I was wondering two things about the 210,
1. When is the portion from the 57 East to the 10 going to be signed as Interstate 210?
2. Why is the Control City on 210 East only Redlands, why doesn't a mileage sign or overhead sign, mention Palm Springs or Indio, as that is the next Control point for Interstate 10 east. Similiar to how Sacramento becomes the control point on 210 west towards the 5 in Newhall.
Haven't heard anything on CA-210/I-210 for ages. I went on CA 210 within the last month, and it was still CA 210.
I'm wondering if Caltrans is waiting to complete the route 905 freeway in near the US/Mexico border and then submit both routes to AASHTO for inclusion in the Interstate system.
I was just on the 210 from Redlands to Pasadena, a couple of weeks ago, and it's still CA 210, but there is one overpass, with a sign that has an Interstate Sheild and an arrow Saying 210 San Bernardino, near the LA/SBD County line.
Post Merge: March 16, 2012, 11:45:39 AM
Quote from: myosh_tino on March 16, 2012, 05:06:07 AM
I'm wondering if Caltrans is waiting to complete the route 905 freeway in near the US/Mexico border and then submit both routes to AASHTO for inclusion in the Interstate system.
I'm not very familiar with how Caltran's works, so sorry if this is a dumb question, do they like to try to submit more then one freeway at once into the Interstae system, or wait until another project is finished to submit them both?
I thought the plan was to finish up all the construction at the 210/215 interchange, before applying for AASHTO approval?
Quote from: oscar on March 16, 2012, 07:30:48 AM
I thought the plan was to finish up all the construction at the 210/215 interchange, before applying for AASHTO approval?
Did you read that anywhere?
Quote from: oscar on March 16, 2012, 07:30:48 AM
I thought the plan was to finish up all the construction at the 210/215 interchange, before applying for AASHTO approval?
IIRC, they ran into seismic problems (read: earthquakes) which delayed the project. Construction work was originally scheduled to end in 2011 but that's been pushed back to 2013 at the earliest.
Quote from: Interstate Trav on March 16, 2012, 06:00:55 AM
I'm not very familiar with how Caltran's works, so sorry if this is a dumb question, do they like to try to submit more then one freeway at once into the Interstate system, or wait until another project is finished to submit them both?
Neither am I but it does make some sense because you would think there would be some savings by prepping the paperwork for both routes at the same time. Especially since the route 905 freeway is scheduled to be completed in mid-2012.
Quote from: myosh_tino on March 16, 2012, 02:58:38 PM
Quote from: oscar on March 16, 2012, 07:30:48 AM
I thought the plan was to finish up all the construction at the 210/215 interchange, before applying for AASHTO approval?
IIRC, they ran into seismic problems (read: earthquakes) which delayed the project. Construction work was originally scheduled to end in 2011 but that's been pushed back to 2013 at the earliest.
Quote from: Interstate Trav on March 16, 2012, 06:00:55 AM
I'm not very familiar with how Caltran's works, so sorry if this is a dumb question, do they like to try to submit more then one freeway at once into the Interstate system, or wait until another project is finished to submit them both?
Neither am I but it does make some sense because you would think there would be some savings by prepping the paperwork for both routes at the same time. Especially since the route 905 freeway is scheduled to be completed in mid-2012.
In that vein, is there any update on the conversion of State Route 15 (Wabash Boulevard/Escondido Freeway) to I-15 in San Diego? I've read it was pending interchange upgrades at 15/94 (which, in its current substandard state, actually isn't even the original configuration of that junction from what I've seen on Historicaerials) but I didn't see any upgrade work at all when I went down that corridor in October.
I could imagine 905, 210, and 15 all becoming Interstates at the same time. (Not to speculate, but when the fourth bore of the Caldecott is finished, I'm also curious what'll happen to 980/24).
Last time a state route got re-signed to Interstate in California was probably 215 (former 395) south of 60, and that was 18 years ago.
I feel like CA 60 from 15 to the east la interchange should be I-310
I actually live off the 210 near Sunland Blvd and the only thing I think is weird is that going West that the control city is San Fernando when it technically doesn't touch the city it should be Sylmar or at least not even mentioned such as how the 118 is for some reason.
I haven't been back to SoCal for some time. So this would mean the end for CA 30 in that area, when I-210 is completed, or has that happened already?
Quote from: bulkyorled on April 09, 2012, 10:44:54 PM
I actually live off the 210 near Sunland Blvd and the only thing I think is weird is that going West that the control city is San Fernando when it technically doesn't touch the city it should be Sylmar or at least not even mentioned such as how the 118 is for some reason.
that section of 210 was once numbered 118, so the use of the 118 control city is an artifact.
Quote from: Henry on April 10, 2012, 12:04:09 PM
I haven't been back to SoCal for some time. So this would mean the end for CA 30 in that area, when I-210 is completed, or has that happened already?
CA 30 no longer exists. I guess Caltrans is waiting for the 210-215 interchange to be completed before applying for interstate designation.
Quote from: Henry on April 10, 2012, 12:04:09 PM
I haven't been back to SoCal for some time. So this would mean the end for CA 30 in that area, when I-210 is completed, or has that happened already?
California 30 has been gone for a long time.
Quotethat section of 210 was once numbered 118, so the use of the 118 control city is an artifact.
Ah that's true. I forgot about this.
I even saw the picture of it and I said it anyways haha
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2Fa%2Fa0%2FOld_white_CA_118_shield.jpg&hash=7f78fafed12a02bdd57fd581508407c70a449462)
Is that sign still there? I don't remember from last time I was in that area.
No its gone now, it was taken away a few months ago. I remember seeing it quite a while ago but not anymore
They probably took it out when they put up the new sign which you can kind of see in the background of that pic
Darn! That was a neat old sign dating back to when I was little, long before the 210 was even built!
Quote from: hm insulators on April 10, 2012, 07:02:04 PM
Darn! That was a neat old sign dating back to when I was little, long before the 210 was even built!
C-62 on the back of that one. I believe it disappeared sometime between the summer of 2008, and March, 2009.
as far as I know, there is are only two old white shields left.
One is on CA-170 southbound at CA-134 - next three exits guide sign in the median.
The other is this, made by the city of San Diego, and I forget exactly where, but it is very likely old.
(//www.aaroads.com/shields/img/CA/CA19600941i1.jpg)
Also heard that CA-210 is to be re-submitted for interstate status after last 2 connections to I-215 were completed. The NB I-215 to WB CA-210 connector opened back in Dec. I drive thru the interchange weekly and it looks like the final connection (EB CA-210 to SB I-215) is about to be completed most anytime now. Just wish construction would move faster! :banghead:
One thing that never got addressed though, was does anyone else wonder why only Redlands is the Control Point for 210 East Bound? Shouldn't Palm Springs or Indio show up on atleast a mileage sign, especailly if 210 is a bypass for Los Angeles.
Quote from: Interstate Trav on April 12, 2012, 02:00:12 AM
One thing that never got addressed though, was does anyone else wonder why only Redlands is the Control Point for 210 East Bound? Shouldn't Palm Springs or Indio show up on atleast a mileage sign, especailly if 210 is a bypass for Los Angeles.
Local control cities seem to be preferred for some routes (i.e. why 60 is not signed for Indio until Riverside) - CalTrans practice tends to emphasize the nearest major destination first, before any longer-distance ones. (i.e. Route 85 is signed for primarily Gilroy, not Los Angeles, southbound)
Only exception to this is the usage of Sacramento for 405 and 170.
Quote from: TheStranger on April 12, 2012, 04:29:46 AM
Local control cities seem to be preferred for some routes (i.e. why 60 is not signed for Indio until Riverside) - CalTrans practice tends to emphasize the nearest major destination first, before any longer-distance ones. (i.e. Route 85 is signed for primarily Gilroy, not Los Angeles, southbound)
Only exception to this is the usage of Sacramento for 405 and 170.
Sacramento is seen on 210 as well for similar reasons.
California has a special aversion to out-of-state destinations (Blythe or "other desert cities" before Phoenix, despite Blythe having no appreciable population, certainly not anything giving rise to a need to sign it from 200 miles away) and as for international destinations, I can think of some distance signs for Ensenada and San Felipe, but as for an actual control city... Caltrans would rather leave it blank, as in the case of 805 southbound, which could certainly be signed Tijuana, BC.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on April 12, 2012, 11:04:52 AM
Sacramento is seen on 210 as well for similar reasons.
Curious: I get that the switch from "Bakersfield" to "Sacramento" in the mid-80s for 5 north came around with understanding that 5 itself doesn't pass through Bakersfield, where 99 does (and 99 no longer continues to Los Angeles)...
...but Sacramento's further at the southernmost point it's signed for (downtown Los Angeles on the Hollywood Freeway/US 101) than Phoenix!!!! Going by the logic that has Pomona and San Bernardino and Santa Ana as the downtown-area control cities, Bakersfield remains logical.
If anything, Bakersfield is a way more direct control city (as the Golden State Freeway corridor continues there) than say, the usage of "San Francisco" off of Route 120 west in Manteca.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on April 12, 2012, 11:04:52 AM
California has a special aversion to out-of-state destinations (Blythe or "other desert cities" before Phoenix, despite Blythe having no appreciable population, certainly not anything giving rise to a need to sign it from 200 miles away) and as for international destinations, I can think of some distance signs for Ensenada and San Felipe, but as for an actual control city... Caltrans would rather leave it blank, as in the case of 805 southbound, which could certainly be signed Tijuana, BC.
Needles for I-40 fits this model too.
At the most extreme IMO is I-80's west terminus, where Sacramento is still only 89 miles away, yet doesn't show up at all (only Bay Bridge/Oakland). Definitely the polar opposite of say, the famous I-85/Atlanta sign in Petersburg, VA.
When was CA 30 decommissioned on the easternmost stretch of CA 210?
Quote from: TheStranger on April 12, 2012, 11:41:13 AM
Definitely the polar opposite of say, the famous I-85/Atlanta sign in Petersburg, VA.
Also the same location where I-95/Miami first appears.
I think Sacramento gets some preference as it is the state capital.
Don't ask me about Indio; it is signed as a control city from places as seemingly random as I-15 northbound to CA-79 southbound (!) in Temecula, which is about as unintuitive a way as can be imagined to get from Point A to Point B - unless one has a map and can see that, there, 79 south heads almost due east, and from there 74 takes off and heads similarly east as well.
but why Indio? it's not that important of a city.
And yet on I-5 northbound, Portland was listed as a control city as far south as Red Bluff at the CA-36 interchange, a good 150 miles south of the California-Oregon border. I said "was" because that particular sign bridge was removed and replaced with a new structure that does not include an I-5 pull through. According to what I've seen in the AARoads Gallery, the next I-5 pull through is at the CA-89 junction north of Mt. Shasta at which point, the only control city shown is Portland.
Reno does not appear as an I-80 control city until just outside of Sacramento a good 120 miles west of the California-Nevada border. If Caltrans wanted to "stay local", they could have used Auburn and Truckee as control cities for I-80.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on April 12, 2012, 11:04:52 AM
Quote from: TheStranger on April 12, 2012, 04:29:46 AM
Local control cities seem to be preferred for some routes (i.e. why 60 is not signed for Indio until Riverside) - CalTrans practice tends to emphasize the nearest major destination first, before any longer-distance ones. (i.e. Route 85 is signed for primarily Gilroy, not Los Angeles, southbound)
Only exception to this is the usage of Sacramento for 405 and 170.
Sacramento is seen on 210 as well for similar reasons.
California has a special aversion to out-of-state destinations (Blythe or "other desert cities" before Phoenix, despite Blythe having no appreciable population, certainly not anything giving rise to a need to sign it from 200 miles away) and as for international destinations, I can think of some distance signs for Ensenada and San Felipe, but as for an actual control city... Caltrans would rather leave it blank, as in the case of 805 southbound, which could certainly be signed Tijuana, BC.
A couple other exceptions I can think of...
I-15 at the I-40 split is NB control city "Las Vegas", as well as the CA-58 interchange 3 Miles South. I also recall I-80 in the Sacramento area is EB control city "Reno". Both cities are in NV. IIRC, NB 5 has a control city of "Portland" at the CA-44 Jct in Redding too.
Quote from: CenVlyDave on April 12, 2012, 03:56:46 PM
A couple other exceptions I can think of...
I-15 at the I-40 split is NB control city "Las Vegas", as well as the CA-58 interchange 3 Miles South. I also recall I-80 in the Sacramento area is EB control city "Reno". Both cities are in NV. IIRC, NB 5 has a control city of "Portland" at the CA-44 Jct in Redding too.
I-15 northbound in Barstow is not really an "exception" due to the fact there are no cities left in California along I-15 after Barstow. I guess Caltrans could have given I-15 the "silent treatment" like I-805 but Las Vegas is such a major destination for Californians, leaving it off would do more harm than good. With regards to I-80 in and around Sacramento, they could have used Auburn or Truckee. Maybe Caltrans has a if-you-have-casinos-then-you-get-listed-on-guide-signs policy. :)
Quote from: myosh_tino on April 12, 2012, 04:08:33 PMMaybe Caltrans has a if-you-have-casinos-then-you-get-listed-on-guide-signs policy. :)
I'm trying to remember where Phoenix is first signed on I-10, but it is, I believe, just after the "other Desert Cities" cluster around Indio. So, maybe 150 miles from the Arizona state line?
I'll be heading out that way tomorrow, so hopefully I'll remember to keep an eye out.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on April 12, 2012, 11:04:52 AM
Quote from: TheStranger on April 12, 2012, 04:29:46 AM
Local control cities seem to be preferred for some routes (i.e. why 60 is not signed for Indio until Riverside) - CalTrans practice tends to emphasize the nearest major destination first, before any longer-distance ones. (i.e. Route 85 is signed for primarily Gilroy, not Los Angeles, southbound)
Only exception to this is the usage of Sacramento for 405 and 170.
Sacramento is seen on 210 as well for similar reasons.
California has a special aversion to out-of-state destinations (Blythe or "other desert cities" before Phoenix, despite Blythe having no appreciable population, certainly not anything giving rise to a need to sign it from 200 miles away) and as for international destinations, I can think of some distance signs for Ensenada and San Felipe, but as for an actual control city... Caltrans would rather leave it blank, as in the case of 805 southbound, which could certainly be signed Tijuana, BC.
That's what I mean, is Sacramento is signed on 210 Westbound on Mileage signs atleast and that's for I-5 north, yet East bound 210 isn't signed for the next major city along it's parent route I-10 where it is headed.
Also I think in regards to control cities, in California they base it on traffic counts and suburbs. That's why on CA 14 north Palmdale and Lancaster are listed or Pomona on Ca 60. I think on the 60 it's because of it being the Pomona freeway and that most traffic headed out of Downtown Los Angeles seems to not be headed to Arizona.
One thing to note though is Indio does show up on CA 60 east, so why not have Indio on 210 East in San Bernardino.
Interesting difference between Los Angeles and San Diego control points.
Los Angeles
I-10 East, San Bernardino
I-5 North, Sacramento (only far city)
I-5 South, Santa Ana
US-101 North, Hollywood/Ventura (probably to avoid people using 101 to San Francisco)
CA-60 East, Pomona
San Diego
I-5 North, Los Angeles
I-15 North, Riverside
I-8 East, El Centro (Yuma is mentioned on a couple mileage signs)
I-805 North, Los Angeles
Quote from: agentsteel53 on April 12, 2012, 01:23:29 PM
I think Sacramento gets some preference as it is the state capital.
Don't ask me about Indio; it is signed as a control city from places as seemingly random as I-15 northbound to CA-79 southbound (!) in Temecula, which is about as unintuitive a way as can be imagined to get from Point A to Point B - unless one has a map and can see that, there, 79 south heads almost due east, and from there 74 takes off and heads similarly east as well.
but why Indio? it's not that important of a city.
I think Indio gets some mention as it was the original US 99/60/70 split, and the Route to Yuma from Los Angeles, and is an important City to the Coachella Valley.
Post Merge: December 31, 1969, 06:59:59 PM
Quote from: CenVlyDave on April 12, 2012, 03:56:46 PM
Quote from: agentsteel53 on April 12, 2012, 11:04:52 AM
Quote from: TheStranger on April 12, 2012, 04:29:46 AM
Local control cities seem to be preferred for some routes (i.e. why 60 is not signed for Indio until Riverside) - CalTrans practice tends to emphasize the nearest major destination first, before any longer-distance ones. (i.e. Route 85 is signed for primarily Gilroy, not Los Angeles, southbound)
Only exception to this is the usage of Sacramento for 405 and 170.
Sacramento is seen on 210 as well for similar reasons.
California has a special aversion to out-of-state destinations (Blythe or "other desert cities" before Phoenix, despite Blythe having no appreciable population, certainly not anything giving rise to a need to sign it from 200 miles away) and as for international destinations, I can think of some distance signs for Ensenada and San Felipe, but as for an actual control city... Caltrans would rather leave it blank, as in the case of 805 southbound, which could certainly be signed Tijuana, BC.
A couple other exceptions I can think of...
I-15 at the I-40 split is NB control city "Las Vegas", as well as the CA-58 interchange 3 Miles South. I also recall I-80 in the Sacramento area is EB control city "Reno". Both cities are in NV. IIRC, NB 5 has a control city of "Portland" at the CA-44 Jct in Redding too.
Doesn't Portland get mentioned before Sacramento on I-5 north?
Also Las Vegas is mention on mileage signs all the way through the Cajon pass on the 15, and even in San Bernardino on the 215 after the 215/210 jct. Caltrans does sign cities pretty well.
Post Merge: April 28, 2012, 11:11:12 PM
Quote from: agentsteel53 on April 12, 2012, 04:54:59 PM
Quote from: myosh_tino on April 12, 2012, 04:08:33 PMMaybe Caltrans has a if-you-have-casinos-then-you-get-listed-on-guide-signs policy. :)
I'm trying to remember where Phoenix is first signed on I-10, but it is, I believe, just after the "other Desert Cities" cluster around Indio. So, maybe 150 miles from the Arizona state line?
I'll be heading out that way tomorrow, so hopefully I'll remember to keep an eye out.
I know exactly where it get's listed, first on a Mileage signs right after Monterey Ave in Palm Desert, then on an overhead sign at Indio Blvd.
thanks for the info on I-10 and Phoenix!
Quote from: Interstate Trav on April 12, 2012, 05:15:51 PM
Doesn't Portland get mentioned before Sacramento on I-5 north?
nope. the southernmost mention of Sacramento is at the East LA Interchange, and the first mileage sign for it is, if I recall correctly, somewhere around Burbank. If not, probably by the Grapevine and definitely just north of the 5/99 split.
as for Portland, there used to be a 600+ mile sign for it near CA-12 in Stockton, but that is gone. I believe the first mention of it is just north of Sacramento on a mileage sign, while the first use as a control city is likely the CA-89 junction as mentioned by myosh_tino. Redding is the intermediate control city north of Sacramento.
Quote from: Interstate Trav on April 12, 2012, 05:15:51 PM
Quote from: CenVlyDave on April 12, 2012, 03:56:46 PM
Quote from: agentsteel53 on April 12, 2012, 11:04:52 AM
Quote from: TheStranger on April 12, 2012, 04:29:46 AM
Local control cities seem to be preferred for some routes (i.e. why 60 is not signed for Indio until Riverside) - CalTrans practice tends to emphasize the nearest major destination first, before any longer-distance ones. (i.e. Route 85 is signed for primarily Gilroy, not Los Angeles, southbound)
Only exception to this is the usage of Sacramento for 405 and 170.
Sacramento is seen on 210 as well for similar reasons.
California has a special aversion to out-of-state destinations (Blythe or "other desert cities" before Phoenix, despite Blythe having no appreciable population, certainly not anything giving rise to a need to sign it from 200 miles away) and as for international destinations, I can think of some distance signs for Ensenada and San Felipe, but as for an actual control city... Caltrans would rather leave it blank, as in the case of 805 southbound, which could certainly be signed Tijuana, BC.
A couple other exceptions I can think of...
I-15 at the I-40 split is NB control city "Las Vegas", as well as the CA-58 interchange 3 Miles South. I also recall I-80 in the Sacramento area is EB control city "Reno". Both cities are in NV. IIRC, NB 5 has a control city of "Portland" at the CA-44 Jct in Redding too.
Doesn't Portland get mentioned before Sacramento on I-5 north?
Also Las Vegas is mention on mileage signs all the way through the Cajon pass on the 15, and even in San Bernardino on the 215 after the 215/210 jct. Caltrans does sign cities pretty well.
I was thinking of Control City Mention mainly, but you are right on the mileage signs. I am even thinking that the first mention of Las Vegas is possibly onsome signage on NB I-15 as it is approaching the split with I-215 in Temecula/Murrietta. Anyone else remember this?
Quote from: myosh_tino on April 12, 2012, 04:08:33 PM
Quote from: CenVlyDave on April 12, 2012, 03:56:46 PM
A couple other exceptions I can think of...
I-15 at the I-40 split is NB control city "Las Vegas", as well as the CA-58 interchange 3 Miles South. I also recall I-80 in the Sacramento area is EB control city "Reno". Both cities are in NV. IIRC, NB 5 has a control city of "Portland" at the CA-44 Jct in Redding too.
I-15 northbound in Barstow is not really an "exception" due to the fact there are no cities left in California along I-15 after Barstow.
There's Baker... could qualify, as it does have an I-15 Business Loop...
Quote from: CenVlyDave on April 12, 2012, 06:24:35 PM
I was thinking of Control City Mention mainly, but you are right on the mileage signs. I am even thinking that the first mention of Las Vegas is possibly onsome signage on NB I-15 as it is approaching the split with I-215 in Temecula/Murrietta. Anyone else remember this?
that is precisely right. it is a control city, and I am drawing a blank as to whether it is for 15 or 215. I know 15 has Los Angeles.
I forget where the first mileage sign is, but I know both 215 and the section if 15 bypassed by it have them.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on April 12, 2012, 07:06:33 PM
Quote from: CenVlyDave on April 12, 2012, 06:24:35 PM
I was thinking of Control City Mention mainly, but you are right on the mileage signs. I am even thinking that the first mention of Las Vegas is possibly onsome signage on NB I-15 as it is approaching the split with I-215 in Temecula/Murrietta. Anyone else remember this?
that is precisely right. it is a control city, and I am drawing a blank as to whether it is for 15 or 215. I know 15 has Los Angeles.
I forget where the first mileage sign is, but I know both 215 and the section if 15 bypassed by it have them.
Ok, just did a little checking via Google street view. The control cities for the roads at the I-15/I-215 split in Murrietta are:
I-15: Los Angeles/Corona and I-215 Riverside/San Bernardino. Las Vegas is mentioned, but on a smaller, rual design sign on the right shoulder, I am sure there is one in the median too, but when the street view vehicle took the photo, the median sign was hit and down for the count, I think. Anyway, the sign(s) say: Barstow/Las Vegas left lanes. So the sign is directing all bypass/thru traffic to use I-15. Oh, and the signs are posted in TEMECULA, so that is technically the first mention of Las Vegas on NB I-15.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on April 12, 2012, 05:36:23 PM
thanks for the info on I-10 and Phoenix!
Quote from: Interstate Trav on April 12, 2012, 05:15:51 PM
Doesn't Portland get mentioned before Sacramento on I-5 north?
nope. the southernmost mention of Sacramento is at the East LA Interchange, and the first mileage sign for it is, if I recall correctly, somewhere around Burbank. If not, probably by the Grapevine and definitely just north of the 5/99 split.
as for Portland, there used to be a 600+ mile sign for it near CA-12 in Stockton, but that is gone. I believe the first mention of it is just north of Sacramento on a mileage sign, while the first use as a control city is likely the CA-89 junction as mentioned by myosh_tino. Redding is the intermediate control city north of Sacramento.
No problem about the first Mention of Phoenix. I live close to the "Other Desert Cities" sign, and have traveled I-10 in California a lot so I know it pretty well.
Oh I miss typed my question, I meant the sign you were talking about for Portland, the 600 plus mileage sign, I know it doesn't get mentioned in Los Angeles. I had meant when is the first time it is even mentioned.
Oh and your right, Sacramento is mentioned on a mileage sign on the 5 in Burbank, and on the 405 north of the 101 and on 210 west and I think even 170 North has one.
Quote from: CenVlyDave on April 12, 2012, 07:32:21 PM
Quote from: agentsteel53 on April 12, 2012, 07:06:33 PM
Quote from: CenVlyDave on April 12, 2012, 06:24:35 PM
I was thinking of Control City Mention mainly, but you are right on the mileage signs. I am even thinking that the first mention of Las Vegas is possibly onsome signage on NB I-15 as it is approaching the split with I-215 in Temecula/Murrietta. Anyone else remember this?
that is precisely right. it is a control city, and I am drawing a blank as to whether it is for 15 or 215. I know 15 has Los Angeles.
I forget where the first mileage sign is, but I know both 215 and the section if 15 bypassed by it have them.
Ok, just did a little checking via Google street view. The control cities for the roads at the I-15/I-215 split in Murrietta are:
I-15: Los Angeles/Corona and I-215 Riverside/San Bernardino. Las Vegas is mentioned, but on a smaller, rual design sign on the right shoulder, I am sure there is one in the median too, but when the street view vehicle took the photo, the median sign was hit and down for the count, I think. Anyway, the sign(s) say: Barstow/Las Vegas left lanes. So the sign is directing all bypass/thru traffic to use I-15. Oh, and the signs are posted in TEMECULA, so that is technically the first mention of Las Vegas on NB I-15.
That is correct, and that is the first sign for Las Vegas. But when you pass that split, Los Angeles is only the control point for a couple of signs before Barstow takes over on mileage signs, and then is the control city on over head signs near the 91 in Corona.
Oh and on I-10 east at the I-15 jct, 15 North is signed Barstow, Las Vegas. On the 60,91,210 it is only has Barstow listed. So the first overhead sign for Las Vegas technically is on I-10 East at I-15 North
Quote from: CenVlyDave on April 12, 2012, 07:32:21 PM
Quote from: agentsteel53 on April 12, 2012, 07:06:33 PM
Quote from: CenVlyDave on April 12, 2012, 06:24:35 PM
I was thinking of Control City Mention mainly, but you are right on the mileage signs. I am even thinking that the first mention of Las Vegas is possibly onsome signage on NB I-15 as it is approaching the split with I-215 in Temecula/Murrietta. Anyone else remember this?
that is precisely right. it is a control city, and I am drawing a blank as to whether it is for 15 or 215. I know 15 has Los Angeles.
I forget where the first mileage sign is, but I know both 215 and the section if 15 bypassed by it have them.
Ok, just did a little checking via Google street view. The control cities for the roads at the I-15/I-215 split in Murrietta are:
I-15: Los Angeles/Corona and I-215 Riverside/San Bernardino. Las Vegas is mentioned, but on a smaller, rual design sign on the right shoulder, I am sure there is one in the median too, but when the street view vehicle took the photo, the median sign was hit and down for the count, I think. Anyway, the sign(s) say: Barstow/Las Vegas left lanes. So the sign is directing all bypass/thru traffic to use I-15. Oh, and the signs are posted in TEMECULA, so that is technically the first mention of Las Vegas on NB I-15.
That sign dates to before NB I-15 was complete and it was quicker to use I-215 to Barstow and Las Vegas so the signs said to use the right lanes.
:hmmm: Stupid question, was the I-210 part ever just CA210? I can get a picture of these signs Glendale has, theyre the green shields but they look ancient.
Quote from: bulkyorled on April 13, 2012, 12:43:39 AM
:hmmm: Stupid question, was the I-210 part ever just CA210? I can get a picture of these signs Glendale has, theyre the green shields but they look ancient.
No, the current Interstate section of the 210 has always been signed as I-210 and never CA-210. Now, prior to being I-210, the route was an extension of CA-118 from Lakeview Terrace to Pasadena. The original route was Foothill Bl. One of the first freeway/expressway bridges still runs parallel to I-210 Between Arroyo/Windsor and Berkshire exits accross the Arroyo Seco in front of Devil's Gate Dam. From Pasadena east, the routing was part of US 66 along Colorado Bl, Colorado Pl, Huntington Dr, Foothill Bl, Alosta Ave, then Foothill Bl again. Of course US 66 went all the way to San Bernadino via Foothill Bl, then turned North at Mt Vernon Ave to Cajon Bl and Cajon Pass along with US 91 and US 395. Well, I am now way past the original 210 allignment, so I guess I better stop while I am ahead. Sorry about getting carried away. :D
:-D no its all very interesting really.
And I guess Glendale just was cheap with it or booboo'd on it to start with. I'll get a pic of it next time I'm out there's a lot of them actually. I noticed it today when I was coming off Honolulu, the fwy onramp off Lowell has a green shield, as it does in all the other spots.
Glendale = :pan:
Quote from: agentsteel53 on April 12, 2012, 01:23:29 PM
I think Sacramento gets some preference as it is the state capital.
Don't ask me about Indio; it is signed as a control city from places as seemingly random as I-15 northbound to CA-79 southbound (!) in Temecula, which is about as unintuitive a way as can be imagined to get from Point A to Point B - unless one has a map and can see that, there, 79 south heads almost due east, and from there 74 takes off and heads similarly east as well.
but why Indio? it's not that important of a city.
CA 79 south (east) of I-15 was once CA 71, as was CA 371, which links 79 to 74 east of Idyllwild. Although 74 doesn't go to Indio, it connects to CA 111, which heads east towards Indio. This is also why NB 111 at WB 74 is signed towards San Diego.
Also, as was previously explained here, Indio is where US 60 and 70 split from US 99.
Quote from: bulkyorled on April 13, 2012, 01:26:18 AM
:-D no its all very interesting really.
And I guess Glendale just was cheap with it or booboo'd on it to start with. I'll get a pic of it next time I'm out there's a lot of them actually. I noticed it today when I was coming off Honolulu, the fwy onramp off Lowell has a green shield, as it does in all the other spots.
Glendale = :pan:
I remember there being a CA 210 shield on WB Montrose Avenue at Pennsylvania. Don't know if there's any more in Glendale.
Quote from: JustDrive on April 13, 2012, 04:37:30 PM
Quote from: bulkyorled on April 13, 2012, 01:26:18 AM
:-D no its all very interesting really.
And I guess Glendale just was cheap with it or booboo'd on it to start with. I'll get a pic of it next time I'm out there's a lot of them actually. I noticed it today when I was coming off Honolulu, the fwy onramp off Lowell has a green shield, as it does in all the other spots.
Glendale = :pan:
I remember there being a CA 210 shield on WB Montrose Avenue at Pennsylvania. Don't know if there's any more in Glendale.
Got any pics of the sign in question? I would like to see it.
Quote from: CenVlyDave on April 13, 2012, 07:19:14 PM
Quote from: JustDrive on April 13, 2012, 04:37:30 PM
Quote from: bulkyorled on April 13, 2012, 01:26:18 AM
:-D no its all very interesting really.
And I guess Glendale just was cheap with it or booboo'd on it to start with. I'll get a pic of it next time I'm out there's a lot of them actually. I noticed it today when I was coming off Honolulu, the fwy onramp off Lowell has a green shield, as it does in all the other spots.
Glendale = :pan:
I remember there being a CA 210 shield on WB Montrose Avenue at Pennsylvania. Don't know if there's any more in Glendale.
Got any pics of the sign in question? I would like to see it.
Here you go:
http://maps.google.com/maps?q=34.221366,-118.248828&ll=34.220958,-118.248811&spn=0.005962,0.013078&sll=34.220981,-118.248978&layer=c&cbp=13,296.02,,0,-4.87&cbll=34.221354,-118.248833&t=m&z=17&panoid=XKOG-g9n8xTdbpsb8hrh9g
Anywhere that there's a direction sign for the 210 in Glendale it has a green shield
Quote from: JustDrive on April 13, 2012, 07:54:56 PM
Quote from: CenVlyDave on April 13, 2012, 07:19:14 PM
Quote from: JustDrive on April 13, 2012, 04:37:30 PM
Quote from: bulkyorled on April 13, 2012, 01:26:18 AM
:-D no its all very interesting really.
And I guess Glendale just was cheap with it or booboo'd on it to start with. I'll get a pic of it next time I'm out there's a lot of them actually. I noticed it today when I was coming off Honolulu, the fwy onramp off Lowell has a green shield, as it does in all the other spots.
Glendale = :pan:
I remember there being a CA 210 shield on WB Montrose Avenue at Pennsylvania. Don't know if there's any more in Glendale.
Got any pics of the sign in question? I would like to see it.
Here you go:
http://maps.google.com/maps?q=34.221366,-118.248828&ll=34.220958,-118.248811&spn=0.005962,0.013078&sll=34.220981,-118.248978&layer=c&cbp=13,296.02,,0,-4.87&cbll=34.221354,-118.248833&t=m&z=17&panoid=XKOG-g9n8xTdbpsb8hrh9g
Thanks. The sign looks like an erroneous one, arrow faded and no "California" on the 210 shield. Probably a city/county install.
City installed most definitely. They're no where but Glendale, even in La Cresenta or La Cañada doesn't have them. They're ancient too, most of them are horribly oxidized or the paint is peeling.
There's also one on EB Foothill Blvd. at Lowell Avenue
http://maps.google.com/maps?q=Glendale,+CA&hl=en&ll=34.240335,-118.26608&spn=0.005925,0.013078&sll=35.532226,-105.161133&sspn=23.80294,53.569336&hnear=Glendale,+Los+Angeles,+California&t=m&z=17&layer=c&cbll=34.240335,-118.26608&panoid=NOkSeXagQDXwHA6Zj8p2_A&cbp=12,138.17,,0,2.99
Its on both sides of Lowell, the WB one is the bad one haha
Well, the main point is that they were city installed. I also remember, thinking of mis-signing roads, that there was an erroneous US-241 shield on a sign assembly in Orange County someplace. What was Caltrans thinking on that one? :wow:
There's a US 210 trailblazer in Pasadena on eastbound California just before Orange Grove.
Quote from: blawp on April 14, 2012, 10:04:47 PM
There's a US 210 trailblazer in Pasadena on eastbound California just before Orange Grove.
A US 210 TrailBlazer? wow that would be neat to have a pictue of.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F24.media.tumblr.com%2Ftumblr_m2m7qjByDp1rob8r8o1_500.jpg&hash=2b65fcfe0fa41cfcd0903aade027af7012778fa0)
Snapped a pic of it this morning, conveniently was in the area. The sign actually looks very new. So they booboo'd on it. You can't see it on Google Maps for some reason they blurred it out
Quote from: bulkyorled on April 17, 2012, 04:34:13 AM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F24.media.tumblr.com%2Ftumblr_m2m7qjByDp1rob8r8o1_500.jpg&hash=2b65fcfe0fa41cfcd0903aade027af7012778fa0)
Snapped a pic of it this morning, conveniently was in the area. The sign actually looks very new. So they booboo'd on it. You can't see it on Google Maps for some reason they blurred it out
it is brand new. it replaced another US-210 sign, which I photographed sometime in late 2010 or early 2011.
Can you post that?
Cool thanks man!
Quote from: bulkyorled on April 17, 2012, 04:34:13 AM
You can't see it on Google Maps for some reason they blurred it out
That's because it is a face.
They dont know what a face is :ded: I was looking in Tulare and it might still be there somewhere at an intersection there was a guy with a snack cart, they blurred out the cotton candy he was selling but his face was left unblurred. Whoops :pan:
Quote from: bulkyorled on April 17, 2012, 04:34:13 AM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F24.media.tumblr.com%2Ftumblr_m2m7qjByDp1rob8r8o1_500.jpg&hash=2b65fcfe0fa41cfcd0903aade027af7012778fa0)
Snapped a pic of it this morning, conveniently was in the area. The sign actually looks very new. So they booboo'd on it. You can't see it on Google Maps for some reason they blurred it out
Thanks for the picture.
Quote from: Interstate Trav on April 12, 2012, 05:15:51 PM
Doesn't Portland get mentioned before Sacramento on I-5 north?
Quote
as for Portland, there used to be a 600+ mile sign for it near CA-12 in Stockton, but that is gone. I believe the first mention of it is just north of Sacramento on a mileage sign, while the first use as a control city is likely the CA-89 junction as mentioned by myosh_tino. Redding is the intermediate control city north of Sacramento.
Quote
Oh I miss typed my question, I meant the sign you were talking about for Portland, the 600 plus mileage sign, I know it doesn't get mentioned in Los Angeles. I had meant when is the first time it is even mentioned.
https://www.aaroads.com/california/images005/i-005_nb_exit_487_02.jpg
This is sign has been since replaced by a reflective green sign just as the left lane ends on NB I-5 past the CA-12 interchange [Exit 485]. I just saw it there about two weeks ago when I was going to visit my parents in Sacramento.
SIDE NOTE:
The funny thing about that mileage is that it is off by about 20 miles. Using Cal-NEXUS data, the highest milepost on I-5 in CA is 797 at the Oregon border. Since this occurs at Exit 485, we add a mile north of the interchange and take 797 - 486 = 311. Add to that the 308 miles that ODOT posts for I-5 in Oregon, and you only get 619. This means that the mileage given by that sign puts you at WA milepost 9 (two miles north of the northern I-5/205 junction in Vancouver WA). A closer approximation would be about 610 or 611.
Quote from: subzeroepsilon on April 18, 2012, 11:36:10 PM
https://www.aaroads.com/california/images005/i-005_nb_exit_487_02.jpg
This is sign has been since replaced by a reflective green sign just as the left lane ends on NB I-5 past the CA-12 interchange [Exit 485]. I just saw it there about two weeks ago when I was going to visit my parents in Sacramento.
I missed it, then, the last time I drove through there. shows how much recall I have for retroreflective signs.
Quote from: bulkyorled on April 17, 2012, 04:34:13 AM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F24.media.tumblr.com%2Ftumblr_m2m7qjByDp1rob8r8o1_500.jpg&hash=2b65fcfe0fa41cfcd0903aade027af7012778fa0)
Snapped a pic of it this morning, conveniently was in the area. The sign actually looks very new. So they booboo'd on it. You can't see it on Google Maps for some reason they blurred it out
So, we have misplaced CA-210 shields in Glendale and now a US-210 shield in Pasadena? What's next a county route 210 sign in Monrovia? Then we would have all the bases covered, lol.
Quote from: CenVlyDave on April 24, 2012, 02:54:55 PM
So, we have misplaced CA-210 shields in Glendale and now a US-210 shield in Pasadena? What's next a county route 210 sign in Monrovia? Then we would have all the bases covered, lol.
we'd need at least one Alabama state route. maybe a Pennsylvania too.
Quote from: blawp on April 14, 2012, 10:04:47 PM
There's a US 210 trailblazer in Pasadena on eastbound California just before Orange Grove.
Somebody in Pasadena is certainly not paying attention! And I guess I haven't really paid attention to the "California 210" signs by Lowell Avenue, even though when I visit California, I often use Lowell to get from Tujunga, where my friend Joe lives, to get at the 210. I'm not the "sign geek" that some road fans are, and having grown up in La Canada, I'm familiar enough with the area that I don't need the signs to tell me how to get to the freeway, of course. So I just haven't paid attention.
Next time I'm in California, I'll have to remember to try to check out the "US 210" sign.
The Pasadena one is terrible especially if they replaced an old sign that also had the US-210 on it with a new one with the same booboo on it
I have a job interview tomorrow in Simi Valley. I will probably be surface-roading it back to Rancho Cucamonga after the interview, considering my interview will be at 3 pm. I will have to use Orange Grove and look for that sign myself.