AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

New rules for political content in signatures and user profiles. See this thread for details.

Author Topic: Will AZ have to give up using Los Angeles on I-40?  (Read 13109 times)

Roadgeekteen

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 8495
  • Interstates everywhere to everything

  • Age: 17
  • Location: Needham
  • Last Login: Today at 07:22:10 PM
    • old interstate plans
Re: Will AZ have to give up using Los Angeles on I-40?
« Reply #50 on: April 22, 2021, 12:06:07 AM »

Quote
Santa Fe is fine by me too since it's the state capital and is a fairly significant road junction, with US 84/285 heading north out of it to Espaņola and Los Alamos. If you really don't want to use Santa Fe, the only other option should be Denver. Not Colorado Springs.

Agreed on Flagstaff and Amarillo though.

Or going northbound from Albuquerque, maybe use Santa Fe / Denver dual control cities, and going southbound from the Colorado state line use dual Santa Fe & Albuquerque.

A bit off-topic; you're right about there being a junction with US 84/285.  However, if you're heading from Albuquerque towards Espaņola or Los Alamos, motorists usually get off the interstate onto NM 599 (exit 276), which completely bypasses Santa Fe.
Denver should be signed at the I-40 interchange and that's it. Albuquerque should be used southbound from Pueblo.

kphoger

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 18265
  • Location: Wichita, KS
  • Last Login: May 14, 2021, 07:24:34 PM
Re: Will AZ have to give up using Los Angeles on I-40?
« Reply #51 on: April 22, 2021, 10:38:41 AM »

There's really no point in trying to defend what New Mexico does with any signage.  We're lucky they manage to bolt the sign to the post, honestly.
Logged
Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.
Visit scenic Orleans County, NY!
Male pronouns, please.

I'm rather partial to whipped cream, personally.

abqtraveler

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 574
  • US-85 runs thru Albuquerque, but only on paper

  • Location: Albuquerque, NM
  • Last Login: May 14, 2021, 04:15:02 PM
Re: Will AZ have to give up using Los Angeles on I-40?
« Reply #52 on: April 22, 2021, 01:14:37 PM »

A change brought in as part of the 2009 MUTCD, a state supplement, or a proposed change a new edition?  I certainly do not recall anything in the MUTCD against indirect control cities.

If there has been such a change at the national level, I certainly don't see Illinois removing Memphis on SB I-57 nor removing Chicago on EB I-80.

In that case, the interchange for I-84 on the Mass Pike can't have New York City as a control city, since it would be an indirect control city as one would have to take a combination of routes to get to NYC from the Mass Pike/I-84 interchange:  either I-84 to I-91 to I-95; or I-84 to I-684 to I-287 to I-95 (or I-87); or even I-84 to I-87.
Logged
2-d Interstates traveled:  4, 5, 8, 10, 15, 20, 24, 25, 27, 29, 35, 37, 39, 40, 41, 43, 45, 49, 55, 57, 64, 65, 66, 69, 70, 71, 74, 75, 76(E), 77, 78, 81, 83, 85, 87(N), 89, 90, 91, 93, 94, 95

2-d Interstates Clinched:  12, 22, 30, 44, 59, 80, 84(E), 86(E), 238, H1, H2, H3, H201

MattHanson939

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 18
  • Location: Albuquerque, NM
  • Last Login: May 14, 2021, 11:44:28 PM
Re: Will AZ have to give up using Los Angeles on I-40?
« Reply #53 on: May 03, 2021, 05:57:44 PM »

Quote
If you really don't want to use Santa Fe, the only other option should be Denver. Not Colorado Springs.



Now thinking about it, I guess I could see your point.  I've seen two instances of an interstate skipping over smaller to medium-sized cities  to use the largest city as a control city, not only due to it being larger but also having major interstate junctions.  This is on I-5 in Oregon.   Going northbound from Ashland, Portland is the control city (Eugene & Salem are omitted yet they're control cities going southbound).  And then Seattle becomes the northbound control city from Portland (skipping over Olympia and Tacoma).  Not only that, Olympia and Tacoma are omitted on signs leading motorists to I-5 south from I-90; but on I-5 itself, Olympia and Portland are dual control cities.

Another idea I have is I-25 using Colorado Springs and Denver as dual control cities going north from Albuquerque.  Or I-5 from Ashland using dual Eugene / Portland, then from Eugene use Salem / Portland.

However, another argument I have for why I-25 ought to use Colorado Springs as the NB control city from Albuquerque is that on I-35 in Texas, Austin is the control city from San Antonio, then Waco is the next control city.  Austin has a population of more than 900,000 yet it's only served by one interstate, but has an extensive freeway system.  Dallas isn't even mentioned until you reach Waco, but I-35 going north from Austin could use Dallas since it's bigger and is where there are major junctions with I-20 and I-30, although it splits into I-35W to go to Fort Worth and I-35E to go to Dallas (perhaps re-designate 35W as an auxiliary interstate, like I-435 or I-235, and have I-35 continue into Dallas). 

35E and 35W ought to use Austin instead of Waco as the southbound control city from Dallas and Fort Worth, respectively.
« Last Edit: May 03, 2021, 06:27:42 PM by MattHanson939 »
Logged

 


Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.