I-15 Control Cities in California

[minneha]

It's interesting to me that of the three primary control cities on I-15 in the Greater Los Angeles area, Los Angeles, San Bernardino, and Riverside, I-15 does not go through the city limits of any of them. It makes me wonder if this should be changed. If it was up to me, I would use Los Angeles as the control city on southbound I-15 from Las Vegas until the I-10 interchange, then switch to San Diego as the control city. On northbound I-15 from San Diego, I would use Ontario as the control city instead of Riverside, then switch to Las Vegas as the control city at the I-10 interchange.

I feel like this makes sense, because people going from San Diego to Los Angeles are probably going to take I-5 rather than I-15. So using Ontario as the northbound I-15 control city makes more sense. But people going from Las Vegas to Los Angeles are going to take I-15, so using Los Angeles as the southbound I-15 control city makes sense. I wouldn't use San Bernardino or Riverside as control cities on I-15. Ontario makes more sense, because I-15 actually goes through Ontario, it has the I-10 interchange in its city limits, and it has the primary commercial airport for the Inland Empire.

[YLroadfan]

It seems that SoCal control/destination cities often are related more to tradition than with actual navigation.  The I-10 section signed for "San Bernardino" actually goes through more of Pomona than the 60 "Pomona Freeway" does; the 210 Freeway is much more direct to San Bernardino. The westbound 91 Freeway is signed for "Artesia" even though Cerritos is larger and is a more prominent commercial destination. The northbound 55 is signed for "Anaheim/Riverside" while actually leading motorists AWAY from central Anaheim and the tourist areas.  And in an earlier post I observed that with the cancellation of the 710 extension through South Pasadena, it's actually quite difficult to find one's way to Pasadena despite all of the control signs on 710 northbound. So maybe it's best to take all of the signage with a large grain of salt, or read them as "in the direction of" as opposed to actual navigation guidance. 

[FredAkbar]

Sometimes there just isn't a control city at all. For example 605 South ("Thru Traffic" doesn't count), or in San Diego, 805 South (I guess "Tijuana" is too much to ask for). In my experience San Diego is notorious for just not having control cities at all. It was hard to even find these GSV examples because CalTrans seems to avoid the question by just not putting thru BGSes on a lot of the exits.

[cahwyguy]

Again, I'll point folks to https://www.cahighways.org/itypes-control.html . The set of control cities for the 2 digit interstates were established by the FHWA in the 1950s, and haven't changed. The 3-digit routes are more forward directions -- not control cities -- and are less constrained and established by the states (because the 3 digit routes tend not to cross state lines).

[Scott5114]

The thing that weirds me out is that from I-5, CA-15 north is signed for Riverside. Fair enough. But CA-163 north is signed for Escondido. Which you get to by taking CA-163 north to I-15, which passes through Escondido before it gets to Riverside...

If it were me I'd just sign the whole damn thing San Diego southbound and Las Vegas northbound. Gets the point across without having to deal with any of the awkward "it leads to a road that leads to the city" stuff.

[roadman65]

Sometimes there just isn't a control city at all. For example 605 South ("Thru Traffic" doesn't count), or in San Diego, 805 South (I guess "Tijuana" is too much to ask for). In my experience San Diego is notorious for just not having control cities at all. It was hard to even find these GSV examples because CalTrans seems to avoid the question by just not putting thru BGSes on a lot of the exits.

continously.

Noticed there were none on I-5 from SR 75 Southward to San Yisidro in 1988.  I thought even Mexico would work, but Caltrans thinks otherwise.

The mileage signs use " International Border" instead of Mexico as " Canada" is often used on mileage signs in states with freeways heading to the northern border.

[YLroadfan]

Again, I'll point folks to https://www.cahighways.org/itypes-control.html . The set of control cities for the 2 digit interstates were established by the FHWA in the 1950s, and haven't changed. The 3-digit routes are more forward directions -- not control cities -- and are less constrained and established by the states (because the 3 digit routes tend not to cross state lines).

I just wish there was more cooperation among the states regarding federally approved and mandated control cities.  For example, Arizona dutifully shows "Los Angeles" as the control for I-40 westbound, and then once in California there is no mention of LA for miles. Same with I-5 north (Portland in CA, Medford in Oregon) and I-80 eastbound (New York City in Ohio, all manner of tiny towns in Pennsylvania).

[SeriesE]

I just wish there was more cooperation among the states regarding federally approved and mandated control cities.  For example, Arizona dutifully shows "Los Angeles" as the control for I-40 westbound, and then once in California there is no mention of LA for miles. Same with I-5 north (Portland in CA, Medford in Oregon) and I-80 eastbound (New York City in Ohio, all manner of tiny towns in Pennsylvania).

Are there even any overhead signs on I-40 in California that would show a control city?

[FredAkbar]

I just wish there was more cooperation among the states regarding federally approved and mandated control cities.  For example, Arizona dutifully shows "Los Angeles" as the control for I-40 westbound, and then once in California there is no mention of LA for miles. Same with I-5 north (Portland in CA, Medford in Oregon) and I-80 eastbound (New York City in Ohio, all manner of tiny towns in Pennsylvania).

Are there even any overhead signs on I-40 in California that would show a control city?

The only one I can easily find is a small overhead sign with control city "Barstow", but it is just a few miles outside of Barstow so I guess that makes sense. I don't know where else there would be one, other than the handful of exits I checked that just have the exit sign only.

[minneha]

If it were me I'd just sign the whole damn thing San Diego southbound and Las Vegas northbound. Gets the point across without having to deal with any of the awkward "it leads to a road that leads to the city" stuff.

The problem with signing San Diego as the control city on southbound I-15 in Las Vegas is that it would skip over the entire Greater Los Angeles area.

I think for southbound I-15 in Las Vegas, the control city should be Los Angeles and it should be consistently signed for Los Angeles all the way to I-10. Right now, there are some Los Angeles signs. There is a Los Angeles 257 mileage sign at the southern edge of Las Vegas. But in California, some signs omit Los Angeles and instead use Barstow or San Bernardino. That's the part I disagree with. I mean, if you are in Las Vegas and you want to drive to Los Angeles, the fastest way is to take I-15 to I-10, then go west on I-10 to LA. So really, Los Angeles would be an appropriate control city on I-15 from Las Vegas all the way to I-10, even though I-15 doesn't go through LA city limits. The control city on I-15 would then switch to San Diego at the I-10 interchange.

Northbound is trickier. I think it would make more sense to sign Las Vegas on northbound I-15 from San Diego than it would to sign San Diego on southbound I-15 from Las Vegas. But I still think it runs into the issue that it would skip over the entire Greater Los Angeles area. Right now, Riverside is signed, which I'm kind of okay with. Although I think Ontario would be better because it's on the route, it has the airport, and it has the I-10 junction where the signage could switch to Las Vegas.

[PNWRoadgeek]

Personally I would prefer "THRU TRAFFIC" on I-15 both ways, maybe "other Inland
                                                                     Empire Cities".

In all seriousness, I sort of disagree with this post where I feel like it doesn't really matter if a control city is on the route or not. I-15 should definitely be signed for LA out of Vegas nonetheless, as traffic that is using the 15 south out of Vegas is either going to LA, the surrounding metro(including the Inland Empire), or San Diego.

You could argue signing San Diego out of Las Vegas, but if the 5 is signed south for LA in Sacramento, I feel like the 15 should as well.

[Max Rockatansky]

I'm pretty sure most normal folks using I-15 nowadays don't tend to stray off course from their intended destinations all that often.  I'm also certain that most normals don't use control cities as a way to navigate. 

[PNWRoadgeek]

Let's talk about why Santa Ana is a control city on the 5 now in southern Orange County for like 10 miles.

What is the point of that? Like I'm not even mad about it, it just seems so utterly pointless and unneeded that I'm shocked they even did it.

[Max Rockatansky]

Let's talk about why Santa Ana is a control city on the 5 now in southern Orange County for like 10 miles.

What is the point of that? Like I'm not even mad about it, it just seems so utterly pointless and unneeded that I'm shocked they even did it.

Santa Ana has to be the most anonymous city in the United States with a population over 300,000 people.  I guess it wasn't that way once upon a time given the Santa Ana Freeway is named after it.  It probably didn't help Anaheim has a larger profile in the public consciousness because of a theme park and a couple pro sports teams. 

[Scott5114]

The problem with signing San Diego as the control city on southbound I-15 in Las Vegas is that it would skip over the entire Greater Los Angeles area.

Good! It should do that, because it doesn't go there.

If we're just deciding control cities based on someone maybe getting off the road at some point to go somewhere that isn't on it, then I-15 north out of LV should be signed for Kansas City.

[pderocco]

Let's talk about why Santa Ana is a control city on the 5 now in southern Orange County for like 10 miles.

What is the point of that? Like I'm not even mad about it, it just seems so utterly pointless and unneeded that I'm shocked they even did it.

Santa Ana has to be the most anonymous city in the United States with a population over 300,000 people.  I guess it wasn't that way once upon a time given the Santa Ana Freeway is named after it.  It probably didn't help Anaheim has a larger profile in the public consciousness because of a theme park and a couple pro sports teams. 

Was it named after the city or after the general?

[pderocco]

The problem with signing San Diego as the control city on southbound I-15 in Las Vegas is that it would skip over the entire Greater Los Angeles area.

Good! It should do that, because it doesn't go there.

If we're just deciding control cities based on someone maybe getting off the road at some point to go somewhere that isn't on it, then I-15 north out of LV should be signed for Kansas City.

It makes sense to base it on where people are likely going on the road. I think more people coming down I-15 are headed to L.A. than to S.D., because L.A. is bigger. And since it's closer, L.A. people are less likely to fly to Vegas than people in S.D.

[Scott5114]

The problem with signing San Diego as the control city on southbound I-15 in Las Vegas is that it would skip over the entire Greater Los Angeles area.

Good! It should do that, because it doesn't go there.

If we're just deciding control cities based on someone maybe getting off the road at some point to go somewhere that isn't on it, then I-15 north out of LV should be signed for Kansas City.

It makes sense to base it on where people are likely going on the road. I think more people coming down I-15 are headed to L.A. than to S.D., because L.A. is bigger. And since it's closer, L.A. people are less likely to fly to Vegas than people in S.D.

Maybe? The problem is, Southern California is a patchwork of hundreds of municipalities, and a southbound traveler originating in LV could be headed to any of them. Los Angeles is just one destination among many—it's plausible that it's a plurality, but it's likely not a majority once you square it against the people headed to Bakersfield, Anaheim, Huntington Beach, San Bernardino, Temecula, Escondido, Hemet, or any other random SoCal city that does not involve going through LA to get to. At that point "Los Angeles" and "San Diego" are equally good control points since they simply stand as a metonym for Southern California as a whole. And in that case, it makes sense to use the one that the road doesn't miss by 35 miles.

I have not seen a ton of LV visitation data, but what I have seen is consistent with the theory that while there are a lot of visitors from Los Angeles, there are just as many from SoCal cities for which a "Los Angeles" control point is kind of useless.

[Max Rockatansky]

Let's talk about why Santa Ana is a control city on the 5 now in southern Orange County for like 10 miles.

What is the point of that? Like I'm not even mad about it, it just seems so utterly pointless and unneeded that I'm shocked they even did it.

Santa Ana has to be the most anonymous city in the United States with a population over 300,000 people.  I guess it wasn't that way once upon a time given the Santa Ana Freeway is named after it.  It probably didn't help Anaheim has a larger profile in the public consciousness because of a theme park and a couple pro sports teams. 

Was it named after the city or after the general?

The city, which makes sense since Santa Ana is the Orange County seat.

[kphoger]

I usually don't have a strong opinion about control cities, but I think I-15 out of Las Vegas should be signed for Barstow.  Solves this whole silly problem.  From Barstow, California can sign it however they want, and I'm fine with San Bernardino.

[Scott5114]

I usually don't have a strong opinion about control cities, but I think I-15 out of Las Vegas should be signed for Barstow.  Solves this whole silly problem.  From Barstow, California can sign it however they want, and I'm fine with San Bernardino.

I guess Barstow would work, but I think it's mostly relevant as a NB I-15 to EB I-40 waypoint. It's much less relevant to a southbound traveler (unless they're headed to Bakersfield).

San Bernardino would probably be better because that's (roughly) where Los Angeles traffic turns off, but San Diego traffic still passes through it. (I-15 bypasses the bulk of SBD, but the north I-15/I-215 junction is in city limits.)

To some extent, just about everything suggested is a way of saying "Cajon Pass" without saying "Cajon Pass", so I wonder if maybe that's the ideal solution.

[oscar]

To some extent, just about everything suggested is a way of saying "Cajon Pass" without saying "Cajon Pass", so I wonder if maybe that's the ideal solution.

Except there's a non-trivial risk of confusion with Tejon Pass on I-5. Sometimes I confuse the two passes, even though I used to live in southern California.

[PNWRoadgeek]

I usually don't have a strong opinion about control cities, but I think I-15 out of Las Vegas should be signed for Barstow.  Solves this whole silly problem.  From Barstow, California can sign it however they want, and I'm fine with San Bernardino.

I guess Barstow would work, but I think it's mostly relevant as a NB I-15 to EB I-40 waypoint. It's much less relevant to a southbound traveler (unless they're headed to Bakersfield).

San Bernardino would probably be better because that's (roughly) where Los Angeles traffic turns off, but San Diego traffic still passes through it. (I-15 bypasses the bulk of SBD, but the north I-15/I-215 junction is in city limits.)

To some extent, just about everything suggested is a way of saying "Cajon Pass" without saying "Cajon Pass", so I wonder if maybe that's the ideal solution.

What could be interesting is if they dual signed San Bernardino with LA or SD. I feel like that could change a lot of things with signage on both the 15 and the 215, obviously once the 15/215 occurs than there isn't really a point to dual signing them anymore, as from there(or maybe the 10 interchange) San Diego is the primary waypoint.

[Scott5114]

To some extent, just about everything suggested is a way of saying "Cajon Pass" without saying "Cajon Pass", so I wonder if maybe that's the ideal solution.

Except there's a non-trivial risk of confusion with Tejon Pass on I-5. Sometimes I confuse the two passes, even though I used to live in southern California.

Yes, that's true. There's also the non-trivial problem that a lot of maps don't label passes, so those not familiar with the area wouldn't necessarily know what it's referring to.

[PNWRoadgeek]

To some extent, just about everything suggested is a way of saying "Cajon Pass" without saying "Cajon Pass", so I wonder if maybe that's the ideal solution.

Except there's a non-trivial risk of confusion with Tejon Pass on I-5. Sometimes I confuse the two passes, even though I used to live in southern California.

I didn't even know that the Cajon Pass existed for many years, probably because the Tejon Pass is so significant, as it basically is the entry point into the LA metro.