Mileage signs control cities

[roadman65]

How do most like them signed?  Does two destinations work or do you like three? 

Also, do you think that it should be the next two sequential cities as the points or the other being the next municipality followed by a consistent control city (ie. the next large communtiy or state line city) if you like the two destinations on off interstate roads?

Also, do you prefer mileage to the city centers or to the entry point?

To me, I think the city center is best, except for NYC that has 5 boroughs and each one its own unique idenity being one New York.  I also think that three destinations are the best with one consistent control point as the third mention.

[Brandon]

In Illinois, you usually see three destinations.  The first is the next exit.  It may be a road (i.e. Illinois 113), a city (i.e. Dwight), or an exit (i.e. Lexington EXIT) (all real ones on I-55).  The second is usually the secondary control city (i.e. Bloomington), followed by the third, the primary control city (i.e. St Louis).  The distances vary.  The first line is usually to the exit, the second and third are to the center of town.

[amroad17]

Ohio and Kentucky use both the two-line and the three-line system.  My only complaint is that the mileages are inaccurate or inconsistent.  For example, in Ohio, the distance between Columbus and Wheeling is anywhere from 125-129 miles on I-70.  In Kentucky, the Louisville-Nashville mileages are all over the board (distance between the two cities showing anywhere between 165-178 miles).  At least the control cities are consistent.

[Alps]

I prefer
1) Next town
2) Optional - Next minor city
3) Next major city

[Scott5114]

Oklahoma tends to just use two. The first line is sometimes the next exit, sometimes the next minor city.

[hobsini2]

I prefer next exit or town, minor control city, then major control city.

[tdindy88]

Indiana has three control cities on their interstate-based signs, the first is the next town and the third is the next major city, the second one is whatever works in its place and can be all over the place, it can be a minor control city, but it could be a small community too. U.S. and state highways usually just do two control cities (the next town and the main control city for that highway, or if it's a short highway then just the next two towns.)

[Greybear]

Oklahoma tends to just use two. The first line is sometimes the next exit, sometimes the next minor city.

I was recently in Oklahoma, traveling along I-35 from the Texas line to OKC and found that most of the milage signs had three destinations, with Okla City being the last one.

[huskeroadgeek]

For signs after minor exits(small towns, minor roads), 2 lines are enough. 3 lines are good for signs after more important exits. Mileage given should usually be to the center of a city unless otherwise indicated(like with EXIT indicating mileage is to an exit). The bottom line should usually be a consistent control city. Exceptions would be if there is another interstate branching off ahead where a good portion of the traffic will be using that road(particularly on multiplexed portions of interstate) or when there are two major destinations fairly close together(example would be I-80 eastbound in Nebraska where Lincoln and Omaha alternate as the bottom line destination).

[cpzilliacus]

On freeways with many major destinations (like I-95 from Richmond, Va. to Portland, Maine) within reasonable distance, I strongly prefer three lines.  Especially after a rest area or service plaza.

[Scott5114]

Oklahoma tends to just use two. The first line is sometimes the next exit, sometimes the next minor city.

I was recently in Oklahoma, traveling along I-35 from the Texas line to OKC and found that most of the milage signs had three destinations, with Okla City being the last one.

This portion of I-35 was all done as one big sign replacement contract in the early 2000s. The signs in that batch do have three destinations.

Oklahoma: consistently inconsistent!

[Special K]

I always appreciate more information, so three lines is good for me.

- Next exit destination
- 2nd next exit destination
- Next Control City

[Road Hog]

Last time I was on I-40 in western Arkansas, they had changed to three controls. The next town, the I-430 junction, and Little Rock.

Used to be that all mileage signs were two-city signs, except there was one sign somewhere near Ozark that had Russellville as an intermediate control city.

[txstateends]

I like 3 cities/towns usually.

- next one
- 2nd next one
- 3rd next one *or* next major one

Exception:  I'd like to see the last city/town/point on a route listed starting off from a terminus as a 3rd (or, WTH, a 4th) listed place; a-la the I-40 pix of Wilmington and Barstow or the US 50 pix of Ocean City and Sacramento (even though some of those examples are singles and not grouped with other control cities on the same sign).

It's very VERY irritating to see a single control city on a mileage sign when you know there are more cities after that to come.  What does it hurt to put more than one?  If it's the last city/town/point to go, that's different.

[hobsini2]

I also got annoyed with both WisDOT and IDiOT for there "mileage signs" on I-94 between Milwaukee and Chicago. Heading South (East 94), after Mitchell Airport Exit, there is a single line sign that shows Chicago 96. That's fine but I would also add Racine, Kenosha, Waukegan, or esp O'Hare because of how many people from SE Wisconsin fly out of both O'Hare and Mitchell. I will at least give WisDOT credit for the "Next 3 exits" signs in the median.

[ce929wax]

I also got annoyed with both WisDOT and IDiOT for there "mileage signs" on I-94 between Milwaukee and Chicago. Heading South (East 94), after Mitchell Airport Exit, there is a single line sign that shows Chicago 96. That's fine but I would also add Racine, Kenosha, Waukegan, or esp O'Hare because of how many people from SE Wisconsin fly out of both O'Hare and Mitchell. I will at least give WisDOT credit for the "Next 3 exits" signs in the median.

Here in Tennessee it is usually just two cities listed on the interstate.  By my estimation it is usually the next minor city and then the major control city (i.e. Carthage-Knoxville).  On minor highways mileage signs are few and far between. 

On another note, I seem to remember on that stretch of I-94 between Chicago and Milwaukee that a lot of the county routes in Wisconsin are merely signed EAST-WEST as control cities.  I could be wrong, and it was 1996 the last time I rode through those parts, but I always thought that that was kind of lazy on WisDOT, as they should at least put a city on there.

[rawmustard]

In Michigan it's typically two-lines with three-lines in a handful of spots. The major control city should always be the last line, but for some reason MDOT decided to just list the next three cities going west from Battle Creek on I-94 (Galesburg, Kalamazoo, and Portage). For one thing, it's unnecessary to list Portage on the same distance sign as Kalamazoo because practically every interchange from 74 through 80 easily provides access to both. Hopefully that sign gets corrected on its next replacement, because you should be able to see the distance to Chicago upon leaving Battle Creek.

INDOT's three-line rule gets downright ridiculous on I-69 northbound going around Angola because they seem to want to avoid mentioning Coldwater (of course the Toll Road gets mentioned instead of maybe Fremont, but that's understandable). It's rather superfluous to see the very next interchange on a distance sign immediately before seeing the advance sign for said interchange.

[tdindy88]

At least Lansing is mentioned from as far south as Huntington County, Indiana. I know very well about the Michigan mileage signs from a recent trip, I was on M-115 east of US 31 in Benzie County and the mileage sign there mentioned the towns of Copemish and Mesick. I kept on thinking...hello...Cadillac?

[Revive 755]

On another note, I seem to remember on that stretch of I-94 between Chicago and Milwaukee that a lot of the county routes in Wisconsin are merely signed EAST-WEST as control cities.  I could be wrong, and it was 1996 the last time I rode through those parts, but I always thought that that was kind of lazy on WisDOT, as they should at least put a city on there.

WisDOT is still using EAST-WEST, and seems to be keeping it with the I-94 eight laning.

[golden eagle]

Mississippi uses both two- and three-city/exit signs.

[Kacie Jane]

On I-5, Washington most often uses a three-line sign.

#1 - next town
#2 - secondary control city (Everett north of Seattle, Tacoma then Olympia south of Seattle)
#3 - control city (Portland, Seattle, or Vancouver)

I haven't traveled I-90 enough to remember the pattern there, but I'd assume it's more or less the same -- mainly I don't know what the cities for line 2 are there.

[zorb58]

Here in PA on I-79 north towards Erie there are two mileage signs that say "Mercer," but the first one points to the exit and says 26 miles and the second one a few miles later points to the town and says 33.  To me that's very annoying and confusing! One or the other may have since been replaced.  I don't pay attention too much anymore because the dry boring ride on 79 north gets to you after a while...

[roadman65]

Here in PA on I-79 north towards Erie there are two mileage signs that say "Mercer," but the first one points to the exit and says 26 miles and the second one a few miles later points to the town and says 33.  To me that's very annoying and confusing! One or the other may have since been replaced.  I don't pay attention too much anymore because the dry boring ride on 79 north gets to you after a while...

NJ had two along US 22 in the same manner.  It has a "NEWARK 12" sign east of Mountain Avenue in Watchung, NJ that denotes mileage to the city border just east of North Broad Street in Hillside.  Then you have (or had) another one a few miles east in Mountainside, NJ that denoted mileage to Downtown Newark (I do not recall the distance).  The former was erected as part of a statewide mileage sign campaign in 1998 that changed criteria to municipal boundaries rather than city or town centers  The latter was the original NJ mileage signs that have been in place for decades and used different guidelines then.  Nonetheless, the numbers did not jive with each other.

In Florida, you have the same on FL 50 where numbers do not match.  You have a sign on EB FL 50 showing that Titusville is 35 miles east of US 441.  Then in Titusville at FL 50's eastern terminus you have a sign on the beginning of FL 50 Westbound showing that Orlando is 39 miles.  If you examine it closely you will find that both Downtown Orlando and its eastern city limit on FL 50 are both east of US 441!  Then Downtown Titusville is located three miles north of FL 50 on US 1.  The numbers as they be do not compute either way you look at them.

Then elsewhere on FL 50 you have two signs, one freeway style large and the other a small one both showing that:
Winter Garden 12
Brookesville 49

The large one is located at the intersection of Tampa Avenue and small one is just west of John Young Parkway.  How can both be the same distance apart from both Winter Garden and Brookesville when the signs are more than a half a mile apart?  One should be 11 miles and 48 miles or the other should be 13 and 50.   Then why is a large BGS located on an urban street in a residential area, especially when the next one is located in front of a McDonalds where there is more right away to have a larger sign?  Why not remove the first and just leave the second one and serve both needs?

[huskeroadgeek]

Missouri uses 3 destination signs in many places. What's interesting is whereas most of the time the bottom line destination on any mileage sign is a somewhat major destination, in some cases on state and US routes in Missouri, the bottom line destination is not really a major destination. For instance, on the MO 13 expressway between Clinton and Springfield, at some point as one gets close enough to Springfield for it to move up to the 2nd line destination, the town of Crane appears as the bottom line destination. Crane is a small town(pop. 1,462) and is not even a major road junction(incidentally, Crane is not even on MO 13 anymore-it is on the old route of MO 13 south of Springfield which is now MO 413). That seems to me like a situation where they adhere too closely to what appears to be a rule to have 3 line signs at all times. If they need to have a 3rd line destination, Branson would seem to be a better choice considering all of the traffic from Kansas City and points north and west that uses MO 13 to connect with I-44 and US 65 to get to Branson.

[The High Plains Traveler]

Colorado seems to prefer two-city destination signs for I-25 and three-city signs for I-76 and I-70, though there are exceptions on both. (As far as I can remember, you see nothing listed beyond Denver for EB I-70 till you get to Denver). Distance signage along I-25 has almost nothing listed for adjoining states except Cheyenne WY, as you approach Ft. Collins northbound. Southbound, I believe there are only two signs with New Mexico destinations: an errant listing for Albuquerque at Monument (between Castle Rock and Colorado Springs), and both Raton and Las Vegas as you leave Trinidad, last SB Colorado town.

On I-70 west and east of Denver, as well as EB I-76, there are out of state destinations listed numerous times on three-city destination signs.