wildly incorrect mileage on CA-58 distance sign

[FredAkbar]

On EB CA-58 just west of the CA-58 Business Loop and CA-14 interchanges, there is a mileage sign that states:

Mojave 1
Jct <14> 4
Jct <15> Barstow 40

See GSV.

The 40 miles is very wrong. It should be about 70 miles. I put in a CalTrans customer service request to let them know. It's District 9, though there was not an option to select the district in the form, but it did have me place a pin on a map which identified the location.

Notably, this newer version of the sign was only installed in the last couple of years. Prior GSV (e.g. from April 2024) shows just Mojave and CA-14 listed on the sign.

Maybe someone at CalTrans got confused and it was supposed to be an I-40 reference to go along with the Barstow / Jct I-15? Though such a reference to Jct I-40 might not make sense in the future.

[Max Rockatansky]

I recall seeing that this past April.  I didn't have my phone ready to take a camera.  Too bad it will be nighttime when I'm passing through there next week.

[pderocco]

40 miles is about the distance to Kramer Junction and US-395. Which wouldn't be a silly thing to put on the sign, since lots of trucks go there and then turn south.

[FredAkbar]

It always takes a couple of passes to confirm it because the first time I just assume I misread the sign or am going crazy. Especially because I don't really think about it until the next sign shows a much greater distance.

Then the second time I see it again and realize I'm onto something. Luckily GSV was updated since the sign was put up.

[FredAkbar]

40 miles is about the distance to Kramer Junction and US-395. Which wouldn't be a silly thing to put on the sign, since lots of trucks go there and then turn south.

True, though isn't the third line on these signs usually the control city (or similar concept) which is held consistent across all the various signs. For that stretch of CA-58, it's always Barstow/I-15 as the final destination.

[pderocco]

40 miles is about the distance to Kramer Junction and US-395. Which wouldn't be a silly thing to put on the sign, since lots of trucks go there and then turn south.

True, though isn't the third line on these signs usually the control city (or similar concept) which is held consistent across all the various signs. For that stretch of CA-58, it's always Barstow/I-15 as the final destination.

Yes, and Barstow is a much better control city than Kramer Junction. I think someone had a brain fart, and measured it to Kramer Junction.

[JustDrive]

I think it's notable that there are absolutely zero references to Los Angeles on that stretch of 58, which would come in handy whenever the Grapevine is closed due to snow.

[cahwyguy]

I think it's notable that there are absolutely zero references to Los Angeles on that stretch of 58, which would come in handy whenever the Grapevine is closed due to snow.

That's not a surprise, as Route 58 goes nowhere near Los Angeles. The closest it gets is Mojave, and that's 90 minutes away at least. Similarly with Bakersfield or Barstow.

[JustDrive]

I think it's notable that there are absolutely zero references to Los Angeles on that stretch of 58, which would come in handy whenever the Grapevine is closed due to snow.

That's not a surprise, as Route 58 goes nowhere near Los Angeles. The closest it gets is Mojave, and that's 90 minutes away at least. Similarly with Bakersfield or Barstow.

I meant at the 58/14 junction, which is only signed for Mojave and Bishop with no mention that 14 goes towards L.A. It was mentioned before the bypass was built.

[Road Hog]

There is one on FM 455 coming into Celina, TX from the west. It says "ANNA 28," except that Anna is at the most 17 miles from the sign. Been that way since I moved into the area 25+ years ago.

[cahwyguy]

I think it's notable that there are absolutely zero references to Los Angeles on that stretch of 58, which would come in handy whenever the Grapevine is closed due to snow.

That's not a surprise, as Route 58 goes nowhere near Los Angeles. The closest it gets is Mojave, and that's 90 minutes away at least. Similarly with Bakersfield or Barstow.

I meant at the 58/14 junction, which is only signed for Mojave and Bishop with no mention that 14 goes towards L.A. It was mentioned before the bypass was built.

Well, Mojave and Bishop are the next major cities. After Mojave, you would have Lancaster then Palmdale and then Santa Clarita. They never completed 14 into LA (Route 14 would have ended at Sunset and Temescal). Now, if you had been talking US 6, then Los Angeles and Long Beach would have made sense.

[gonealookin]

There's probably some other thread on this subject, but because this is current and in Pacific Southwest...

Eastbound US 50, just past the junction with Nevada SR 28, has "Fallon 62" on a mileage sign:

https://maps.app.goo.gl/Sj3zMcPgsF6cGb6t7

It's actually 74 miles.  That's a fairly new sign which repeats that error from the old one.

[ClassicHasClass]

I think it's notable that there are absolutely zero references to Los Angeles on that stretch of 58, which would come in handy whenever the Grapevine is closed due to snow.

That's not a surprise, as Route 58 goes nowhere near Los Angeles. The closest it gets is Mojave, and that's 90 minutes away at least. Similarly with Bakersfield or Barstow.

I meant at the 58/14 junction, which is only signed for Mojave and Bishop with no mention that 14 goes towards L.A. It was mentioned before the bypass was built.

Well, Mojave and Bishop are the next major cities. After Mojave, you would have Lancaster then Palmdale and then Santa Clarita. They never completed 14 into LA (Route 14 would have ended at Sunset and Temescal). Now, if you had been talking US 6, then Los Angeles and Long Beach would have made sense.

But that's the control cities argument, isn't it? The 405 doesn't go to Sacramento either.

[cahwyguy]

But that's the control cities argument, isn't it? The 405 doesn't go to Sacramento either.

Well, to be technical, Control Cities are only defined for the major Interstates: See https://www.cahighways.org/itypes-control.html Anything else is, again, technically, a forward direction. The difference is that continuous signing is (nationally) guaranteed for a control city. It appears on every pull-through sign on the Interstate leading to it until it is reached, then the next control city appears on every pull-through until that is reached, and so on. This doesn't work for things like loop routes (3-digits) or spurs (which might be within a city); and AASHTO doesn't have jurisdiction over the state routes.

Now, you are right that Caltrans *could* decide to use Los Angeles as a forward direction. But they have precedence for not doing that. Look at Route 126. Its "forward direction" westbound, after Santa Paula, is Santa Clarita, NOT Los Angeles. Similarly Route 14 EB after Santa Clarita uses Palmdale and Lancaster, not Mojave or Bishop. I used GSV in Lancaster, and the signs to get folks on the freeway use Mojave and Los Angeles.

Given this data, Mojave seems to be a significant point to sign: it is where Route 58 meets Route 14. From there, it would be reasonable that the next major signage would be Lancaster or Palmdale (essentially, where Route 14 meets Route 138), and then Los Angeles from that point on.

As for I-405: As noted, signing loops is hard. How would you sign it N of Santa Monica? Sylmar? That wouldn't help drivers (esp. as you can't continue S on I-5 from I-405 N). What about S of Long Beach? Irvine? Again, that doesn't really help drivers.

If you want to discuss control cities, there are plenty of other discussions both on this board and elsewhere.

[FredAkbar]

CalTrans emailed me back today:

"Situation Acknowledged. Will be addressed."

Additional message: "Thanks for bringing this to Caltrans. We have sent this request to our Special Crews who will inspect the sign at the location provided as soon as possible."

I kind of messed up the description as I told them the location is "EB CA-58 just west of CA-14 interchange" (it's actually just west of the CA-58 BL interchange which is before the CA-14 interchange), but I also included a GSV link so hopefully they figure it out.

[FredAkbar]

Got a second reply a few minutes later:

"Your concern as submitted in the Customer Service Request has been addressed, and your ticket has been closed. For more information regarding your CSR, please see the "Additional Closing Message" in this email. Thank you for using the Caltrans web site to notify us of your concern. At Caltrans we're here to get you there. If you have any questions, please call our District Office at (760) 872-0601."

Additional message: "Thank you for contacting Caltrans regarding this issue. Our Guardrail Maintenance crew is aware of this issue and are awaiting the necessary parts to be able to make the repairs in this request."

So I guess they ordered a new piece for the sign or however they plan to fix it.

[SeriesE]

But that's the control cities argument, isn't it? The 405 doesn't go to Sacramento either.

Now, you are right that Caltrans *could* decide to use Los Angeles as a forward direction. But they have precedence for not doing that. Look at Route 126. Its "forward direction" westbound, after Santa Paula, is Santa Clarita, NOT Los Angeles. Similarly Route 14 EB after Santa Clarita uses Palmdale and Lancaster, not Mojave or Bishop. I used GSV in Lancaster, and the signs to get folks on the freeway use Mojave and Los Angeles.

Given this data, Mojave seems to be a significant point to sign: it is where Route 58 meets Route 14. From there, it would be reasonable that the next major signage would be Lancaster or Palmdale (essentially, where Route 14 meets Route 138), and then Los Angeles from that point on.

Signs on CA-14 S pretty much immediately switches to Los Angeles right after the interchange with CA-58.

[andy3175]

Got a second reply a few minutes later:

"Your concern as submitted in the Customer Service Request has been addressed, and your ticket has been closed. For more information regarding your CSR, please see the "Additional Closing Message" in this email. Thank you for using the Caltrans web site to notify us of your concern. At Caltrans we're here to get you there. If you have any questions, please call our District Office at (760) 872-0601."

Additional message: "Thank you for contacting Caltrans regarding this issue. Our Guardrail Maintenance crew is aware of this issue and are awaiting the necessary parts to be able to make the repairs in this request."

So I guess they ordered a new piece for the sign or however they plan to fix it.

Well, I've made similar requests to fix Caltrans infrastructure (lights out, sign issues, pavement damage, encampments in the rights of way, etc.). The "Situation Acknowledged. Will be addressed." statement is a good sign in my experience that Caltrans will fix the problem. It may take a minute, but they will get it done. My most recent experience was with the recently added "Mission Bay Park Next Three Exits" sign on I-5 south in the City of San Diego between Exits 26 and 23. It was added as a new sign around 2023 (I think), and someone hit the sign within a few months after it was installed. I notified Caltrans, they sent me that same message, and they manufactured a new sign to replace the old damaged sign. After about six months, the new sign was in place. The timeframe for that seemed reasonable.