AARoads Forum

I know that control citys are important for traffic heading to and from places

I know New York City is an important control city
I saw (New York) as a control city for I-95 north as far south as Baltimore, I think what Maryland did is a great idea

however in New England I-95 is the major route from any New England point to NY city and I only saw (NY city) as control point on I-95 south in southern half of CT and a few in Providence RI.
I think Massachussets and even NH and Maine should start to put up (NY city or New York) as a control city for I-95

for example in Massachussets on I-93 comming to its southern end in Canton and on I-95 Rt-128 in Canton I suggest ( Exit 1A I-95 south Providence RI, New York City) so traffic can get on I-95 south to head to NY and points south.

South of Boston I also suggest on I-95s control point between Exit 12 and 1 especasly in Foxbaro (I-95 south Providence RI, New York City) (I-95 North Boston, To All NH-Maine points).

on Rt-128 I-95 combo I suggest the following
on Rt-2 put up (I-95 south to I-90 mass pike RI-Ct-NY) and (I-95 north Peabody Hampton Beach NH)

North of Boston I suggest on I-95 south (also on I-93 south and US-3) before the Rt-128 jct to put (To Providence RI, New York City use I-95 Rt-128 south) this is important info for trucks with hazardous material because there banned from I-93 tunnels

also unrelated to that  North of Boston on I-95 northbound between Exit 45 and Exit 60 I suggest (I-95 north Hampton Beach NH, Portsmouth NH) so traffic will know how to get to Hampton Beach resort during the summer.

getting back to the topic on the I-95 NH turnpike like at the Hampton toll plaza interchange I suggest to put up (I-95 south to I-495 Boston New York). also on Rt-16 near the end in Portsmouth put up (I-95 south to Rt-101 I-495, Boston New York) so traffic will understand how to get to I-495 and Rt-101 from the north.

in Maine tunrpike southbound near I-295 north of Portland aria I suggest they put a sign (Boston, New York use I-95 south)

anyother suggestions please let me know

I-95 the whole way is not the best way from New York City to I-95 north of Boston.

I always cringe when I see "New York City" as a control city because technically there is no such place.  It's the "city of New York", not the "city of New York City". I get what they're trying to do with that control city but it still makes me crazy. Old crankiness and all that.

Quote from: 1 on May 07, 2014, 04:05:26 PM
I-95 the whole way is not the best way from New York City to I-95 north of Boston.

Only those New Englanders in Maine, far eastern New Hampshire, Massachusetts east of 93 or south of Canton, Rhode Island, and parts of CT should be using 95 as anything but the last leg of their trip to New York.

This is not 'any part of New England,' or even most of it.

I would be really interested in hearing more about whether this solution has a problem to go with it. What percentage of 95 south traffic in Maine is heading to New York? What confusion exists at the moment among drivers driving from Maine and New Hampshire to New York?

Once upon a time, there used to be a supplemental BGS along I-95 South just before the I-495 South Exit (#59) that listed New York.  It was replaced in the 90s without any reference to NYC.

Similarly, along US 1 South in Peabody before the I-95 (MA 128) exit; there used to be supplemental BGS' that listed either New York or New York City for the MA 128 South, then later I-95 South heading.  Such signage was also removed during the 90s.

Quote from: A00234826 on May 07, 2014, 03:55:08 PMhowever in New England I-95 is the major route from any New England point to NY city and I only saw (NY city) as control point on I-95 south in southern half of CT and a few in Providence RI.
I think Massachussets and even NH and Maine should start to put up (NY city or New York) as a control city for I-95

As 1 mentioned, you are aware that I-95 is not the most direct way to NYC from many eastern & northern New England cities?

Heck, along I-95 in MA where it multiplexes w/128; some people freak out (my 77-year-old mother being one of them) when only NH & RI destinations are listed on I-95 BGS' instead of more local MA destinations.

Additionally, listing 2 destinations for one route number in one direction per either pull-thru and/or exit ramp BGS is more often than not discouraged by MUTCD; although many states still do such in certain cases.

Quote from: Pete from Boston on May 07, 2014, 04:42:37 PMI would be really interested in hearing more about whether this solution has a problem to go with it. What percentage of 95 south traffic in Maine is heading to New York? What confusion exists at the moment among drivers driving from Maine and New Hampshire to New York?

Most NYC-bound truckers from either NH & ME that don't have to stop in eastern MA usually use I-95/495/290/90/84/CT-15/I-91/95.  Such is much more direct and is also cheaper; the only toll being I-90/Mass Pike from Auburn (I-290) to Sturbridge (I-84). 

For the OP, Exit 9 BGS off I-90 West for I-84 (http://goo.gl/maps/jWnsO)

Quote from: upstatenyroads on May 07, 2014, 04:23:49 PM
I always cringe when I see "New York City" as a control city because technically there is no such place.  It's the "city of New York", not the "city of New York City". I get what they're trying to do with that control city but it still makes me crazy. Old crankiness and all that.

NYSDOT does it on many roads.  Even the NYSTA has it on some of their signage.(https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8489/8172766321_02437e6262_c.jpg)

I know what you mean, though, as New York is the proper name of the city.  It is not like Kansas City where "City" part of its name.  NJDOT is starting to do it as well.  I-78, I-80 and even I-287 is using "New York City" whereas before it was just plain and simple "New York."  Even new posts on here of the NJ Turnpike 6-9 new signs has "New York City" instead of "New York" as it did for decades.

Quote from: roadman65 on May 07, 2014, 05:07:18 PMI know what you mean, though, as New York is the proper name of the city.  It is not like Kansas City where "City" part of its name.  NJDOT is starting to do it as well.  I-78, I-80 and even I-287 is using "New York City" whereas before it was just plain and simple "New York."  Even new posts on here of the NJ Turnpike 6-9 new signs has "New York City" instead of "New York" as it did for decades.

I have to wonder if such practice is a result of the recent MUTCD prohibition of listing states as control cities.  Either DOTs are misinterpreting such prohibition or MUTCD (wrongly IMHO) told DOTs to add City to New York listings.

The farthest south I can think of a BGS using "New York City" is northbound I-95 in Virginia at Exit 161.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi31.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fc378%2F1995hoo%2FRoad%2520sign%2520pictures%2Fa9251f60.jpg&hash=bbc15b468aacc49efa5f059424a17a6da6bb85cc)

I don't see any reason to gripe about the word "City" in this situation because it avoids ambiguity. New York State is a big enough place that you wouldn't necessarily want to follow I-95 if you were going to, say, Buffalo.

Let's not forget Copley Square's affront (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.34904,-71.077326,3a,75y,194.71h,85.18t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sA7N0JXoj1VgxwIeTcqvdEA!2e0!6m1!1e1) to the bitter New-York-haters of Boston.  This sign was always my Exhibit A of how New York matters to Boston far more than the other way around, making the "rivalry" often discussed up here a one-sided fiction.

Quote from: upstatenyroads on May 07, 2014, 04:23:49 PM
I always cringe when I see "New York City" as a control city because technically there is no such place.  It's the "city of New York", not the "city of New York City". I get what they're trying to do with that control city but it still makes me crazy. Old crankiness and all that.

To people around the City of New York, there's New York (a city), and there's New York State (a state).  At least that's how I grew up looking at it.  "New York City" just makes me think of the cranky rustlers in the old Pace salsa commercial, crying out its exotic name in disgust.

Quote from: Pete from Boston on May 07, 2014, 06:04:17 PMLet's not forget Copley Square's affront to the bitter New-York-haters of Boston.  This sign was always my Exhibit A of how New York matters to Boston far more than the other way around, making the "rivalry" often discussed up here a one-sided fiction

I've been told that "New York" (as opposed to something like Springfield or Albany NY) was included on that sign (which was installed about 1996) to enable the ancient support truss to be re-used - remember, this was the height of the "reuse existing sign supports wherever possible" era in Massachusetts.

please use correct quote tags

NYC might be the biggest city in the US, but doesn't need to be the only city listed on the Eastern seaboard. If someone is in Maine, more than likely they are only going as far south as Boston. No need to list NYC on 95 for that. IF someone is in Boston, wouldn't it be faster to go inland and south rather than hug the coast? So shouldn't Providence, RI or New Haven, CT work better? As for Baltimore area going north, both Philly and NYC should be the control cities since the 495/95/295(NJTP as well) split off in Delaware will divert to one of those two cities. 

On both I-95 and CT 15 SB in CT, "NY City" is used as the control city south of New Haven.  Once you cross from CT into NY, the control city changes to "New York".  When I see NY City, I think of the 5 boroughs, not just Manhattan.  There's a NYCDOT so why can't NY City be a control city?

I see no reason why NYC should be a control city any point north of Boston.  Maybe supplemental signage, if anything.  RI uses "New York" as a control city but I think it should be supplemented with New London CT. 

It is like "Miami" is being used as far north as St. Augustine, yet when you get past Palm Bay it changes to "West Palm Beach" because of FDOT district politics.  That is what is between RI and CT on I-95.  RI prefers "NY", but CT will not use it until after New Haven all after "New York" is brought into the picture.  However, at CT 9's southern terminus both "New Haven and NY City" are both used together there.

Quote from: 1995hoo on May 07, 2014, 05:40:19 PM
The farthest south I can think of a BGS using "New York City" is northbound I-95 in Virginia at Exit 161.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi31.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fc378%2F1995hoo%2FRoad%2520sign%2520pictures%2Fa9251f60.jpg&hash=bbc15b468aacc49efa5f059424a17a6da6bb85cc)

I don't see any reason to gripe about the word "City" in this situation because it avoids ambiguity. New York State is a big enough place that you wouldn't necessarily want to follow I-95 if you were going to, say, Buffalo.

If you're on I-95 and think you're headed towards Buffalo then you shouldn't be driving a vehicle.

Quote from: upstatenyroads on May 07, 2014, 08:09:34 PM

Quote from: 1995hoo on May 07, 2014, 05:40:19 PM
The farthest south I can think of a BGS using "New York City" is northbound I-95 in Virginia at Exit 161.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi31.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fc378%2F1995hoo%2FRoad%2520sign%2520pictures%2Fa9251f60.jpg&hash=bbc15b468aacc49efa5f059424a17a6da6bb85cc)

I don't see any reason to gripe about the word "City" in this situation because it avoids ambiguity. New York State is a big enough place that you wouldn't necessarily want to follow I-95 if you were going to, say, Buffalo.

If you're on I-95 and think you're headed towards Buffalo then you shouldn't be driving a vehicle.

Might depend on where you start. Coming from further south, it's perfectly reasonable to go up I-95 to the DC area and swing around to the west before heading up I-270.

Regarding "New York" versus "New York State," my relatives in Brooklyn always regarded "New York" (the city) as referring to the island of Manhattan. The 1898 consolidation might as well never have happened. Of course, Yonkers is Upstate to them too! (BTW, growing up here in Northern Virginia we always said "Washington State" to refer to the state of Washington so as to distinguish from the city....for some reason we didn't call it "DC" back then. Confused the crap out of some college friends of mine who interpreted "Washington State" as referring to a university.)

Ultimately I think people who fuss about "City of New York" versus "New York City" on a sign are being pedantic because the point is for the sign to assist people. "New York City" potentially does that. I also note the city's website is NYC.gov.....

Quote from: roadman65 on May 07, 2014, 07:12:08 PM
However, at CT 9's southern terminus both "New Haven and NY City" are both used together there.

This is also done in Hartford and also New Britain I believe where 5-15 interchanges with 9 or I-91 (or is it I-84?). If memory serves those signs use the New Haven and N.Y. City as control cities as well.

Quote from: 1995hoo on May 07, 2014, 08:18:39 PM

Quote from: upstatenyroads on May 07, 2014, 08:09:34 PM

Quote from: 1995hoo on May 07, 2014, 05:40:19 PM
The farthest south I can think of a BGS using "New York City" is northbound I-95 in Virginia at Exit 161.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi31.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fc378%2F1995hoo%2FRoad%2520sign%2520pictures%2Fa9251f60.jpg&hash=bbc15b468aacc49efa5f059424a17a6da6bb85cc)

I don't see any reason to gripe about the word "City" in this situation because it avoids ambiguity. New York State is a big enough place that you wouldn't necessarily want to follow I-95 if you were going to, say, Buffalo.

If you're on I-95 and think you're headed towards Buffalo then you shouldn't be driving a vehicle.

Might depend on where you start. Coming from further south, it's perfectly reasonable to go up I-95 to the DC area and swing around to the west before heading up I-270.

Regarding "New York" versus "New York State," my relatives in Brooklyn always regarded "New York" (the city) as referring to the island of Manhattan. The 1898 consolidation might as well never have happened. Of course, Yonkers is Upstate to them too! (BTW, growing up here in Northern Virginia we always said "Washington State" to refer to the state of Washington so as to distinguish from the city....for some reason we didn't call it "DC" back then. Confused the crap out of some college friends of mine who interpreted "Washington State" as referring to a university.)

Ultimately I think people who fuss about "City of New York" versus "New York City" on a sign are being pedantic because the point is for the sign to assist people. "New York City" potentially does that. I also note the city's website is NYC.gov.....

I guess I'm pedantic. I can deal with that. In today's world where "good enough" warrants a medal, I feel more and more obsolete.

If it makes folks warm and fuzzy to see "New York City" on a guide sign then so be it. Unfortunately they're probably following their GPS and have no idea what the signs say anyway, but for those paying attention to the signs, they'd probably find the information helpful.

Quote from: connroadgeek on May 07, 2014, 09:21:53 PM

Quote from: roadman65 on May 07, 2014, 07:12:08 PM
However, at CT 9's southern terminus both "New Haven and NY City" are both used together there.

This is also done in Hartford and also New Britain I believe where 5-15 interchanges with 9 or I-91 (or is it I-84?). If memory serves those signs use the New Haven and N.Y. City as control cities as well.

The following locations in CT have a secondary control city of NY City:
I-84 WB Exit 57*
I-91 SB at Exit 17**
CT 9 SB at Exit to I-95 SB
CT 9 SB at Exit 20S
CT 15 SB Exit to I-91 SB in Hartford
CT 15 NB Exit to I-91 SB in Hartford

*  The primary control city for this exit is "Charter Oak Bridge".  Interesting that this was chosen and "New Haven" was left out, though this is the primary truck route to/from Boston.

**  There used to be more pull-throughs on I-91 SB in Hartford which also had NY City listed but they were removed in the late 80s/early 90s.

I have no quarrel with "New York City" being used at all, but I find it interesting that NJDOT is going all out to change "New York" out for this.  For years you have seen signs for "New York" on all major roadways leading to the North Jersey Metro Area, and now all of a sudden since the mid to late 90's NJDOT decided to tack on the "City" to it. 

Quote from: connroadgeek on May 07, 2014, 09:21:53 PM

Quote from: roadman65 on May 07, 2014, 07:12:08 PM
However, at CT 9's southern terminus both "New Haven and NY City" are both used together there.

This is also done in Hartford and also New Britain I believe where 5-15 interchanges with 9 or I-91 (or is it I-84?). If memory serves those signs use the New Haven and N.Y. City as control cities as well.

You're referring to Exits 20 N/S of CT Route 9 in Cromwell. Here's how the signs look when heading south at roughly mile marker 30, at the I-91 exits:

http://goo.gl/maps/mgNNo

P.S. US 5/CT 15 [Berlin Turnpike] intersects with CT Route 9 in Berlin, not New Britain.

Quote from: upstatenyroads on May 07, 2014, 04:23:49 PM
I always cringe when I see "New York City" as a control city because technically there is no such place.  It's the "city of New York", not the "city of New York City". I get what they're trying to do with that control city but it still makes me crazy. Old crankiness and all that.

Quote from: roadman65 on May 07, 2014, 10:44:59 PM
I have no quarrel with "New York City" being used at all, but I find it interesting that NJDOT is going all out to change "New York" out for this.  For years you have seen signs for "New York" on all major roadways leading to the North Jersey Metro Area, and now all of a sudden since the mid to late 90's NJDOT decided to tack on the "City" to it. 

At least we have an "Oklahoma City" and two "Kansas City"s, so why can't we have a "New York City" as well? Each example does a great job distinguishing itself from the state that it's named after.

Have you looked at the two Kanas City's?  If you travel SB I-29 at I-635 you will see that "Kanas City" is on the pull through sign only for I-29 which goes to the Missouri city.  I-635, that goes to the Kansas city of Kansas City, is signed with the state name of "Kansas." 

Apparently Missouri does not want to share the name with the neighboring state even though I-29 is the route from the Kansas City Airport which is for both Kansas City's.  Meanwhile those heading to Kansas might be confused at the I-635 exit and stay straight through on I-29 which goes to the Missouri city as they may think that "Kansas" is for the other points in the Sunflower State and that name of "Kansas City'  on the pull through there is for both places.

Quote from: roadman on May 07, 2014, 06:32:39 PMI've been told that "New York" (as opposed to something like Springfield or Albany NY) was included on that sign (which was installed about 1996) to enable the ancient support truss to be re-used - remember, this was the height of the "reuse existing sign supports wherever possible" era in Massachusetts.

IIRC, that particular BGS and gantry replaced the original 60s-era button-copy BGS (legend likely read Mass Pike Points West) and single-post style gantry.  Looking at the GSV of the current BGS & gantry, one can clearly tell that the gantry is not from the mid-60s.

The likely real reason for the Turnpike Authority using New York for its I-90 West entrance ramp signage for that area is to direct the various NYC-bound busses from the bus terminal(s) that were/are in that area.

Quote from: Henry on May 08, 2014, 03:50:19 PM

Quote from: upstatenyroads on May 07, 2014, 04:23:49 PM
I always cringe when I see "New York City" as a control city because technically there is no such place.  It's the "city of New York", not the "city of New York City". I get what they're trying to do with that control city but it still makes me crazy. Old crankiness and all that.

Quote from: roadman65 on May 07, 2014, 10:44:59 PM
I have no quarrel with "New York City" being used at all, but I find it interesting that NJDOT is going all out to change "New York" out for this.  For years you have seen signs for "New York" on all major roadways leading to the North Jersey Metro Area, and now all of a sudden since the mid to late 90's NJDOT decided to tack on the "City" to it. 

At least we have an "Oklahoma City" and two "Kansas City"s, so why can't we have a "New York City" as well? Each example does a great job distinguishing itself from the state that it's named after.

Well, in common parlance, clearly we can and do.  The point that has been made is that the name of those places are, respectively, City of Oklahoma City, and City of Kansas City. The city at the mouth of the Hudson is called City of New York, period. 

In fact, "the city" is probably far more common locally than "New York City."  Years after moving away from there, I still mean New York 90% of the time I refer to "the city."  I've heard people express disdain for the conceit apparent in this usage, but what are you gonna do?  When New York is the standard of "city" you grow up with, it's pretty much the only one.

(Interestingly, out in the boroughs "the city" generally refers to Manhattan, while in New Jersey it's pretty much everything across the Hudson.)

Quote from: PHLBOS on May 09, 2014, 08:53:48 AM

Quote from: roadman on May 07, 2014, 06:32:39 PMI've been told that "New York" (as opposed to something like Springfield or Albany NY) was included on that sign (which was installed about 1996) to enable the ancient support truss to be re-used - remember, this was the height of the "reuse existing sign supports wherever possible" era in Massachusetts.

IIRC, that particular BGS and gantry replaced the original 60s-era button-copy BGS (legend likely read Mass Pike Points West) and single-post style gantry.  Looking at the GSV of the current BGS & gantry, one can clearly tell that the gantry is not from the mid-60s.

The likely real reason for the Turnpike Authority using New York for its I-90 West entrance ramp signage for that area is to direct the various NYC-bound busses from the bus terminal(s) that were/are in that area.

hmm why not stay on I-95 because it gose to NY city, there other ways to get to NY city from Boston without paying the mass pike like I-93 (southeast expressway)south to Canton to Exit 1 to I-95 south (toll free)
from the south like Cape Cod I suggest to put up on Rt-25 entering I-195 (I-195 west Providence RI, New York City)
I also suggest on I-93 south Braintree split a sign (New York City use I-93 to I-95 south)

For the most part, when people say they're going to New York around here, they mean New York City...and mostly the Manhattan area.  They'd be a little more specific sometimes if they mean another borough.  Long Island means Long Island (although if not clear, it can be confused with Jersey's Long Beach Island).  If they're going elsewhere, then it's "New York State".

Quote from: jeffandnicole on May 09, 2014, 12:06:59 PM
For the most part, when people say they're going to New York around here, they mean New York City...and mostly the Manhattan area.  They'd be a little more specific sometimes if they mean another borough.  Long Island means Long Island (although if not clear, it can be confused with Jersey's Long Beach Island).  If they're going elsewhere, then it's "New York State".

Agreed on I-84 in Ct near the NY border they use to say (I-84 west New York State) so people will know there entering NY but not the city of NY

Quote from: A00234826 on May 09, 2014, 12:04:51 PM

Quote from: PHLBOS on May 09, 2014, 08:53:48 AM

Quote from: roadman on May 07, 2014, 06:32:39 PMI've been told that "New York" (as opposed to something like Springfield or Albany NY) was included on that sign (which was installed about 1996) to enable the ancient support truss to be re-used - remember, this was the height of the "reuse existing sign supports wherever possible" era in Massachusetts.

IIRC, that particular BGS and gantry replaced the original 60s-era button-copy BGS (legend likely read Mass Pike Points West) and single-post style gantry.  Looking at the GSV of the current BGS & gantry, one can clearly tell that the gantry is not from the mid-60s.

The likely real reason for the Turnpike Authority using New York for its I-90 West entrance ramp signage for that area is to direct the various NYC-bound busses from the bus terminal(s) that were/are in that area.

hmm why not stay on I-95 because it gose to NY city, there other ways to get to NY city from Boston without paying the mass pike like I-93 (southeast expressway)south to Canton to Exit 1 to I-95 south (toll free)
from the south like Cape Cod I suggest to put up on Rt-25 entering I-195 (I-195 west Providence RI, New York City)
I also suggest on I-93 south Braintree split a sign (New York City use I-93 to I-95 south)

Let's get one thing straight — there's a limited amount of space and driver attention to go around.  If someone there is going to New York and needs to be told not to take Route 3 to do it, they are in a very small minority.  It doesn't warrant the sign.

As far as 95 to New York, I'm guessing you're not a seasoned driver from Boston to New York because this route is 20+ miles longer and involves a very underpowered two-lane section of 95 in Connecticut that has the propensity to quickly become very slow.  Furthermore, 90 to 84 gives one at least three options of through route beyond Hartford, along with many more ways to switch between them if traffic is bad.

I can see you are really fond of 95, but the small Mass Pike toll is worth it for the quality of trip it ultimately provides.

Amen.  The toll on the Pike is well worth it, especially only out to 84.  (I've also been known to choose to take the Chicago Skyway instead of the Borman and stuff like that, when it's clearly worth the time saved or even just potential frustration saved.)

Quote from: PurdueBill on May 09, 2014, 12:55:53 PM
Amen.  The toll on the Pike is well worth it, especially only out to 84.  (I've also been known to choose to take the Chicago Skyway instead of the Borman and stuff like that, when it's clearly worth the time saved or even just potential frustration saved.)

I meant to add that most of the toll is negated by the gallon or so of gas saved, making it truly a no-brainer.

Quote from: A00234826 on May 09, 2014, 12:10:23 PMAgreed on I-84 in Ct near the NY border they use to say (I-84 west New York State) so people will know there entering NY but not the city of NY

That particular BGS was replaced (it actually read N.Y. State BTW) with its listed control destination as Newburgh, a city that I-84 actually runs through or near.  The change was likely due to the newer practice of no longer listing only states as a control destinations.

With regards to the topic on hand, I have several questions/comments:

1.  During the course of this thread or even before it, did you even look at a road map (or Google/Bing Maps) showing New York (City) & Boston?  IMHO, this would be one case where one picture is worth 1000 words.

2.  After receiving several responses from others (including myself) regarding that using all of I-95 from the Boston area to NYC isn't the wisest (nor shortest) of routes, unless one's either attempting to clinch the route or stopping at key destinations along the way (Providence, Mystic, New London, New Haven, etc.); you're still pressing the issue regarding signing I-95 in MA w/such.  What gives?

3.  In reference to your "Why don't they sign I-93 South to I-95 South w/NYC listings?" (paraphrase, mind you) reply to my stating that the New York reference on the I-90 West BGS at Copley Square was likely used as a means to direct NYC-bound busses (there are a few bus terminals near that area) the easiest & quickest way to get off the local city streets and onto a highway; here's the simple, basic answer.  Backtracking east (through narrow,  crowded city streets) to pick up I-93 South (the Southeast Expressway) to head that far southwest is absolute lunacy.  Remember, these busses have a schedule to reasonably maintain.

4.  The only reasoning behind why NYC appears on I-95 signage as far south as the DC area is likely due to the fact that between Baltimore and NYC; one can take an all-highway routing that has no major metropolitan cities between them... I-295 in DE to the New Jersey Turnpike, which actually isn't part of I-95 south of the PA Turnpike branch-off.

I-95 North/295 North split south of Wilmington, DE: note the NY destination (along w/NJ, though DelDOT messed up the order (the older BGS had it correctly listed as NJ-NY)) is with I-295 (http://goo.gl/maps/dEdIS).

And before you say "that's because of the I-95 gap in NJ"; I believe that it's reasonably safe to state that even if I-95 (the Somerset Freeway) was built, DelDOT would still not have placed NY for the I-95 North destination BGS at the 295 split.

Quote from: PHLBOS on May 07, 2014, 05:14:02 PM

Quote from: roadman65 on May 07, 2014, 05:07:18 PMI know what you mean, though, as New York is the proper name of the city.  It is not like Kansas City where "City" part of its name.  NJDOT is starting to do it as well.  I-78, I-80 and even I-287 is using "New York City" whereas before it was just plain and simple "New York."  Even new posts on here of the NJ Turnpike 6-9 new signs has "New York City" instead of "New York" as it did for decades.

I have to wonder if such practice is a result of the recent MUTCD prohibition of listing states as control cities.  Either DOTs are misinterpreting such prohibition or MUTCD (wrongly IMHO) told DOTs to add City to New York listings.

As a Chicago native, I wouldn't expect the control states of "Indiana" and "Wisconsin" to go away anytime soon. And I'm sure there are other examples elsewhere, but I agree that states should not be used as control cities at all. Why not use "Gary" or "Milwaukee" for the respective examples listed above?

Quote from: PHLBOS on May 09, 2014, 02:12:15 PM
And before you say "that's because of the I-95 gap in NJ"; I believe that it's reasonably safe to state that even if I-95 (the Somerset Freeway) was built, DelDOT would still not have placed NY for the I-95 North destination BGS at the 295 split.

I agree. Amazingly enough, there are other places on I-95 north that aren't New York (City). Sure, people may be using the highway to head up there, but I think it's rude to ignore the other major points the highway passes through.

Quote from: A00234826 on May 07, 2014, 03:55:08 PM


North of Boston I suggest on I-95 south (also on I-93 south and US-3) before the Rt-128 jct to put (To Providence RI, New York City use I-95 Rt-128 south) this is important info for trucks with hazardous material because there banned from I-93 tunnels

also unrelated to that  North of Boston on I-95 northbound between Exit 45 and Exit 60 I suggest (I-95 north Hampton Beach NH, Portsmouth NH) so traffic will know how to get to Hampton Beach resort during the summer.


anyother suggestions please let me know

For North of Boston on I-95 Im just telling them that the hazardous material trucks are banned from using I-93 tunnel in Boston for points south of Boston so they will know how to get on I-90 or any point south or west (ether NY, Cape cod, Fall river, Provdience)  with a sign on side (To I-90 masspike, RI-CT-NY points, use I-95 Rt-128). This is very important for people driving from NH and heading south of Boston because trucks with hazours material need to know that they cant go through Boston tunnels to get on I-90 masspike in Boston or as a shortcut for Rt-128 or I-495.

I also suggest since Hampton Beach is very popular for summer tourst to put (I-95 north Hampton Beach NH) in between Exit 45-60.

also on I-495 I-290 I suggest
ON I-290 west put on Exit 7 (I-90 masspike to I-84, Springfiled, New York) so traffic from I-290 will know where I-84 is
On I-495 south near Exit 25 put ( To I-84 Hartford Ct, New York City use I-290 to Exit 7) becasuse its shorter to take i-290 through Worecester to I-90 insted of remaiing on I-495 south to Westbaro.
On I-290 east and I-495 north I suggest put Portsmouth NH as a control city for example between Worcester and I-495 I suggest (I-290 east to I-495 Marlbaro, Portsmouth NH), and on I-495 north between Marlbaro and Lowell (I-495 North Lowell Portsmouth NH), and north of Lowell (I-495 north Lawerance Portsmouth NH) north of Haverhill (I-495 north to I-95 Portsmouth NH, Portland ME)
ALSO
I-95 near the I-495 jct in Sailsbury I suggest a sign said (I-495 South Worcester, Hartford Ct)
on I-495 south enterence signs north of Exit 28 replase Tauton with Worcester so signs will say (I-495 south Marlbaro, Worcester)
becasue many people from Lowell Lawerence aria to drive to Tauton use I-95 Rt-128 or I-93 to Rt-24 for a more direct route.
On I-495 south between Amesbury and I-290 I suggest on milege signs example after Exit 54 (Lowell 31, Worcester 67, Hartford Ct 132) many commuters use I-495 from NH to get to I-90 masspike for I-84)

last of all I suggest on I-495 near exit 22 I suggest u put (Exit 22 I-90 Masspike (toll) to I-84 Boston, Albany NY) so traffic will take I-90 to I-84
also on masspike between Rt-9 and Rt-122 I suggest sign like (I-90 Masspike west to I-84 Worcester, Springfield) and west of Rt-122 to I-84 (I-90 masspike west to I-84 Springfield, New York Points)

This is too much to make sense of, but I will point out that on the Mass Pike, the logical exits for New Hampshire, Maine, the Cape, Providence, and New York are all well signed.

I realize that you feel strongly that all roads lead to New York, and all traffic should be reminded when it's time to turn to get to New York.  But that's just not how things are done.  You don't see signs in Syracuse or Pittsburgh fir Chicago, either, for the same reason.

People have maps, fancy electric ones.  Signs aren't meant to replace maps.   Maps of today tell you every distance of your own personal trip.  Signing for all major destinations is less necessary now than ever.

Also, I don't think Hampton Beach is the magnitude of destination you think it is.

Quote
Also, I don't think Hampton Beach is the magnitude of destination you think it is.

Well put Pete from Boston.  I'll also add this - On I-95 northbound, the signs for the last exit in Massachusetts read "MA 286 (shield) Beaches Salisbury."  Now, this seems to have been sufficient for the past fifty or so years since Interstate 95 was first constructed.

Actually Portland, ME is more better to use for NB I-95 over Portsmouth, NH.  However, I am not going to lose sleep over it and recommend that MA take down the signs or use it next sign placement project that takes place.  I am just saying that Portland is the better one of the two places I think.

Quote from: roadman65 on May 09, 2014, 06:16:15 PM
Actually Portland, ME is more better to use for NB I-95 over Portsmouth, NH.  However, I am not going to lose sleep over it and recommend that MA take down the signs or use it next sign placement project that takes place.  I am just saying that Portland is the better one of the two places I think.

Once you get north of the US 1 interchange at the Topsfield/Danvers line, a number of entrance signs for I-95 north do have two destinations.  Starts with "Salisbury Portsmouth NH", which then changes to "Portsmouth NH Kittery ME" as you get closer to the NH line.  I once was told that, years ago, Kittery was chosen over Portland at the explicit request of the State of Maine (and not just MaineDOT) because of the outlet stores within Kittery itself.

Personally, I agree that Portland is a better destination than Kittery.  However, like you, I do not believe that it should be plastered all over I-95 north and I-495 north once you leave Mansfield (MA).

Quote from: roadman on May 09, 2014, 07:03:25 PM

Quote from: roadman65 on May 09, 2014, 06:16:15 PM
Actually Portland, ME is more better to use for NB I-95 over Portsmouth, NH.  However, I am not going to lose sleep over it and recommend that MA take down the signs or use it next sign placement project that takes place.  I am just saying that Portland is the better one of the two places I think.

Once you get north of the US 1 interchange at the Topsfield/Danvers line, a number of entrance signs for I-95 north do have two destinations.  Starts with "Salisbury Portsmouth NH", which then changes to "Portsmouth NH Kittery ME" as you get closer to the NH line.  I once was told that, years ago, Kittery was chosen over Portland at the explicit request of the State of Maine (and not just MaineDOT) because of the outlet stores within Kittery itself.

Personally, I agree that Portland is a better destination than Kittery.  However, like you, I do not believe that it should be plastered all over I-95 north and I-495 north once you leave Mansfield (MA).

Portsmouth and Portland on the same sign would be confusing.

There's one sign I would change on I-95, but has nothing to do with New York City. It's this one in Kittery, ME:

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FdOCSypn.jpg&hash=efe93ebcee4d91dd332e8280d1c0487df2ae4eb2)

Change it to Hampton, NH/Boston. Thank you!  :rolleyes:

Close, but not quite.... I'd change it to Portsmouth / Boston, just like its counterpart was changed on US 1 South on the ramp to I-95 South at this point.  It used to have control points same as the I-95 SB pullthrough.

I actually like the "New Hampshire/Massachusetts" pairing.  I know it's not MUTCD compliant, but how often do we embrace all of the MUTCD changes?

Imagine I-91 North in Enfield saying "MASSACHUSETTS | VERMONT"? I'll stick with Springfield, Greenfield and Brattleboro, thank you. :)

"New Jersey" is used as a control city on some highways in Delaware, Pennsylvania, and New York.

As far as "New York" or "New York City" as a control city, it should probably be used as a secondary listing until the highway you're on is closer to the city.

Don't forget that New York is on some BGS's at the I-76/I-80 interchange west of Youngstown, OH as well on those on I-80 from there to the OH/PA line.

Quote from: amroad17 on May 10, 2014, 08:08:09 PM
Don't forget that New York is on some BGS's at the I-76/I-80 interchange west of Youngstown, OH as well on those on I-80 from there to the OH/PA line.

Don't forget that the next city 80 passes through that's as big as Youngstown is Paterson, NJ, 15 miles from New York. 

Quote from: jeffandnicole on May 09, 2014, 12:06:59 PM
For the most part, when people say they're going to New York around here, they mean New York City...and mostly the Manhattan area.  They'd be a little more specific sometimes if they mean another borough.  Long Island means Long Island (although if not clear, it can be confused with Jersey's Long Beach Island).  If they're going elsewhere, then it's "New York State".

For me, it's:

'The city' - Manhattan
New York City - Brooklyn/Manhattan
NYC - Same as above
New York - Brooklyn

I don't go to the beach so those phrases are irrelevant. Don't ask me why New York is associated with Brooklyn. Maybe because that's the most common part of NYC (or, heck, New York in general) I visit on a (at minimum) yearly-basis.

Quote from: Pete from Boston on May 10, 2014, 09:23:24 PM
Don't forget that the next city 80 passes through that's as big as Youngstown is Paterson, NJ, 15 miles from New York. 

Everyone loves New York. That's why it gets so much attention when it comes to control cities on pullthroughs.

What is interesting is that Staten Island is not considered part of NYC, especially along the NJ Turnpike.  Even from the entrance to the NJT at Elizabeth from I-278, signs used to read "New York AND North" at the split in the ramp despite that part of NYC is directly across the Arthur Kill from there.

In fact the NJT signs "New York" for the whole length mainly using the GW Bridge as the point of reference for the city.  The mileage sign that once stood NB at the Raritan River Bridge once stated "New York 30 MI" which would suggest that the NJTA was using the Bridge as the point of mileage as that is where 30 miles north of there would be about.

Even NJDOT on US 22 signs "New York" as control point straight through past NJ 82 which is US 22's exit for the Goethals Bridge into Staten Island.  Also in Bridgewater, NYC is pull through control point on US 22 EB at I-287 JCT where I-287 SB would be US 22's exit for those going to Staten Island via the Outerbridge Crossing.  I-287 uses Perth Amboy (next to Staten Island) on the signs for I-287 SB along US 22.

The LIE does change its control city from "New York" to "Manhattan" once it enters Queens. I-95 South appears to be using "G. Washington Br." after entering the Bronx, but "New York" north of it, so the New York State seems to agree that other Boroughs are part of New York.

Do the northbound mileage signs to New York along I-95 from Baltimore refer to the George Washington Bridge via the NJ Turnpike or something else?

Quote from: 1995hoo on May 07, 2014, 08:18:39 PM
Regarding "New York" versus "New York State," my relatives in Brooklyn always regarded "New York" (the city) as referring to the island of Manhattan. The 1898 consolidation might as well never have happened. Of course, Yonkers is Upstate to them too!

I always considered Upstate NY to be everything north of the line separating Rockland and Westchester Cos. on the south from Orange and Putnam Cos. on the north.

ixnay

Quote from: A00234826 on May 09, 2014, 12:04:51 PM

Quote from: PHLBOS on May 09, 2014, 08:53:48 AM

Quote from: roadman on May 07, 2014, 06:32:39 PMI've been told that "New York" (as opposed to something like Springfield or Albany NY) was included on that sign (which was installed about 1996) to enable the ancient support truss to be re-used - remember, this was the height of the "reuse existing sign supports wherever possible" era in Massachusetts.

IIRC, that particular BGS and gantry replaced the original 60s-era button-copy BGS (legend likely read Mass Pike Points West) and single-post style gantry.  Looking at the GSV of the current BGS & gantry, one can clearly tell that the gantry is not from the mid-60s.

The likely real reason for the Turnpike Authority using New York for its I-90 West entrance ramp signage for that area is to direct the various NYC-bound busses from the bus terminal(s) that were/are in that area.

hmm why not stay on I-95 because it gose to NY city, there other ways to get to NY city from Boston without paying the mass pike like I-93 (southeast expressway)south to Canton to Exit 1 to I-95 south (toll free)
from the south like Cape Cod I suggest to put up on Rt-25 entering I-195 (I-195 west Providence RI, New York City)
I also suggest on I-93 south Braintree split a sign (New York City use I-93 to I-95 south)

Is it me, or have we been through this already in this thread?

Quote from: roadman on May 09, 2014, 07:03:25 PMOnce you get north of the US 1 interchange at the Topsfield/Danvers line, a number of entrance signs for I-95 north do have two destinations.  Starts with "Salisbury Portsmouth NH", which then changes to "Portsmouth NH Kittery ME" as you get closer to the NH line.  I once was told that, years ago, Kittery was chosen over Portland at the explicit request of the State of Maine (and not just MaineDOT) because of the outlet stores within Kittery itself.

Personally, I agree that Portland is a better destination than Kittery.

The MA 110 interchange at the Salisbury/Amesbury line is where the I-95 North destinations change.  Although recent BGS & LGS signage vary a bit.

Overhead BGS lists Portland ME while the ground-mounted BGS' lists Kittery ME as the 2nd I-95 North destination. (http://goo.gl/maps/sLQnI)

Along MA 110 Eastbound, apparently somebody at MassDOT forgot that the most direct route to Salisbury is indeed along MA 110 when this LGS was made.  The border is just east of the overpass. (http://goo.gl/maps/CQQtF)

Personally, I would've used Hampton/Portsmouth as the two I-95 North destinations from MA 110 to NH 51 101 but that's just me.

Quote from: PHLBOS on May 13, 2014, 09:55:36 AM
Personally, I would've used Hampton/Portsmouth as the two I-95 North destinations from MA 110 to NH 51 but that's just me.

It's NH 101 now.

Quote from: PHLBOS on May 13, 2014, 09:55:36 AM

Quote from: roadman on May 09, 2014, 07:03:25 PMOnce you get north of the US 1 interchange at the Topsfield/Danvers line, a number of entrance signs for I-95 north do have two destinations.  Starts with "Salisbury Portsmouth NH", which then changes to "Portsmouth NH Kittery ME" as you get closer to the NH line.  I once was told that, years ago, Kittery was chosen over Portland at the explicit request of the State of Maine (and not just MaineDOT) because of the outlet stores within Kittery itself.

Personally, I agree that Portland is a better destination than Kittery.

The MA 110 interchange at the Salisbury/Amesbury line is where the I-95 North destinations change.  Although recent BGS & LGS signage vary a bit.

Overhead BGS lists Portland ME while the ground-mounted BGS' lists Kittery ME as the 2nd I-95 North destination. (http://goo.gl/maps/sLQnI)

Wow - that must be pretty new.  I've never seen Portland used as a I-95 control point south of Portsmouth.  I was going to say outside of Maine, but forgot about the "Portsmouth/Portland" control points used on the Spaulding Turnpike SB approach to I-95.

Quote from: 1 on May 13, 2014, 02:24:07 PMIt's NH 101 now.

Oops, forgot about that.  Previous post has since been corrected.

Quote from: shadyjay on May 13, 2014, 05:28:17 PM

Quote from: PHLBOS on May 13, 2014, 09:55:36 AMOverhead BGS lists Portland ME while the ground-mounted BGS' lists Kittery ME as the 2nd I-95 North destination. (http://goo.gl/maps/sLQnI)

Wow - that must be pretty new.  I've never seen Portland used as a I-95 control point south of Portsmouth.  I was going to say outside of Maine, but forgot about the "Portsmouth/Portland" control points used on the Spaulding Turnpike SB approach to I-95.

Actually, the mid-70s vintage BGS' that were there before had Portland, Maine (along with Portsmouth, NH) listed as well... along with Series B fonts for the I-shields.

Actually it should be both Portsmouth and Portland like in the day or at the Spaulding Turnpike interchange.  Inside the 128 loop it should be Portland and once I-95 breaks free of the Yankee Division, then both Portsmouth and Portland both be used.

What is even more interesting is that I-93 uses Concord, NH instead of Manchester, NH.  Manchester is New Hampshire's largest city, yet its state capital, that is the second reached city, is signed from Downtown Boston northward.  This is the reverse order of what I-95 has, but by the same DOT.

Quote from: roadman65 on May 13, 2014, 07:00:07 PM
Actually it should be both Portsmouth and Portland like in the day

:confused:

Quote from: roadman65 on May 13, 2014, 07:00:07 PM
Inside the 128 loop it should be Portland

:confused:

Quote from: roadman65 on May 13, 2014, 07:00:07 PM
and once I-95 breaks free of the Yankee Division, then both Portsmouth and Portland both be used.

You're almost as bad as the OP wanting to skip several cities in the in-between states and sign I-95 South for New York (City).

Quote from: roadman65 on May 13, 2014, 07:00:07 PMWhat is even more interesting is that I-93 uses Concord, NH instead of Manchester, NH.  Manchester is New Hampshire's largest city, yet its state capital, that is the second reached city, is signed from Downtown Boston northward.

Until the 1990s, the only NH destination listed on I-93 North signage in MA was Salem NH.

When the sign panels on I-93 between Somerville and Methuen were replaced in the early 1990s, Concord was used instead of Manchester as the northbound control city because AASHTO hadn't yet approved their current list, which includes Salem, Manchester, and Concord (only Concord was included on the previous listing).

The reason Concord was used instead of Salem (NH) when the signs were replaced was a result of an explicit request from the Salem Massachusetts Chamber of Commerce to the then MassHighway commissioner.  Seems the Chamber had gotten complaints from tourist types heading for the Witch City who saw Salem on the I-93 signs (this was before MassHighway/MassDOT's current practice of always including the state abbreviation with out of state cities) and wound up in New Hampshire.

Quote from: PHLBOS on May 13, 2014, 07:18:26 PM

Quote from: roadman65 on May 13, 2014, 07:00:07 PM
Actually it should be both Portsmouth and Portland like in the day

:confused:

Quote from: roadman65 on May 13, 2014, 07:00:07 PM
Inside the 128 loop it should be Portland

:confused:

Quote from: roadman65 on May 13, 2014, 07:00:07 PM
and once I-95 breaks free of the Yankee Division, then both Portsmouth and Portland both be used.

You're almost as bad as the OP wanting to skip several cities in the in-between states and sign I-95 South for New York (City).

Correction I don't want I-95 to skip control cities in the between states, but as a addition as a secondary control city to the local control cities like for example in Foxbaro near the Gellet Stadiam (I-95 south to I-295 Providence RI, New York City)  or north of Boston (I-95 south Boston Providence RI)
Just remember not all traffic from Mass take mass pike to I-84 to get to NY city like Cape Cod, they use I-195 west to I-95 south
I suggest on Rt-25 in Wareham put signs (I-495 north Foxbaro, Worcester) (Exit 1 I-195 west Providence RI, New York City)

The last control city that is lacking but local is on I-495 north of Boston between Exit 38 Lowell and Exit 27 its said Marlbaro and Tauton I suggest you replace Tauton with Worcester north of Exit 26 becasue many people use I-495 to I-290 for Worcester and I-93 or I-95 Rt-128 to Rt-24 is a better route to Tauton from Lowell or other places north.



Fixed quote, can't be arsed to fix grammar and spelling. I just can't do it all myself. ~S

Quote from: roadman on May 13, 2014, 10:25:45 PMThe reason Concord was used instead of Salem (NH) when the signs were replaced was a result of an explicit request from the Salem Massachusetts Chamber of Commerce to the then MassHighway commissioner.  Seems the Chamber had gotten complaints from tourist types heading for the Witch City who saw Salem on the I-93 signs (this was before MassHighway/MassDOT's current practice of always including the state abbreviation with out of state cities) and wound up in New Hampshire.

While I don't doubt that was the reasoning; every BGS & LGS along I-93 North that existed always had the NH after the Salem listing for that very purpose (distinguish it from Salem, MA).  It's not unlike the Manchester, MA is now referred to (has the name actually changed to such?) as Manchester-By-the-Sea.

Quote from: A00234826 on May 13, 2014, 10:49:51 PMCorrection I don't want I-95 to skip control cities in the between states, but as a addition as a secondary control city to the local control cities like for example in Foxbaro near the Gellet Stadiam (I-95 south to I-295 Providence RI, New York City)  or north of Boston (I-95 south Boston Providence RI)

And you need to understand that many that use I-95 in MA are not going as far as Portsmouth, NH nor Providence, RI.

Previous MassDPW/Highway/DOT practice allowed for the listing of 2 control destinations per one direction on guide, exit and pull-through signs.  In the case of I-95, such meant listing a Massachusetts destination for the more localized listing and either Portsmouth or Providence as the more distant destination.  Outside of the YDH (128), Boston is generally listed as either the only or 2nd listed destination (following either Peabody, Waltham, Norwood(?) or Canton) on I-95 signage heading towards the Hub.

As I mentioned earlier & on other related-threads; while the listing of just one destination on signs is more MUTCD complaint, it's not without its problems & issues... especially for roads that run through several more populous/metropolitan regions. 

While my 77-year-old mother has finally gotten used to seeing I-95 signs along what most still refer to as Route 128; the solo Portsmouth, NH listing on many new signs still throw her off. One needs to keep in mind that many still refer to the Interstate-occupied sections of the YDH as Route 128 despite the fact that Interstate designations have been around for nearly 40 years.  IMHO, the previous practice of having 2 destinations per one direction is not going to end civilization as we know it despite what MUTCD and FHWA thinks.   

Quote from: A00234826 on May 13, 2014, 10:49:51 PMJust remember not all traffic from Mass take mass pike to I-84 to get to NY city like Cape Cod, they use I-195 west to I-95 south I suggest on Rt-25 in Wareham put signs (I-495 north Foxbaro, Worcester) (Exit 1 I-195 west Providence RI, New York City)

Until your above-post, nobody including yourself ever mentioned anything regarding NYC signage from Cape Cod.  FYI, New York is listed as a 2nd destination on RI 138 BGS' in Newport & Jamestown.  Such approach dates back to when I-895 was originally proposed to be fully built.

At best, NYC can be listed on a destination/mileage BGS at key locations.  That's probably what you're really looking for in the first place.

Quote from: A00234826 on May 13, 2014, 10:49:51 PMThe last control city that is lacking but local is on I-495 north of Boston between Exit 38 Lowell and Exit 27 its said Marlbaro and Tauton I suggest you replace Tauton with Worcester north of Exit 26 becasue many people use I-495 to I-290 for Worcester and I-93 or I-95 Rt-128 to Rt-24 is a better route to Tauton from Lowell or other places north.

First of all, it's Marlboro and Taunton along with Foxboro and Gillette Stadium further up in your post.

Second, Worcester should only be listed as a I-495 South destination through Exit 27.  Such was previously-accepted practice; Roadman might be able to shed some light on why Worcester was dropped on I-495 South signage between Exits 38 and 27.

Quote from: PHLBOS on May 14, 2014, 09:58:43 AM

Quote from: roadman on May 13, 2014, 10:25:45 PMThe reason Concord was used instead of Salem (NH) when the signs were replaced was a result of an explicit request from the Salem Massachusetts Chamber of Commerce to the then MassHighway commissioner.  Seems the Chamber had gotten complaints from tourist types heading for the Witch City who saw Salem on the I-93 signs (this was before MassHighway/MassDOT's current practice of always including the state abbreviation with out of state cities) and wound up in New Hampshire.

While I don't doubt that was the reasoning; every BGS & LGS along I-93 North that existed always had the NH after the Salem listing for that very purpose (distinguish it from Salem, MA).  It's not unlike the Manchester, MA is now referred to (has the name actually changed to such?) as Manchester-By-the-Sea.

Quote from: A00234826 on May 13, 2014, 10:49:51 PMCorrection I don't want I-95 to skip control cities in the between states, but as a addition as a secondary control city to the local control cities like for example in Foxbaro near the Gellet Stadiam (I-95 south to I-295 Providence RI, New York City)  or north of Boston (I-95 south Boston Providence RI)

And you need to understand that many that use I-95 in MA are not going as far as Portsmouth, NH nor Providence, RI.

Previous MassDPW/Highway/DOT practice allowed for the listing of 2 control destinations per one direction on guide, exit and pull-through signs.  In the case of I-95, such meant listing a Massachusetts destination for the more localized listing and either Portsmouth or Providence as the more distant destination.  Outside of the YDH (128), Boston is generally listed as either the only or 2nd listed destination (following either Peabody, Waltham, Norwood(?) or Canton) on I-95 signage heading towards the Hub.

As I mentioned earlier & on other related-threads; while the listing of just one destination on signs is more MUTCD complaint, it's not with its problems & issues... especially for roads that run through several more populous/metropolitan regions. 

While my 77-year-old mother has finally gotten used to seeing I-95 signs along waht most still refer to as Route 128; the solo Portsmouth, NH listing on many new signs still throw her off. One needs to keep in mind that many still refer to the Interstate-occupied sections of the YDH as Route 128 despite the fact that Interstate designations have been around for nearly 40 years.  IMHO, the previous practice of having 2 destinations per one direction is not going to end civilization as we know it despite what MUTCD and FHWA thinks.   

Quote from: A00234826 on May 13, 2014, 10:49:51 PMJust remember not all traffic from Mass take mass pike to I-84 to get to NY city like Cape Cod, they use I-195 west to I-95 south I suggest on Rt-25 in Wareham put signs (I-495 north Foxbaro, Worcester) (Exit 1 I-195 west Providence RI, New York City)

Until your above-post, nobody including yourself ever mentioned anything regarding NYC signage from Cape Cod.  FYI, New York is listed as a 2nd destination on RI 138 BGS' in Newport & Jamestown.  Such approach dates back to when I-895 was originally proposed to be fully built.

At best, NYC can be listed on a destination/mileage BGS at key locations.  That's probably what you're really looking for in the first place.
Yes espesaly on I-195 when it list on mileage BGS (New Bedford, Providence RI, New York City)  and on I-95 just south of Canton for examle (Foxbaro 7 Providence RI 33. New York City 210)

Quote from: A00234826 on May 13, 2014, 10:49:51 PMThe last control city that is lacking but local is on I-495 north of Boston between Exit 38 Lowell and Exit 27 its said Marlbaro and Tauton I suggest you replace Tauton with Worcester north of Exit 26 becasue many people use I-495 to I-290 for Worcester and I-93 or I-95 Rt-128 to Rt-24 is a better route to Tauton from Lowell or other places north.

First of all, it's Marlboro and Taunton along with Foxboro and Gillette Stadium further up in your post.

Second, Worcester should only be listed as a I-495 South destination through Exit 27.  Such was previously-accepted practice; Roadman might be able to shed some light on why Worcester was dropped on I-495 South signage between Exits 38 and 27.

I agree on I-495 it should said untill Exit 27 (I-495 south Marlbaro Worcester) then after that (Marlbaro Tauton)
also south of I-290 it should have (I-495 south Foxbaro, Tauton)

Also north of Boston I also suggest to put Springfield as a secondary control city on I-495 south and I-290 or on a milege BGS
like on I-290 just west of I-495 (I-290 west Worcester Springfield) west of Worcester (I-290 west to I-90 Alburn Springfield)

Speeking of I-290 I noticed that at Exit 12 it saids (Rt-146 south to I-90 mass pike, Mulbury, Providence RI) and (i-290 west to I-395), many people heading west use I-290 to Exit 7 to get on I-90 west I suggest (Exit 12 Rt-146 south to I-90 East Mulbury Providence RI) (I-290 west to I-90 west Arburn Springfield)

similer to the BGS signs on I-495 near the pike that said (Hartford Ct, New York City exit 22) I suggest on I-290 near exit 7 a BGS ( To I-84 Hartford Ct, New York City use I-90 west to Exit 9)

PHLBOS by using Portland is only skipping small cities.  Want to talk about skipping over cities come down to Florida.  On I-95 southbound south of Jacksonville you have "Miami" on many signs when you have West Palm Beach and Fort Lauderdale to pass through as well.  If you want to get technical you have Daytona Beach as well as Melbourne and Fort Pierce.  Daytona was recently added to the mix in Jacksonville, so at least they are getting a little better on this.

Then go to the other coast, you have Naples starting from Tampa on I-75 SB when you have Bradenton, Sarasota, and Fort Myers to pass by which are much larger cities than Naples is.   

Quote from: A00234826 on May 14, 2014, 10:23:25 AM

Quote from: PHLBOS on May 14, 2014, 09:58:43 AMFirst of all, it's Marlboro and Taunton along with Foxboro and Gillette Stadium further up in your post.

I agree on I-495 it should said untill Exit 27 (I-495 south Marlbaro Worcester) then after that (Marlbaro Tauton)
also south of I-290 it should have (I-495 south Foxbaro, Tauton)

With all due respect, did you even read the above-post for the proper spelling of those towns?

Quote from: A00234826 on May 14, 2014, 10:23:25 AMAlso north of Boston I also suggest to put Springfield as a secondary control city on I-495 south and I-290 or on a milege BGS
like on I-290 just west of I-495 (I-290 west Worcester Springfield) west of Worcester (I-290 west to I-90 Alburn Springfield)

IMHO, you're now being silly.  Listing Worcester on I-495 signage is one thing but adding Springfield in addtion to that is pushing it.   It's not normal practice to list two destinations that the route itself doesn't even touch nor directly serve; one listing for such is sufficient.

Quote from: A00234826 on May 14, 2014, 10:23:25 AMSpeeking of I-290 I noticed that at Exit 12 it saids (Rt-146 south to I-90 mass pike, Mulbury, Providence RI) and (i-290 west to I-395), many people heading west use I-290 to Exit 7 to get on I-90 west I suggest (Exit 12 Rt-146 south to I-90 East Mulbury Providence RI) (I-290 west to I-90 west Arburn Springfield)

similer to the BGS signs on I-495 near the pike that said (Hartford Ct, New York City exit 22) I suggest on I-290 near exit 7 a BGS ( To I-84 Hartford Ct, New York City use I-90 west to Exit 9)

No comment for the atrocious spelling above.

Quote from: roadman65 on May 14, 2014, 09:36:04 PM
PHLBOS by using Portland is only skipping small cities.

It wasn't too long ago and a few BGS' still remain that listed NH-Maine as northbound I-95 (& 495) destinations.  Since such practice now runs afoul w/MUTCD and/or FHWA; MassHighway decided to use Portsmouth, NH for because it's the largest city along I-95 in the adjacent state.

Quote from: roadman65 on May 14, 2014, 09:36:04 PM
Want to talk about skipping over cities come down to Florida.  On I-95 southbound south of Jacksonville you have "Miami" on many signs when you have West Palm Beach and Fort Lauderdale to pass through as well.  If you want to get technical you have Daytona Beach as well as Melbourne and Fort Pierce.  Daytona was recently added to the mix in Jacksonville, so at least they are getting a little better on this.

Then go to the other coast, you have Naples starting from Tampa on I-75 SB when you have Bradenton, Sarasota, and Fort Myers to pass by which are much larger cities than Naples is.   

All those destinations along I-95 & 75 are all in one state are they not?

Take the number of miles of I-95 in Florida and stretch that same distance across the northeast and you'll cross at least one state border depending on where one places that measured distance.

Yes, MD & even VA have I-95 destination signage that skip over cities in DE, PA & NJ and list NY (City) instead but (& I mentioned such earlier) that's only because there is a direct highway corridor routing between Baltimore & New York (I-95/295/NJTP) that has no other larger cities in between.

And yes, I-95 South signage in RI often ignores CT cities (New London & New Haven) in favor of NYC; but that appears to be the exception and not the rule among New England Interstates completely skipping over cities in adjacent states for a larger city 2 states over.

Actually Illinois has the best way.   They sign the next major city at interstate to interstate (hence Memphis on I-57 SB considering you have to pass over three states to get there) while the US, state, county, and municipal roads use the next sequential city.

Anyway, I am not being rude to NH, but its just my opinion that Portland be used because it fits the larger of the two cities.  The way you make it sound, that every state needs to have a control city, so if Portland and Boston were both in the same state then Portland would be all right then.  Also if Florida was three States making a state line south of Daytona, then another state begin lets say at Jupiter, then Daytona Beach or Jupiter should replace Miami.

Quote from: roadman65 on May 14, 2014, 11:58:21 PMAnyway, I am not being rude to NH, but its just my opinion that Portland be used because it fits the larger of the two cities.  The way you make it sound, that every state needs to have a control city,

One question: are you even from or ever lived in the northeast?  In general, people in this area tend to view locations & distances on a smaller, more-localized scale than their larger state and/or more spread-out counterparts aka microcosmic.  Seeing Portland, ME or New York listed on route signage in the Greater Boston area (which is more densely populated than most Florida regions) is viewed by many in the area as useless & counter-productive.  Heck, Providence, RI isn't even listed on I-93 South signage until one hits Braintree (Exit 7).

Simply put; someone in the northeast will more likely view a 20-mile drive one-way as long-distance whereas one elsewhere will view it as a short-hop. 

The listed destinations on signs, for the most part, likely reflect such.  The notable exceptions being the fore-mentioned NH-Maine listings that once dotted I-95 as far south as Exit 11A-B (the old 70s-era pull-through BGS listed Boston, NH-Maine for I-95 North) and older I-90 West signage that listed New York in Boston (one or two 90s-vintage entrance ramp BGS' still exist to this day).

Quote from: roadman65 on May 14, 2014, 11:58:21 PMso if Portland and Boston were both in the same state then Portland would be all right then.

Once upon a time, Maine (which was not one of the original 13 colonies) was indeed part of Massachusetts.  Had such remained true to this day; maybe MassDOT would've put Portland as an I-95 North destination as far south as Canton. 

Yeah I lived in New Jersey so I know the situation in the North East all too well.  Still Portland is not that far away and from Boston northward along the I-95 corridor it is the next real big city.  True, in New Jersey we used (and still use) Clinton for control point for I-78 west from Newark because of what you say, but that is being outdated as well.  Most newer signs are being changed to Easton, PA, although I personally would use Allentown, PA because that is the largest city along its route between Newark and Harrisburg.  Easton is carbon copied so to say as it was leftover from when US 22 was the main route across the Delaware River before I-78 was opened in 1990 and of course Easton is the first city along US 22 in PA where it transits it's heart.  I-78 passes away from Easton proper with only one interchange now.

Allentown should be really used from Newark westward, although I have no problems with Clinton first, but in a much more perfect world I would think that Allentown would be the best choice now, especially now that the longer gap is shortened with the interstate system.  The interstate freeways have changed the way we travel big time.

Look at I-10 for example, it uses Pasagoula, MS west of Mobile, AL because when US 90 was the route Pasagoula was the next big city for the regional arterial and when I-10 opened in segments it first stopped at the AL-MS Line. Now with I-10 New Orleans fits that bill for a more high speed national road system, however Alabama still has not updated that yet and treat Pasagoula just like MA does with Portsmouth.  Then you have Opelousas, LA for I-49 from I-10 at Lafayette, LA left over from when US 167 was the corridor previously which is a small city compared to the next one Alexandria which incidentally is used on  US 165 several miles to the west.  Then further west at I-10's junction with US 171 its control city is the largest city along I-49 hundreds of miles further north  which is Shreveport. 

Plus, along I-287 in NJ now signs that once read Somerville now use Morristown- Mahwah going NB and Perth Amboy is used SB.  Even NJDOT is updating from the small regional towns along the way for the much further larger cities.  Times are changing now with the high speed freeways in our road system.

Quote from: PHLBOS on May 14, 2014, 10:01:58 PM
....

Yes, MD & even VA have I-95 destination signage that skip over cities in DE, PA & NJ and list NY (City) instead but (& I mentioned such earlier) that's only because there is a direct highway corridor routing between Baltimore & New York (I-95/295/NJTP) that has no other larger cities in between.

....

I would suggest another reason for this, especially at major junctions in the DC area such as the Springfield Interchange in Virginia and (historically, at least) the College Park Interchange in Maryland is simply the high volume of non-local drivers passing through, a substantial portion of whom are headed to New York. It's simply a practical step to list New York (City) as an aid to those people at a location where the main thru route changes course via what most of the public would perceive as an "exit." I kind of doubt the listing of New York in those places is due solely to there being no other large cities in between (though it may be a factor, as opposed to the factor).

In the same vein, Virginia has an overhead BGS, though it's presently damaged with about a quarter of it missing, on northbound I-95 about four miles south of Springfield saying "I-95 NORTH/NY–NJ/4 MILES/USE LEFT LANES" (the last line is black-on-yellow, the rest is standard BGS). There used to be a similar ground-mounted sign to the right of the road long before New York appeared on any other signs in Virginia, which underscores my feeling that part of the reason Virginia posts these signs is to aid people through the complex Springfield Interchange. There are a heck of a lot of signs to read as you approach that interchange!

Quote from: PHLBOS on May 14, 2014, 10:01:58 PM
Yes, MD & even VA have I-95 destination signage that skip over cities in DE, PA & NJ and list NY (City) instead but (& I mentioned such earlier) that's only because there is a direct highway corridor routing between Baltimore & New York (I-95/295/NJTP) that has no other larger cities in between.

If that were the criteria, you could sign NYC along all of I-95 from both directions (yes, excluding places where there is a more direct route, please don't start that again), not to mention along every freeway in the country that could conceivable be used to reach NYC.

If you don't mean "larger than NYC", but rather "as large as other control cities", Philadelphia is far larger than Baltimore, yet Baltimore is not ignored in favor of Washington.

Quote from: PHLBOS on May 14, 2014, 10:01:58 PM

Quote from: A00234826 on May 14, 2014, 10:23:25 AM

Quote from: PHLBOS on May 14, 2014, 09:58:43 AMFirst of all, it's Marlboro and Taunton along with Foxboro and Gillette Stadium further up in your post.

I agree on I-495 it should said untill Exit 27 (I-495 south Marlbaro Worcester) then after that (Marlbaro Tauton)
also south of I-290 it should have (I-495 south Foxbaro, Tauton)

With all due respect, did you even read the above-post for the proper spelling of those towns?

Quote from: A00234826 on May 14, 2014, 10:23:25 AMAlso north of Boston I also suggest to put Springfield as a secondary control city on I-495 south and I-290 or on a milege BGS
like on I-290 just west of I-495 (I-290 west Worcester Springfield) west of Worcester (I-290 west to I-90 Alburn Springfield)

IMHO, you're now being silly.  Listing Worcester on I-495 signage is one thing but adding Springfield in addtion to that is pushing it.   It's not normal practice to list two destinations that the route itself doesn't even touch nor directly serve; one listing for such is sufficient.

For I-495 for shure it dosnet connet Worcester or Springfield but its the best route from NH-Maine to Worcester by the way of i-290
When I recommend Springfield I was referring to I-290s secondary not I-495 like sign on I-495 interchange and other exits east of Exit 22 (I-290 west Worcester Springfield) (i-290 East to I-495 Marlboro, Lowell) and west of Worcester (I-290 west to I-90 Auburn Springfield) (I-290 East to I-190, I-495 Worcester, Marlboro),

on I-290 I recommend put (to I-495) on I-290 Eastbound on ramps.  since I-290 is a shortcut from Masspike in Auburn to I-495 in Marlbaro for points north. I also recomend on I-90 Masspike  to put sign on I-290 as first route on left of sign insted of I-395 like (Exit 10 I-290, Rt-12 I-395, Auburn, Worcester, NH-Maine) so people can take I-290 east as a shortcut to I-495 north.

Still Tauton is still too out of way for people in Lowell and surrounding territory's so I recommend on ramps on I-495 near I-290 (i-495 south Marlboro, Milford) since Milford is the next city south of Marboro, or like onramp from Rt-62 for example (i-495 south to I-290 Marlboro, Worcester) after I-290 soutword (i-495 south Milford, Foxboro) then after Milford (I-495 south Foxboro, Tauton)  then after Foxbaro (I-495 south Tauton, Cape Cod)

How about instead of using NYC as a control city, put "this route avoids NYC". As silly as it sounds, it isn't for southerners that want to go to Boston or New England and avoid the four hours of sitting in the City of New York traffic...


iPhone

A00234826:

No offense, but would you please review the following thread about how to quote someone else's posts? You keep putting the entire text of your reply within the quote tags and it makes your posts very hard to follow. Note how the moderators already modified one of your posts when you mangled the quotes. If you want people to take the time to read your comments, you them the reciprocal courtesy of using the quote feature properly.

I tried to quote your comment, but you so thoroughly mangled the quote tags that my reply then showed up in the quote box as well, and it's not worth it to me to take the time to try to go through and figure out what you did wrong. I suspect the number of "opening" quote tags in your post is not the same as the number of "closing" quote tags.

Here's the link:

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=4000.0

I fixed the quote tags. However, I still cannot decipher what A- is trying to say.

A. Dude. Use spell check. Have someone else proofread. But at some point we're gonna have to cut you off if you can't type coherent English.

Quote from: roadman65 on May 15, 2014, 09:10:50 AM
Yeah I lived in New Jersey so I know the situation in the North East all too well.  Still Portland is not that far away and from Boston northward along the I-95 corridor it is the next real big city.  True, in New Jersey we used (and still use) Clinton for control point for I-78 west from Newark because of what you say, but that is being outdated as well.  Most newer signs are being changed to Easton, PA, although I personally would use Allentown, PA because that is the largest city along its route between Newark and Harrisburg.  Easton is carbon copied so to say as it was leftover from when US 22 was the main route across the Delaware River before I-78 was opened in 1990 and of course Easton is the first city along US 22 in PA where it transits it's heart.  I-78 passes away from Easton proper with only one interchange now.

Allentown should be really used from Newark westward, although I have no problems with Clinton first, but in a much more perfect world I would think that Allentown would be the best choice now, especially now that the longer gap is shortened with the interstate system.  The interstate freeways have changed the way we travel big time.

Look at I-10 for example, it uses Pasagoula, MS west of Mobile, AL because when US 90 was the route Pasagoula was the next big city for the regional arterial and when I-10 opened in segments it first stopped at the AL-MS Line. Now with I-10 New Orleans fits that bill for a more high speed national road system, however Alabama still has not updated that yet and treat Pasagoula just like MA does with Portsmouth.  Then you have Opelousas, LA for I-49 from I-10 at Lafayette, LA left over from when US 167 was the corridor previously which is a small city compared to the next one Alexandria which incidentally is used on  US 165 several miles to the west.  Then further west at I-10's junction with US 171 its control city is the largest city along I-49 hundreds of miles further north  which is Shreveport. 

Plus, along I-287 in NJ now signs that once read Somerville now use Morristown- Mahwah going NB and Perth Amboy is used SB.  Even NJDOT is updating from the small regional towns along the way for the much further larger cities.  Times are changing now with the high speed freeways in our road system.

Roadman that is true since Allentown has a bigger population than Easton and for I-95 in MA has some signs saying Providence New York City, but others has Providence only and I would use Providence New London on I-95 in RI since RI uses New London or New Haven as the next control city

I would like to see New York added as a control city at the NB I-81/EB I-78 interchange.  It would fit under Allentown on some of the BGS's.

Quote from: amroad17 on May 30, 2014, 06:30:13 PM
I would like to see New York added as a control city at the NB I-81/EB I-78 interchange.  It would fit under Allentown on some of the BGS's.

I agree also I seen signs on I-80 as far as Ohio turnpike (I-80 East New York City) when it leave the turnpike
I suggest in that aria for long distance travel (I-80 East  Youngstown, New York-New England) (I-76 East Pitsburg, Philadelphia, Washington DC)

Quote from: A00234826 on June 07, 2014, 11:30:56 AM
I agree also I seen signs on I-80 as far as Ohio turnpike (I-80 East New York City) when it leave the turnpike
I suggest in that aria for long distance travel (I-80 East  Youngstown, New York-New England) (I-76 East Pitsburg, Philadelphia, Washington DC)

I-80 doesn't go into New England, and a lot more people will use I-80 in New Jersey than you think that would make sense signing it over NYC until after Paterson and it approaches the NJ Turnpike...

Also, I-76 to Washington DC?

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi0.kym-cdn.com%2Fphotos%2Fimages%2Fnewsfeed%2F000%2F307%2F189%2F6fe.jpg&hash=2aa2cf2059d5117a6114398439ca1a5d64f1c4e6)

For people heading from New England NY, to LA southern California aria I think St Louis is the mid point, for many drivers especially for snowbirds
I suggest for  snowbirds (just like I-95 nb before Washington DC)on the side on I-44  northbound a few Exits before I-55 (New York, New England use I-55 north I-70 East). and on I-55 southbound before I-44 (I-44 Tulsa, Los Angeles) (I-55 south Menphis, New Orleans) and on I-55 nb before the split (I-55 north Springfield, Chicago) (I-70 east Indianapolis, New York-New England)
on I-70 I-55 south and westbound before the Mississippi river I suggest for long distance travelers (I-70 west Kansas City, Denver) (I-55 south to I-44 Tulsa, Los Angeles)

Also in New Station PA were I-70 joins PA turnpike since Philadelphia and NY city are big city's for western PAs control city's  i suggest (I-70 east I-76 PA turnpike Harrisburg, Philadelphia) and a sign before the jct on I-70 east (New York City New England use PA turnpike East)

further East when I-70 leaves PA turnpike for MD I know it saids (I-70 east Balitmore, Washington DC) to counter that I suggest that (I-76 PA turnpike Philadelphia, New York, New England)

Honestly, I don't think many people from St. Louis and LA are going to drive to NYC and vice versa so it's pretty useless to even sign them..
Second, I-76 goes nowhere near New England or NYC. Sure you can use other highways (I-95 for example), but I-76 is not a direct route.

Okay, I get it, NYC is a huge major city. So is Chicago, and so is many others. You do NOT need to sign EVERY route that leads to NYC and New England. Signing I-55 North for NYC? That's over a thousand miles away!

My opinion only...

I would like to see New York listed on at least one BGS at the I-81/I-84 interchange both NB and SB in Scranton, the I-81/80 interchange NB near Hazleton, and the aforementioned I-81/78 NB interchange north of Harrisburg.  These interchanges are not too far from New York plus these highways would be the most direct routes there from northeastern and central Pennsylvania, in case someone would be interested in visiting "The Big Apple."

I like the listing of major cities that are considered "long-distance" such as Memphis on the southside of Chicago, Tulsa outside of St. Louis, and Los Angeles and Albuquerque in Flagstaff along with the New York in Youngstown, OH.  I would like to see a supplemental BGS on I-75/71 SB listing Nashville and St. Louis for exit 173.  But this is just my personal preference.

Quote from: amroad17 on June 07, 2014, 06:44:17 PM
My opinion only...

I would like to see New York listed on at least one BGS at the I-81/I-84 interchange both NB and SB in Scranton, the I-81/80 interchange NB near Hazleton, and the aforementioned I-81/78 NB interchange north of Harrisburg.  These interchanges are not too far from New York plus these highways would be the most direct routes there from northeastern and central Pennsylvania, in case someone would be interested in visiting "The Big Apple."

I like the listing of major cities that are considered "long-distance" such as Memphis on the southside of Chicago, Tulsa outside of St. Louis, and Los Angeles and Albuquerque in Flagstaff along with the New York in Youngstown, OH.  I would like to see a supplemental BGS on I-75/71 SB listing Nashville and St. Louis for exit 173.  But this is just my personal preference.

I generally agree.  I believe that control cities should be fairly large cities that most people have heard of.  Generally, this is done in the Midwest, where the control cities all tend to be fairly large and on 2dis they rarely make suburbs into control cities.

Another option is to use two control cities: one local and one long distance.  The I-95/I-85 split in Virginia does this nicely, by mentioning Atlanta and Miami as secondary controls, the sign allows long-distance drivers to know where they are going, while still providing useful controls for the nearby local cities.

Quote from: Jake2000 on June 07, 2014, 12:01:42 PM
Honestly, I don't think many people from St. Louis and LA are going to drive to NYC and vice versa so it's pretty useless to even sign them..
Second, I-76 goes nowhere near New England or NYC. Sure you can use other highways (I-95 for example), but I-76 is not a direct route.

Its important for snowbirds especially coming home from California to know how to get to New York and New England and vice versa.   (ps signs for (NJ-NY use I-95 north) as far as south of DC and (I-95 south Miami) south of Richmend are important for snowbirds heading from New England to Florida or vice versa) 

I think in St Louis aria since that city is a midpoint for cross country traffic heading from New England or NY to Disneyland CA or other places in the southwest, or just west

thats why I suggest at the Mississippi river bridge on I-70 WB before I-55 south leaves (I-70 west Kansas City, Denver) AND (I-55 south to I-44 Tulsa, Los Angelas) then at I-44 jct (I-44 west Tulsa, Los Angelas) (I-55 south Menthis, New Orlines)

the opposide side on I-44 before it ends (I-55 north to I-70 Chicago New York)
then when I-55 and I-70 leave for Mississippi river (I-55 North I-70 East I-64 East US-40 East, Chicago, New York)

then when I-70 leaves I-55 and heads east  (I-70 East Indianapolis, New York)

as for the 2nd comment Im just directing traffic from southern OH and Wheeling WV the route to NY city since I-70 is a major cross country route for example at the New Station toll plaza (I-70 east I-76 PA turnpike Philadelphia, New York) since Phillidephia is the next largest city.  and on oppisite direction I suggest about 1 1/2 mile before Exit 75  a sign saying (St Louis, Denver, Los Angelas use I-70 west Exit 75)

further east when I-76 leaves for Philadelphia (I-276 PA turnpike east to NJ turnpike NJ-NY, New England) since I-276 ends and snowbirds can take NJ turnpike north to the GW bridge to get to New England

How many snowbirds from New England are going to drive to California?

The ideas being tossed around here by the OP, of far distant control cities, is absolutely ridiculous.  Perhaps we should put Chicago and Seattle on the pullthroughs on the Mass Pike in Boston.  After all, I-90 does go all the way across country and people need to know how to get there. 

Or we should put Miami as a control city on I-95 in Houlton, ME.

I-91 needs a "Canada" control city in New Haven.

There's no need for any of this.  Any l-d traveler is going to grab a map or print out directions to where they're traveling if over a thousand miles.  And as we've figured out earlier, I-95 isn't the best route to NYC from NH or ME, and no posting of control cities isn't going to change that.

Quote from: shadyjay on June 14, 2014, 10:01:27 AM
The ideas being tossed around here by the OP, of far distant control cities, is absolutely ridiculous.  Perhaps we should put Chicago and Seattle on the pullthroughs on the Mass Pike in Boston.  After all, I-90 does go all the way across country and people need to know how to get there. 

Or we should put Miami as a control city on I-95 in Houlton, ME.

I-91 needs a "Canada" control city in New Haven.

There's no need for any of this.  Any l-d traveler is going to grab a map or print out directions to where they're traveling if over a thousand miles.  And as we've figured out earlier, I-95 isn't the best route to NYC from NH or ME, and no posting of control cities isn't going to change that.

Memphis is being used from as far north as Chicago on I-57 SB that is a road that does not even go there where you have to pass through many other decent size cities en route to.

I never really understood the use of Memphis on I-57. I can possibly see Missouri not wanting to use Champaign, but I'm surprised Illinois doesn't. I can also see not using Effingham or Mt. Vernon, but other states would use them since they are major interstate crossroads.

So, where else is it most logical for you to exit off the road you're on for another road that is signed for that destination, when both take you to the same place? The control city for I-57 north from I-55 is Chicago, yet, I-55 goes to Chicago as well.

I remember we had a thread about better routes (I was surprised to hear that a shorter route from Charleston, WV to Erie, PA is 77-271-90 vs. 79) but where else is it signed other than here?