Exit name/destination choices that aren't the most ideal for an interchange

[pianocello]

Exit 11 on I-496 in Lansing, MI used to be for Jolly Rd. Only problem is, Jolly Rd is an overpass about a half mile south of the interchange, and all ramps intersect with the nearby Dunckel Rd instead.

A couple years ago, the signs have been updated to say "Exit 11 - Dunckel Rd / Jolly Rd". (link)

[hbelkins]

Exit 94 on I-64 at Winchester has been signed for Van Meter Road for as long as I can remember. The route numbers listed on the exit signage are KY 1958 and Truck KY 627. The exit itself is NOT for Van Meter; Van Meter is a local road (KY 2888) that basically serves as a frontage road for I-64 between exits 94 and 87.

[SkyPesos]

Minor nitpick of mine: Mason used as a control city for US 42 on its exit from I-275. This interchange is still a bit of distance from Mason, and most drivers heading to Mason would either use I-75 and exit at Tylersville Rd (22) or Liberty Way (24A), or I-71 and exit at Mason-Montgomery Rd (19), Western Row Rd (24) or OH 741 (25), than exit here and make the trek on a mostly 1 lane per direction road up to Mason.

[hobsini2]

In the case of Colby, which I have been a few times, Colby should be signed on Hwy 25. It's not wrong to sign 3 destinations on a BGS. Put Colby on top since it is the closest city and then Leoti and Atwood.

KDOT isn't signing it because doing so would create 3 destinations, though. They're not doing it because there's two Colby exits, so as far as they're concerned "Colby, Next 2 Exits" is the appropriate way to sign it, because it's consistent with how they do it for larger cities.

It may be consistent but that doesn't mean it's more helpful. Those type of Next X Exit signs should be used when you have a series of exits serving a city AND the BGS is using the street name. Using them on a town that's 59th in the state's population is silly. At least have a city with a decent size pop that out of towners can recognize. Hell, you would be hard pressed to find a regular person who knows Hays let alone Colby.

[dkblake]

The control cities for the Mid-Cape Highway are the same both EB and WB but make much more sense from the EB perspective. For example, the control cities for the former Exit 8/Union St. are Yarmouth/Dennis, but Dennis (town or village) doesn't make any sense for WB traffic, which would get off at the former Exit 9. Similarly, the control cities for the former Exit 7/Willow St. are W. Yarmouth/Yarmouthport, but Hyannis is the main destination off Exit 7 for WB traffic and traffic to Yarmouthport would take Exit 8. 

[ftballfan]

on us 31 in muskegon, mi, (at least last time i was there), m-46 is signed eastbound as 'm-46 east, newaygo' newaygo isn't even ON m-46.

Some more on US-31:
Exit 140 (M-20/Stony Lake Rd/New Era) - Fremont should be mentioned, at least southbound. Northbound could add White Cloud or Hesperia
Exit 118 (M-120/Fremont/North Muskegon) - Fremont should be dropped southbound (it works perfectly NB) as it's far out of the way to head on SB US-31 to exit 118 to head back northeast toward Fremont

[KCRoadFan]

One that comes to mind in Minnesota: the mention of Waterville on the sign for I-35 Exit 56 (for MN 60) in Faribault. While it works perfectly well for southbound I-35, northbound traffic headed there would be better served by getting off at Exit 48 (the Medford exit) due to the trajectory of MN 60, which swings to the south as it heads west from I-35.

Personally, I think a better choice for the "second town" on the Exit 56 signage would be Zumbrota; Waterville, then, would be referenced on supplementary signage at Exit 48 (northbound) and Exit 56 (southbound).

(Also in that section of Minnesota: I think that the sign for westbound US 14 at the interchange on I-35 in Owatonna should be for Mankato instead of Waseca; the former is a much larger town and is more on par, population-wise, with Rochester, the destination for eastbound US 14. Waseca - as well as Kasson for eastbound US 14 - should be referenced on supplementary signage before the exit.)

[TheHighwayMan3561]

One that comes to mind in Minnesota: the mention of Waterville on the sign for I-35 Exit 56 (for MN 60) in Faribault. While it works perfectly well for southbound I-35, northbound traffic headed there would be better served by getting off at Exit 48 (the Medford exit) due to the trajectory of MN 60, which swings to the south as it heads west from I-35.

Personally, I think a better choice for the "second town" on the Exit 56 signage would be Zumbrota; Waterville, then, would be referenced on supplementary signage at Exit 48 (northbound) and Exit 56 (southbound).

(Also in that section of Minnesota: I think that the sign for westbound US 14 at the interchange on I-35 in Owatonna should be for Mankato instead of Waseca; the former is a much larger town and is more on par, population-wise, with Rochester, the destination for eastbound US 14. Waseca - as well as Kasson for eastbound US 14 - should be referenced on supplementary signage before the exit.)

Zumbrota wouldn't make sense for southbound I-35 traffic at MN 60. Kenyon would make a lot more sense for this argument since 35/60 is equal to 52/56 in going from MSP to Kenyon. Similarly, Mankato actually makes a lot more sense for MN 60 than US 14, at least heading southbound on I-35.

[webny99]

Personally, I think a better choice for the "second town" on the Exit 56 signage would be Zumbrota; Waterville, then, would be referenced on supplementary signage at Exit 48 (northbound) and Exit 56 (southbound).

Zumbrota wouldn't make sense for southbound I-35 traffic at MN 60. Kenyon would make a lot more sense for this argument since 35/60 is equal to 52/56 in going from MSP to Kenyon. Similarly, Mankato actually makes a lot more sense for MN 60 than US 14, at least heading southbound on I-35.

Having different destinations depending on the direction seems to always be somewhat controversial, but personally I'd be fine with Zumbrota northbound and Mankato southbound.

[kphoger]

Having different destinations depending on the direction seems to always be somewhat controversial

Yes.  You can never then refer to an exit as "the ______ exit", because the name will depend on direction of travel.

[webny99]

Having different destinations depending on the direction seems to always be somewhat controversial

Yes.  You can never then refer to an exit as "the ______ exit", because the name will depend on direction of travel.

That doesn't apply if it's the second destination that varies, though. In the case above, it's the Faribault exit no matter what.

[achilles765]

Well one I immediately think of here in Houston is the exit off IH 45 for Loop 336 in Conroe. The exit sign reads "Loop 336. To Navasota, Cleveland"  but you have to turn onto another highway at some point to reach either of those since 336 is just a loop around Conroe.

[roadman65]

In Florida on I-4 Exit 58 needs to be redone.  It uses Kissimmee from when it was an EB only exit, but since it became a full interchange and so much sprawl turned what once was rural into a suburban nightmare between I-4 and Kissimmee proper no more is it a direct route.

Kissimmee should be removed for Champions Gate to be Champions Gate/ Poinciana.

[ctkatz]

this has since been changed in the past 15 years but for decades I 65 north at uofl had an A/B exit for eastern parkway.   132 A went straight to eastern parkway east, but 132 B was listed as eastern parkway west, but you weren't turning on to eastern west.  in actuality you were turning on to east university bvld, which led to crittenden drive which then led you to the eastern parkway intersection where you could turn either east or west.

since I've left campus the area has really grown and changed. the exits are no longer an A/B, former exit 132 B is now 133 and is listed as university Blvd TO eastern parkway, and the off ramp has been changed to let you turn either direction where before you were forced towards crittenden.