Same control for different roads

[roadman65]

I was told in previous post that the MUTCD forbids using the same control cities on the same sign for two completely different roads like in the image here https://goo.gl/maps/FFDwK1XTM9xkaeCu7

Yet this is a recent install by NJDOT.  I'm guessing it's right there along with bridges where road agencies have been ignoring the official guide, so New Jersey is doing that here especially being the City of Clinton is spread out and doesn't have a well defined business district that stands out.  All roads heading from Paterson south along NJ 19 here lead to Clifton, so NJDOT is trying to convey that to motorists.

[ran4sh]

The relevant MUTCD reference is section 2E.13 paragraph 1

It shouldn't be a surprise that sometimes an agency fails to comply with the MUTCD. That doesn't mean non-compliance should be encouraged though.

The MUTCD already recognizes that places used as "control cities" may not have "a well defined business district". People would know that if they actually read the wording used.

In 2D.41 (which is also referenced from 2E.39)

"A well-defined central area or central business district should be used where one exists. In other cases, the layout of the community should be considered in relation to the highway being signed and the decision based on where it appears that most drivers would feel that they are in the center of the community in question."

I don't think it could be argued that Valley Rd leads to what people would say is the "center" of Clifton.

The MUTCD already has a sign to indicate that multiple exits serve a given place/city. The "next X exits" sign.

(There's also the use of both a street name and place name on the same sign, which there are probably more MUTCD violations of that type...)

[roadman65]

For the City of Clifton it’s hard to pin point where most drivers would consider that they’re in the center of that municipality. What NJDOT did here is understandable here even though in violation. Clifton is a bedroom community and is suburban sprawl with business layout and even though a city, it’s really set up more to look like a township.

Yeah the combination of street and destination also is not MUTCD compliant, but knowing New Jersey they will continue to use that concept for decades to come. Though I am surprised that NJDOT did eliminate three control cities on guide signs which they never had problems using in the past, but chose to follow the MUTCD in that requirement.

[CometTheMountainLion]

https://maps.app.goo.gl/6MpXiwuSxTnearxE9?g_st=ic

Here is another case of this in, wait for it, Oklahoma. The signs for the Indian Nation Turnpike and US-271 both feature Antlers. But US-271 does pass through the town center.

[machias]

Like this? (NYSDOT Region 2)


https://goo.gl/maps/vSYBPhG13W5ygs5X7

[SkyPesos]

Both I-80 and I-480 WB are signed for Cleveland at where I-480 exits from I-80 (Streesboro is OH 14's control city). I would change I-80 WB's control city to Toledo at this point.

[1995hoo]

This assembly has Tysons Corner on three different signs for two different roads, and it's entirely appropriate regardless of whatever the MUTCD might say.

[andrepoiy]

Toronto and Toronto (Downtown)

[Hunty2022]

Looked at the US 50 / MD-90 interchange yesterday. US 50 East is signed for "Downtown Ocean City"  and MD-90 East is signed for "Ocean City and Points North" . I'll put up a picture if I take one when I pass it later.

[hbelkins]

2013 Kansas Trip Day 3 - 221 by H.B. Elkins, on Flickr

[lordsutch]

The I-40/I-55 eastern split in West Memphis has Memphis as the first control city for both routes, although I-40 is probably better for the CBD while I-55 is/will be better for the airport after the I-55/Crump/Riverside mess is straightened out.

US 129 in Macon lets you choose between "Milledgeville" (GA 49) and "Alternative Route to Milledgeville" (GA 22).

[ran4sh]

Another good Georgia example is in the Athens area (US 78 Business approaching mainline US 78) where a sign indicates "North Atlanta" via GA 316 and "East Atlanta" via US 78. https://goo.gl/maps/CEG2scLCLPvCvxfK7 (This sign predates the completion of GA 316, so GA 316 [with US 29 and 78 overlapping] has never had a similar sign)

[KCRoadFan]

On eastbound I-70 at the "Wentzville Split" (the junction with I-64/US 40/US 61), there is a choice of roads into St. Louis: either remain on I-70, or exit onto I-64/US 40 going eastbound. From that junction, it's about 40 miles to downtown St. Louis along either road; I-70 is signed for St. Louis and I-64/US 40 for Chesterfield (I remember the signs used to read "Lambert Airport/St. Louis" for the former road and "Chesterfield/Forest Park" for the latter).

Personally, if I were MoDOT, I would sign I-70 as "St. Charles/St. Louis" and I-64/US 40 as "Chesterfield/St. Louis", to indicate that drivers can reach St. Louis via either road (thus taking a page from KTA's playbook with the two Kansas City signs where I-35 splits off the Turnpike at Emporia, as shown earlier in the thread).

[hbelkins]

On eastbound I-70 at the "Wentzville Split" (the junction with I-64/US 40/US 61), there is a choice of roads into St. Louis: either remain on I-70, or exit onto I-64/US 40 going eastbound. From that junction, it's about 40 miles to downtown St. Louis along either road; I-70 is signed for St. Louis and I-64/US 40 for Chesterfield (I remember the signs used to read "Lambert Airport/St. Louis" for the former road and "Chesterfield/Forest Park" for the latter).

Personally, if I were MoDOT, I would sign I-70 as "St. Charles/St. Louis" and I-64/US 40 as "Chesterfield/St. Louis", to indicate that drivers can reach St. Louis via either road (thus taking a page from KTA's playbook with the two Kansas City signs where I-35 splits off the Turnpike at Emporia, as shown earlier in the thread).

Most routing services use I-70 over I-64 for through traffic between Louisville and Kansas City.

[Scott5114]

https://maps.app.goo.gl/6MpXiwuSxTnearxE9?g_st=ic

Here is another case of this in, wait for it, Oklahoma. The signs for the Indian Nation Turnpike and US-271 both feature Antlers. But US-271 does pass through the town center.

2013 Kansas Trip Day 3 - 221 by H.B. Elkins, on Flickr

These are both instances where a toll road and a free road both go to the same location (with different locations in between). Obviously there are some tradeoffs involved (time vs. money, mostly). It's hard to say that one or the other should be forbidden from using the duplicated control, since which route is the "best" is going to be kind of subjective. For larger destinations, which route is better may also depend on where in the destination you're going to (as is true for the Kansas City example).

[roadman65]

East end of PA 760 in Sharon, PA.

Courtesy AA Roads.

[Flint1979]

Both I-80 and I-480 WB are signed for Cleveland at where I-480 exits from I-80 (Streesboro is OH 14's control city). I would change I-80 WB's control city to Toledo at this point.

I think I would have gone with Toledo too since I-480 goes to Cleveland and I-80 does not even enter Cleveland proper at all.

[KCRoadFan]

East end of PA 760 in Sharon, PA.

Courtesy AA Roads.

That just goes to show how bad control cities are in Pennsylvania.

[fwydriver405]

This happens a few times in Maine.

I-95 North for the first three exits for "Kittery", both with newest signage (2023, below*) and signage prior (2020 or 21):



It also happens again for "Falmouth" for Exits 52-53, repeated both northbound and southbound. Prior Exit 53 signage during the late 1990s exit sign replacement mentioned "West Falmouth" and "Portland North" instead of just "Falmouth".

And again for the Augusta area for Exits 112-113 both NB and SB (though the gantry NB before that one lists "No. Augusta" for the advance sign).

I-195 features both "Saco" for Exits 2 A-B, both NB and SB (though SB features "Downtown Saco")

I-295's southbound on-ramp signage at the exit from the Veterans Memorial Bridge contains "South Portland" control cities for both the left exit for US 1 south, as well as to enter I-295 south (despite the road already being in South Portland city limits), though the sign before that only mentions "South Portland" via US Route 1 South.

Even street names in Portland on I-295 are repeated - Washington Ave (SB), Forest Ave, and Congress St (SB). Though for Washington Ave, I believe it's becuase Maine Route 26 concurs with I-295 on the Tukey's Bridge for 200 m between both pairs of Exit 8s NB and SB - entirely within city limits.

I can only think of one instance in New Hampshire, coming right out of the Rochester toll gantry (used to be plaza) for Exits 11-12 northbound to "Rochester" on NH 16 / Spaulding Turnpike northbound.

[roadman65]

East end of PA 760 in Sharon, PA.

Courtesy AA Roads.

That just goes to show how bad control cities are in Pennsylvania.

Mercer shouldn't be used for I-80 here at all. Skip to Dubois already. 

Yes PennDOT is bad just like Plymouth Meeting for I-476 instead of  Allentown or Carlisle on I-81 north from Chambersburg instead of Harrisburg.

[mrsman]

2013 Kansas Trip Day 3 - 221 by H.B. Elkins, on Flickr

i really have no problem with this and believe that there are many cases where something similar should be done in other splits around the country where both roads arguably go to the same city.  Both roads are probably equally good for Downtown KC.  Obviously they hit different parts of Metro-KC, southern areas should go via 35 and western areas should go via 70.  And of course different roads for Emporia and Topeka, as noted.

Personally, if I were MoDOT, I would sign I-70 as "St. Charles/St. Louis" and I-64/US 40 as "Chesterfield/St. Louis", to indicate that drivers can reach St. Louis via either road (thus taking a page from KTA's playbook with the two Kansas City signs where I-35 splits off the Turnpike at Emporia, as shown earlier in the thread).

I agree with this and your reasoning as it is similar to the way I think about the Kansas City example above.

The I-40/I-55 eastern split in West Memphis has Memphis as the first control city for both routes, although I-40 is probably better for the CBD while I-55 is/will be better for the airport after the I-55/Crump/Riverside mess is straightened out.

At this split, I would try to signify that 40 is the better route to Central or Downtown Memphis.  Would Central Memphis for 40 and Southern Memphis for 55 work here? 

The LIE and the Northern Parkway literally go to the same places.  The following is completely acceptable to me.

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7748363,-73.6252304,3a,75y,14.19h,77.04t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s7SjAKR_IWxtYSsvFkRHCEA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu



An interesting situation exists where Capital Beltway interchanges with the BW Parkway:

https://www.google.com/maps/@38.9883955,-76.8830258,3a,44.6y,328.67h,93.84t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s0-H8Hj2SpJwTam8htjBX7g!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3D0-H8Hj2SpJwTam8htjBX7g%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D236.03438%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu

Now there is no pull through for the Beltway, but it is part of I-95 and I-95's control is absolutely Baltimore here (as it leads to I-95 split in College Park). 

https://www.google.com/maps/@38.9908932,-76.8867341,3a,75y,53.62h,82.69t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1syXFO_aLV3zSRExSLwtGiQg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu

But BW Parkway goes directly to Baltimore, but does not allow for trucks. 

I suppose if both roads had pull-through signs at the same time, I would use "College Park/Baltimore" for 95/495 and "Fort Meade/Baltimore" for BW Parkway.  BWI Airport/Baltimore could also work, but then again we want to be careful to not induce any trucks onto the Parkway.

Arguably, we have a similar problem at the 95/295 interchange in Baltimore:

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.2674495,-76.6222001,3a,75y,274.93h,81.51t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s5QibR1w-Kha0rdx8WZXbLQ!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3D5QibR1w-Kha0rdx8WZXbLQ%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D73.01226%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu

295 controls can be BWI Airport/Washington with a warning that trucks aren't allowed south of MD-175.  95 controls can be Halethorpe/Washington.



90 and 94 both connect Chicago to Indiana.  80 does as well, although 80 does not enter Chicago city limits and from the east only has a Chicago control while multiplexed with either 90 or 94.  They intersect with each other in two places:

Chicago Skyway split:

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.7779137,-87.6308492,3a,75y,151.35h,83.64t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sXPkVL3WOzemrb1kuxpKdTQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu

This seems like the best signage for this, even though the IN toll road of course goes to Indiana as well.  Working within the assumption that a state control is acceptable for Chicagoland, I would sign 94 as 94 to 57 Indiana/Memphis and 90 would just stay as is.  Both 90 and 94 go to Indiana and they both go to the same part of Indiana until the major split in Portage, IN where 80/90 heads to South Bend and Toledo and 94 heads to Detroit.  Heck, if I was to replace Indiana with cities on any of the signs where Indiana appears, it would likely be "South Bend/Detroit" to denote that any of those roads (80,90,94,294) all eventually lead to the Portage split.  [And I do prefer incorporating South Bend as an EB control between Chicago and Toledo, but not WB.]  So at this point, 90 is a bit more direct, but is a toll road.  And either road could be pretty bad given traffic.  But they all lead to the same place.

On the Indiana side, we are faced with the following:

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.591582,-87.2279683,3a,75y,292.22h,88.72t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s9QcoWuYYHVKBY_75Dw_cNA!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3D9QcoWuYYHVKBY_75Dw_cNA%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D19.017937%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu

Des Moines is a good control, but I would also add some signage to indicate that it is an alternate route to Chicago, even though it takes away toll money from the IN Toll Road.

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5951141,-87.2155372,3a,75y,261.38h,93.73t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sgwI_E2htChqKo2EvIsNKQQ!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DgwI_E2htChqKo2EvIsNKQQ%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D302.948%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu

The vantage point that 94 traffic is encouraged to stay on the Borman to Chicago, but you could also exit to the Chicago Skyway if that is interesting to you.

I guess the real problem is that there is no part that 90 takes you that can be indicated well on the signage that can distinguish it from the 94 route.  The 94 route can be distinguished as it also leads to other highways (to 57 or 394 eastbound and to 80 westbound).  The only city that 90 reaches between the Skyway split and the Lake Station split that is unique to 90 is East Chicago, IN. 

So at the Skyway split, I'm open to adjusting the 94 sign to read "94 East to 57 South Indiana/Memphis" and leaving the 90 sign alone.  At the Indiana signs, I would like to see "Chicago/Des Moines" as the control for the WB 80/94 and "East Chicago/Chicago" with TOLL ROAD for the WB 90.


From the Quad Cities, 80 has a Chicago control, even though 88 is more direct to Chicago.  I would use Sterling/Chicago for any 88 signs in the area and Joliet/Chicago for any 80 signs in the area.



I-5/170 split in the San Fernando Valley:

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.2345157,-118.41175,3a,75y,157.68h,90.57t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s9Wt77U7VMEjKmR1VCbWVQg!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3D9Wt77U7VMEjKmR1VCbWVQg%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D140.94354%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu

Except at the split, the southbound control for both roads is Los Angeles.  I like Burbank/Los Angeles for 5 and Hollywood/Los Angeles for 170.  I also like to include Hollywood as a secondary control on any freeway interchange for the Hollywood Freeway, especially as the freeway names are getting less used.  So I would like to see Hollywood as a secondary control at the 101/170/134 interchange and the 101/110 interchange. ,

[jp the roadgeek]

NYC for both I-91 and CT 15 South in Meriden, CT (though future sign replacement will probably remove NYC for I-91, since it doesn't come within 75 miles of it and requires a switch to I-95).  Interestingly, the control for CT 15 switches to New Haven south of here until Hamden.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/C58xh8nmpiXPAp1b9

[mrsman]

NYC for both I-91 and CT 15 South in Meriden, CT (though future sign replacement will probably remove NYC for I-91, since it doesn't come within 75 miles of it and requires a switch to I-95).  Interestingly, the control for CT 15 switches to New Haven south of here until Hamden.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/C58xh8nmpiXPAp1b9

I really don't like New haven as the control for 15.  The road only skirts the very edge of New haven.  95 and 91 should be the best way to direct traffic to New haven, especially at this point here where the routes diverge.  But I would say the same at many of the roads that intersect with both 15 (or Hutchinson Pkwy) and 95 (or 91).   As the 15 routing is pretty close to the 95 routing, there needs to be some level of distinguishing controls that can be used.


So Trumbull may be the only distinguishing control, even though it is small.  So perhaps NB controls for 15: Trumbull/Hartford and then Hartford.  SB controls should be Trumbull/New York City and then NYC.  New Canaan is another possibility for a secondary control.

15 is of course more direct to NYC, but it doesn't allow trucks.  So 15 can lead to NYC, but 91 can also get you there.

For the diversion point listed above:  New Haven/New York for 91 and Trumbull/New York for 15, if it were my decision.

[jp the roadgeek]

NYC for both I-91 and CT 15 South in Meriden, CT (though future sign replacement will probably remove NYC for I-91, since it doesn't come within 75 miles of it and requires a switch to I-95).  Interestingly, the control for CT 15 switches to New Haven south of here until Hamden.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/C58xh8nmpiXPAp1b9

I really don't like New haven as the control for 15.  The road only skirts the very edge of New haven.  95 and 91 should be the best way to direct traffic to New haven, especially at this point here where the routes diverge.  But I would say the same at many of the roads that intersect with both 15 (or Hutchinson Pkwy) and 95 (or 91).   As the 15 routing is pretty close to the 95 routing, there needs to be some level of distinguishing controls that can be used.


So Trumbull may be the only distinguishing control, even though it is small.  So perhaps NB controls for 15: Trumbull/Hartford and then Hartford.  SB controls should be Trumbull/New York City and then NYC.  New Canaan is another possibility for a secondary control.

15 is of course more direct to NYC, but it doesn't allow trucks.  So 15 can lead to NYC, but 91 can also get you there.

For the diversion point listed above:  New Haven/New York for 91 and Trumbull/New York for 15, if it were my decision.

The worst use of New Haven is at the Exit 61 (Whitney Ave) SB entrance.  Whitney Ave takes you right into downtown New Haven, yet the BGS directs you onto CT 15. 

[Bitmapped]

East end of PA 760 in Sharon, PA.

Courtesy AA Roads.

FWIW, Mercer was added to the PA 318 sign about a decade ago. It just used to be signed for West Middlesex. There's also overlap between I-376's Exit #1 and #2 (PA 18), which are both signed for West Middlesex.