duarte or Seal Beach are not good, then maybe we can at least use Norwalk as a SB control from 210, 10, and 60 and a NB control from 405 and 91? Why is Norwalk a good control for the 105, but not the 605?
IIRC, on original planning, the 105's western control was originally supposed to be "LA Airport" not El Segundo, but given that the final routing did not directly connect into the airport (the aerial structure over Sepulveda/Century) they decided to use El Segundo instead.
I do not see why Tijuana cannot be used for I-5 and I-805 S Bound. Even in Mexico they use San Diego as a control city to cross the border.
Or do what they do at most places in Michigan crossing into Canada and use the country as a control city. From Downtown San Diego use Mexico as at least that is some place over none.
I-105 used to use LAX before El Segundo was used, but now its back to using Century Blvd to the terminals from I-405 despite its unfreeway like demeanor.
I wonder if coming off Cajon Pass near San Bernardino now uses San Diego for I-15 S Bound along with Los Angeles as in 1988 San Diego was control point for I-215 do to the I-15 freeway being incomplete south of CA 60. At the split of I-15 and I-215 in 88 no mention of I-215 to I-15 to circumnavigate the gap was used. Only the mention that San Diego was a control city for I-215 along with San Bernardino as LA was sole control for I-15 SB. I say this because I-215 could still be a better choice for through traffic going all the way on I-15, as I do not know the counts of traffic for either two interstate legs.
Quote from: roadman65 on April 23, 2019, 11:33:11 PM
I wonder if coming off Cajon Pass near San Bernardino now uses San Diego for I-15 S Bound along with Los Angeles as in 1988 San Diego was control point for I-215 do to the I-15 freeway being incomplete south of CA 60. At the split of I-15 and I-215 in 88 no mention of I-215 to I-15 to circumnavigate the gap was used. Only the mention that San Diego was a control city for I-215 along with San Bernardino as LA was sole control for I-15 SB. I say this because I-215 could still be a better choice for through traffic going all the way on I-15, as I do not know the counts of traffic for either two interstate legs.
San Diego is one of the I-15 control cities at the 15/215 junction in Devore:
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.2361299,-117.4249169,3a,75y,121.79h,90.7t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sLYHuBL9u_nici3y7AUIrtA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Even though it is slightly shorter, 215's section from Riverside to Moreno Valley concurrent with 60 is a bit of a traffic bottleneck.
Quote from: roadman65 on April 23, 2019, 11:33:11 PM
I do not see why Tijuana cannot be used for I-5 and I-805 S Bound. Even in Mexico they use San Diego as a control city to cross the border.
Agreed. This is the best approach. In Seattle, Vancouver BC is the northbound control - the next big city to the north, even though it is over the border (and not even right on the border). I see no excuse for not posting any control city, if the road continues, it reaches somewhere.
Quote from: roadman65 on April 23, 2019, 11:33:11 PM
Or do what they do at most places in Michigan crossing into Canada and use the country as a control city. From Downtown San Diego use Mexico as at least that is some place over none.
I-105 used to use LAX before El Segundo was used, but now its back to using Century Blvd to the terminals from I-405 despite its unfreeway like demeanor.
Another issue is the exit from 105 to Sepulveda to LAX. Only one traffic light you face from the exit to the Airport loop, but this traffic light causes major backups, even onto 105 itself. It's a terrible design. They would've been better off if the freeway were run above Century, instead of Imperial, west of the 405. The 105 should've lead directly to LAX, similar to other Airport stub freeways like I-195 into Baltimore's airport or I-678 into JFK.
If you are coming from the east, at times it is best to use a surface street connection: 105-Aviation-Century. But there is a lot of construction of the new light rail now, so it's anyone's guess as to how best to get to LAX.
Quote from: roadman65 on April 23, 2019, 11:33:11 PM
I wonder if coming off Cajon Pass near San Bernardino now uses San Diego for I-15 S Bound along with Los Angeles as in 1988 San Diego was control point for I-215 do to the I-15 freeway being incomplete south of CA 60. At the split of I-15 and I-215 in 88 no mention of I-215 to I-15 to circumnavigate the gap was used. Only the mention that San Diego was a control city for I-215 along with San Bernardino as LA was sole control for I-15 SB. I say this because I-215 could still be a better choice for through traffic going all the way on I-15, as I do not know the counts of traffic for either two interstate legs.
As Stranger pointed out, I-15 has a SD control as well as LA. I-15 is far better choice for through traffic, not going into SB or Riverside. IMO, very good signage needs to be placed along I-15 that guides L.A. bound traffic to I-10 and CA-60. Even if the LA control is not used at the 15/210 and 15/91 interchanges, a sign should tell people that they need to continue on I-15 as the best way to reach LA.
Any ideas for the use of control cities in the San Diego area? I looked around on GSV and was surprised at how little control cities are being used. There are many panels without control cities. 52, 56, 54, and 94 seem to have almost no control city signage and I know that there is no control city for SB I-15 south of 163.
CA 125 neither. About the only places I see control cities consistently signed are on the Interstates, and even then biased more to the directions out of town rather than south and west.
Quote from: Mark68 on April 17, 2019, 12:12:44 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on April 16, 2019, 10:57:27 PM
What I find most interesting is that on my visit to Southern California in 1988 I-10 had several control cities going EB from LA. San Bernardino, Riverside, Palm Springs, and Indio. In San Diego I-5 going SB had none, and coming from Tijuana at the I-5 and I-805 split that I-805 gets no control city at all!
Then I-405 uses local places but heading north out of LA it uses a far away city such as Sacramento. Then I-5 also uses Sacramento going NB but uses Santa Ana going SB instead of San Diego.
They are alot like NC using different points along the way with no consistency.
I believe there is no control city on I-805 because it spends the entirety of its existence within the city limits of San Diego.
With all due respect, Los Angeles is a control city on Interstate 805 at the Junction with SR-163
Quote from: Joshua Whitman on December 08, 2019, 05:52:14 AM
Quote from: Mark68 on April 17, 2019, 12:12:44 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on April 16, 2019, 10:57:27 PM
What I find most interesting is that on my visit to Southern California in 1988 I-10 had several control cities going EB from LA. San Bernardino, Riverside, Palm Springs, and Indio. In San Diego I-5 going SB had none, and coming from Tijuana at the I-5 and I-805 split that I-805 gets no control city at all!
Then I-405 uses local places but heading north out of LA it uses a far away city such as Sacramento. Then I-5 also uses Sacramento going NB but uses Santa Ana going SB instead of San Diego.
They are alot like NC using different points along the way with no consistency.
I believe there is no control city on I-805 because it spends the entirety of its existence within the city limits of San Diego.
With all due respect, Los Angeles is a control city on Interstate 805 at the Junction with SR-163
The recent sign replacement project has established control cities for 5 southbound within San Diego County as follows:
San Diego
Downtown
Chula Vista
San Ysidro
805 southbound is generally signed now for Chula Vista starting at the split from Interstate 5.
15 south now has National City as the control from 8 southward.
Control cities south of downtown on 5 are new as of 2019.
Regards,
Andy
www.aaroads.com
I'm glad to see more control cities being used in San Diego. Now they need to address some of the non interstate freeways.
Nexus 5X
Quote from: andy3175 on December 08, 2019, 02:59:06 PM
The recent sign replacement project has established control cities for 5 southbound within San Diego County as follows:
San Diego
Downtown
Chula Vista
San Ysidro
805 southbound is generally signed now for Chula Vista starting at the split from Interstate 5.
15 south now has National City as the control from 8 southward.
Control cities south of downtown on 5 are new as of 2019.
Regards,
Andy
www.aaroads.com
South of either 54 or 905, does 805's control city southbound change from Chula Vista to San Ysidro?
Quote from: mrsman on May 11, 2019, 11:44:56 PM
Any ideas for the use of control cities in the San Diego area? I looked around on GSV and was surprised at how little control cities are being used. There are many panels without control cities. 52, 56, 54, and 94 seem to have almost no control city signage and I know that there is no control city for SB I-15 south of 163.
In San Jose, CASR-87 often has no particular control city (especially southbound south of downtown). It would be reasonable to say that CASR-51 (signed as "business 80") in Sacramento (especially southbound) has none as well. Neither of these routes crosses a county line (and may not ever exit a city). It is difficult to post a reasonable "control city" for a route that stays within the same city.
Quote from: michravera on December 12, 2019, 10:32:36 PM
In San Jose, CASR-87 often has no particular control city (especially southbound south of downtown). It would be reasonable to say that CASR-51 (signed as "business 80") in Sacramento (especially southbound) has none as well. Neither of these routes crosses a county line (and may not ever exit a city). It is difficult to post a reasonable "control city" for a route that stays within the same city.
Business 80 west (51 south) is signed for Sacramento at the split with I-80 near the Watt Avenue exit, though not sure there are any other destinations before the current terminus at US 50.
IIRC eastbound Business 80 has always been signed for Reno.
Quote from: michravera on December 12, 2019, 10:32:36 PM
In San Jose, CASR-87 often has no particular control city (especially southbound south of downtown). It would be reasonable to say that CASR-51 (signed as "business 80") in Sacramento (especially southbound) has none as well. Neither of these routes crosses a county line (and may not ever exit a city). It is difficult to post a reasonable "control city" for a route that stays within the same city.
This sign on the exit from I-280 south has the San Jose airport and "To CA 85" listed, which seem like reasonable choices to me.
(https://i.imgur.com/BP06u0t.png)
I have always felt that control cities are very important and helpful way to guide traffic along the freeways to their destinations. Ideally, use nationally recognized cities, then large cities, regional cities, suburbs, and if nothing unique is applicable, the street (or intersecting highway) at the end of the freeway.
Remember, the freeway itself does not have to go to the control city, it just has to lead to a freeway that does. This is why having 405 north (or 170 north) to Sacramento is reasonable and helpful.
I agree that the posted sign for CA-87 at I-280 has reasonable controls, to SJ Airport and to CA-85 (although my preference would be to use Gilroy, the southbound control for 85).
As far as Biz-80/CA-51 southbound, south of the CA-160 split, the signs should read Biz-80 (is it westbound or southbound) to US 50 and CA-99 with both San Francisco and Fresno as controls. Similar signage should follow the freeway until the Oak Park Interchange.
EDITED TO ADD: With that being said, there is generally very little to complain about with regard to Bay Area control cities. They seem to be used on practically every freeway and IMO they generally use the right choice of cities.
Quote from: mrsman on December 13, 2019, 09:49:58 AM
As far as Biz-80/CA-51 southbound, south of the CA-160 split, the signs should read Biz-80 (is it westbound or southbound) to US 50 and CA-99 with both San Francisco and Fresno as controls. Similar signage should follow the freeway until the Oak Park Interchange.
South of the American River, I think the Business 80 pullthrough signage has ceased completely (as US 50 west of Oak Park is no longer part of the route). Instead this is what it looks like as of this year:
https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5798905,-121.464527,3a,15.5y,194.6h,96.78t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1slbRNAmMYRQo4i8CogNT7bQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Quote from: TheStranger on December 13, 2019, 03:21:00 PM
Quote from: mrsman on December 13, 2019, 09:49:58 AM
As far as Biz-80/CA-51 southbound, south of the CA-160 split, the signs should read Biz-80 (is it westbound or southbound) to US 50 and CA-99 with both San Francisco and Fresno as controls. Similar signage should follow the freeway until the Oak Park Interchange.
South of the American River, I think the Business 80 pullthrough signage has ceased completely (as US 50 west of Oak Park is no longer part of the route). Instead this is what it looks like as of this year:
https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5798905,-121.464527,3a,15.5y,194.6h,96.78t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1slbRNAmMYRQo4i8CogNT7bQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
That point is close enough to the Oak Park Interchange that you don't need to mention Biz-80 anymore.
Similarly, for a long time, the south end of US 101 was not referenced on the BGSes. Instead you had signage of 10 San Bernardino / 5 Santa Ana starting from the 110 Freeway. In recent years, this was changed to 101 south to 5/10/60 with no control cities at all. (Although one or two of the old signs may still exist at times).
As far as Sacramento goes, it is interesting that there is no real consensus on the control for 50 east. You see signs for both Placerville and South Lake Tahoe used interchangeably.
Here is a great on-ramp sign with control cities off Exposition Blvd, using both San Francisco and Fresno.
https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5978352,-121.446852,3a,75y,110.37h,73.78t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sxuol4-Tae9dFFyrMe_kFlQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
It seems that in the Arden Blvd area, most of the on-ramps for Biz-80 use San Francisco as a control, a legacy of the route being I-80, and encouraging Downtown Sac traffic to use CA-160 (which of course was once the old US 40 routing).
IMO, as many signs as possible in the area should use both Fresno and San Francisco, especially those that have room and are currently reading "Capital City Freeway".
Quote from: mrsman on December 14, 2019, 06:53:17 PM
Quote from: TheStranger on December 13, 2019, 03:21:00 PM
Quote from: mrsman on December 13, 2019, 09:49:58 AM
As far as Biz-80/CA-51 southbound, south of the CA-160 split, the signs should read Biz-80 (is it westbound or southbound) to US 50 and CA-99 with both San Francisco and Fresno as controls. Similar signage should follow the freeway until the Oak Park Interchange.
South of the American River, I think the Business 80 pullthrough signage has ceased completely (as US 50 west of Oak Park is no longer part of the route). Instead this is what it looks like as of this year:
https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5798905,-121.464527,3a,15.5y,194.6h,96.78t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1slbRNAmMYRQo4i8CogNT7bQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
That point is close enough to the Oak Park Interchange that you don't need to mention Biz-80 anymore.
Similarly, for a long time, the south end of US 101 was not referenced on the BGSes. Instead you had signage of 10 San Bernardino / 5 Santa Ana starting from the 110 Freeway. In recent years, this was changed to 101 south to 5/10/60 with no control cities at all. (Although one or two of the old signs may still exist at times).
As far as Sacramento goes, it is interesting that there is no real consensus on the control for 50 east. You see signs for both Placerville and South Lake Tahoe used interchangeably.
Here is a great on-ramp sign with control cities off Exposition Blvd, using both San Francisco and Fresno.
https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5978352,-121.446852,3a,75y,110.37h,73.78t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sxuol4-Tae9dFFyrMe_kFlQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
It seems that in the Arden Blvd area, most of the on-ramps for Biz-80 use San Francisco as a control, a legacy of the route being I-80, and encouraging Downtown Sac traffic to use CA-160 (which of course was once the old US 40 routing).
IMO, as many signs as possible in the area should use both Fresno and San Francisco, especially those that have room and are currently reading "Capital City Freeway".
"San Francisco / Fresno / South Lake Tahoe / Placerville"
Quote from: mrsman on December 13, 2019, 09:49:58 AM
I have always felt that control cities are very important and helpful way to guide traffic along the freeways to their destinations. Ideally, use nationally recognized cities, then large cities, regional cities, suburbs, and if nothing unique is applicable, the street (or intersecting highway) at the end of the freeway.
Remember, the freeway itself does not have to go to the control city, it just has to lead to a freeway that does. This is why having 405 north (or 170 north) to Sacramento is reasonable and helpful.
It does help that 405 and 170 terminate at I-5 northbound.
One control city I do not understand is using Los Angeles for 91 West in orange County. From Riverside, most drivers use 60 west. From Corona, most drivers use 91 west to 71 north, which connects to 60 and 10. And it did not seem to be a legacy control city for its predecessor route in the area. (I-15 southbound uses Los Angeles because US 66, a predecessor route, actually reached downtown Los Angeles!)
Quote from: dbz77 on December 14, 2019, 10:04:27 PM
One control city I do not understand is using Los Angeles for 91 West in orange County. From Riverside, most drivers use 60 west. From Corona, most drivers use 91 west to 71 north, which connects to 60 and 10. And it did not seem to be a legacy control city for its predecessor route in the area. (I-15 southbound uses Los Angeles because US 66, a predecessor route, actually reached downtown Los Angeles!)
An example of LA as Route 91's control city westbound:
https://www.google.com/maps/@33.849059,-117.8167658,3a,75y,246.84h,91.53t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sGgj6Iob2klbF8f8i98jC1g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
My guess is that it is used in part because it links to I-5 north but Long Beach or Gardena would be much more obvious westbound control choices IMO.
The Riverside Fwy portion (east of I-5) is older than the Artesia/Gardena/Redondo Beach Fwy portions. When the 91 terminated at I-5, it made sense that L.A. was the control.
In the Inland Empire, some of the controls read "Beach Cities" to distinguish from L.A., in order to encourage traffic heading to L.A. to use CA-60 or I-10, which are far more direct. There is some dispute as to what "Beach Cities" could refer to, it could refer to the OC beaches like Newport Beach (especially if you consider that 55's north control is/was Riverside), it could refer to US 91's original terminus of Long Beach (the 91 freeway still goes through the very northern portion of LB, but traffic is still encouraged to continue on 710), or it could refer to the South Bay Beach cities like Hermosa or Redondo (the freeway ends at Artesia Blvd which continues towards those cities).
My preference is in Riverside County, the westbound control should be Anaheim. In OC, east of I-5, the control should continue to be L.A. West of I-5, the control should be Gardena, as that is where the freeway ends.
In eastern OC, even though 91 does not go directly to L.A., it is still the most direct way of heading there. Given the hills separating OC from Pomona, L.A. traffic in eastern Anaheim should take 91 to I-5, and not try to take 57 or a local canyon to 60. I do see the argument for making Gardena the control in eastern OC, but since L.A. is so far better known, it should take precedence, even though you have to transfer to I-5 to actually get there. IMO, this would be particularly helpful as there may be some lost Disney tourists all over Anaheim who will love guidance to get them back to L.A.
At 91/71, I agree that in order to discourage traffic through Santa Ana Canyon, Downtown L.A. bound traffic should take 71 to 60. In SoCal, a control usually refers to the city's downtown, as we see that there are many freeways with L.A. controls well within L.A. city limits. Of course, even from the Inland Empire, there are plenty of places that one would consider "L.A." whether part of the city or not, where 91 would make sense, particularly traffic to the Harbor or even LAX may prefer 91 to 60, depending on traffic conditions.
Quote from: mrsman on December 15, 2019, 11:03:29 AM
The Riverside Fwy portion (east of I-5) is older than the Artesia/Gardena/Redondo Beach Fwy portions. When the 91 terminated at I-5, it made sense that L.A. was the control.
Hmmmmm, so that explains why before the 5/91 interchange was rebuilt in the 90s, WB 91 to NB 5 was a left exit.
Quote from: JustDrive on December 30, 2019, 04:40:42 AM
Quote from: mrsman on December 15, 2019, 11:03:29 AM
The Riverside Fwy portion (east of I-5) is older than the Artesia/Gardena/Redondo Beach Fwy portions. When the 91 terminated at I-5, it made sense that L.A. was the control.
Hmmmmm, so that explains why before the 5/91 interchange was rebuilt in the 90s, WB 91 to NB 5 was a left exit.
I believe so. At many Ys, they were designed with left exits and entrances as a cost-saving measure. Cheaper than makig a full-fledged flyover. There were a lot of left entrances along the entire 101 freeway, including the old Santa Ana Fwy. The Long Beach fwy and Firestone exits are also on the left.
The WB 91 to NB 5 was a left exit because the 91 originally terminated as a merge into the right-hand lanes of the 5 north, not as a cost-saving measure. When the Artesia Freeway portion of the 91 was built, they built the mainline lanes for continuing onto the 91 as a new bridge to the right of and crossing over the preexisting lanes merging down to the 5.
Prior to the Artesia Freeway being built, the SB 5 did use a left exit to the EB Riverside Freeway portion of the 91. This was sort of a cost-saving measure insomuch as the 5 had the Union Pacific tracks to its immediate south (still does) and so there wasn't much right of way for a right-side transition ramp and flyover.
Quote from: mrsman on December 30, 2019, 06:07:45 PM
Quote from: JustDrive on December 30, 2019, 04:40:42 AM
Quote from: mrsman on December 15, 2019, 11:03:29 AM
The Riverside Fwy portion (east of I-5) is older than the Artesia/Gardena/Redondo Beach Fwy portions. When the 91 terminated at I-5, it made sense that L.A. was the control.
Hmmmmm, so that explains why before the 5/91 interchange was rebuilt in the 90s, WB 91 to NB 5 was a left exit.
I believe so. At many Ys, they were designed with left exits and entrances as a cost-saving measure. Cheaper than makig a full-fledged flyover. There were a lot of left entrances along the entire 101 freeway, including the old Santa Ana Fwy. The Long Beach fwy and Firestone exits are also on the left.
IIRC wasn't the Long Beach Freeway left exit from the Santa Ana Freeway primarily also to maximize limited right of way?
The (now removed) exit from I-5 north to Route 42 (Firestone) west I think was a vestige, to some extent, of when Firestone Boulevard west of there and the Manchester Avenue segment east of there (now the Santa Ana Freeway frontage road) was all part of 1934-1950s Route 10.