Since some of us have issues with some locations used as control cities, what would your ideal control city list consist of? Here's mine:
I-55N (Grenada/Memphis): I'd drop Grenada
I-55S (McComb/New Orleans): Keep New Orleans, drop McComb
I-20W (Vicksburg): No change
I-20E (Meridian): Fine with Meridian, though I'd add Birmingham to it
I-220 (no control cities): Northbound would be Yazoo City/Memphis until US 49 splits, Memphis exclusively from US 49 northward. Southbound would be Vicksburg exclusively until it multiplexes with US 49S. At that point, it'd be Vicksburg/Hattiesburg
US 49S (Hattiesburg): No change
US 49N (Flora/Yazoo City): No change
US 80: No control cities from I-220. I'd use Clinton for westbound, downtown Jackson/Pearl for eastbound
MS 18 (Raymond): No change
MS 25 (Carthage): I'm OK with Carthage, but I'd rather use Starkville. I could even be swayed into dropping Carthage entirely.
While not in my area, in Memphis, I'd use Tunica as the control city for US 61 rather than Vicksburg from I-55, though there is signage for Tunica before approaching the exit. In fact, I've wondered why they don't use Clarksdale or even Greenville as the control city.
Note to mods, this would be better in the fictional thread, IMHO, but here's mine:
I'll stick with the Chicago area of Illinois for the time being. Note that IDOT uses primary and secondary control cities.
I-55: St Louis and Chicago are fine for the primary controls, as are Bloomington, Joliet, and Chicago for the secondary controls
I-57: Ditto with Memphis and Chicago; Champaign, Kankakee, and Chicago
I-80: Hodgepodge of Indiana, Iowa, Toledo, and Des Moines for primary controls. Iowa and Indiana are fine for primary controls, and Moline-Rock Island, Joliet, and Indiana are good for secondary controls. I would, however, sign I-88 for Chicago and sign I-80 for Joliet and Indiana in the Quad Cities. I-88 is a better way to reach the Loop and I-80.
I-88: I would choose DeKalb, Aurora, and Chicago.
I-90: Rockford and Chicago are fine.
I-94: Indiana and Wisconsin/Mikwaukee work well.
I-190: O'Hare and Chicago, what else?
I-290: Now here comes some major changes. Wbd should be Aurora and Schaumburg, not West Suburbs and Rockford. Ebd should be Joliet/Oak Brook (@ I-90) and Chicago (@ I-355, I-88, and I-294).
I-294: Wisconsin and Indiana. How much simpler can they be?
I-355: More major changes. Sbd should be Joliet (@ I-290 and I-88), Lockport/New Lenox (@I-55 Sbd), and Lockport/Indiana (@ I-55 Nbd). Nbd should be Schaumburg.
IL-394: Danville!?! I'd use Crete. IL-394 never makes it to Danville, and I-57 to I-74 is better for that and IL-1.
I'm ok with pretty much all the control cities in my area except for on I-95 NB at VA 35/US 301/VA 156(Exit 41) where I believe that Hopewell(accessed via VA 156) should be used as a control city along with Courtland even though traffic can also access Hopewell via the I-295 exit only 5 miles to the north.
New Jersey
I-78E (Newark) - no change
I-78W (Clinton) - Change this for Phillipsburg and Allentown
I-80E (Paterson/New York City) - no change
I-80W (Netcong/Del Water Gap/Stroudsburg PA) - Maybe scrap Netcong
I-287N (Somerville/Morristown/Boonton/Mahwah) - No change
I-287S (Boonton/Morristown/Perth Amboy) - no change
I-280E & W (The Oranges/Newark/Harrison) - The only change here is that they could all be signed a little more, I-280 rarely uses control points
NJ 3 E - I don't think it has any, so I will say it should use Clifton and Secaucus
NJ 3 W (Clifton) - Could add Little Falls
In south Florida:
Interstate 75 north from the Palmetto Expressway FL 826 to Interstate 595 should state Sunrise-Weston.
Interstate 75 north (west) from Interstate 595 across Alligator Alley should remain Naples.
Interstate 75 south from Interstate 595 to Palmetto Expressway should be Hialeah-Miami.
Interstate 95 north from Miami should have both Fort Lauderdale and West Palm Beach (and spell it out, too!). I hate that "W Palm Bch" crap.
Interstate 595 west should be kept with "TO Interstate 75 and Florida's Turnpike" shields but include Sunrise-Weston. Right now, there is nothing.
Metro Atlanta area:
I-85 North (north of Downtown Atlanta): I'd add Gainesville to Greenville between I-75 and I-985. North of I-985, I'd add Charlotte to Greenville.
Be well,
Bryant
I-35 southbound could stand to have Ardmore added as a control city.
Some California thoughts...
I-205: Westbound, "Oakland" or "Dublin" at I-5, and eastbound, "Manteca" at I-580
Route 154: Santa Barbara going southbound from US 101, and Santa Maria going northbound from Santa Barbara. (Kinda understand why this isn't the case - to discourage most travelers from leaving the 101 freeway between the two cities)
San Diego
I-805: Southbound, National City and San Ysidro
I-5, metro San Diego: Southbound, San Ysidro south of downtown
Route 905 (future I-905): Eastbound from I-5 and I-805, "Otay Mesa Border Crossing", while westbound from Route 125, "Imperial Beach/San Diego"
Route 15: Southbound, "Barrio Logan" or "National City"
Los Angeles
I-605: "Azusa" or "Glendora" northbound, "Long Beach" southbound
Route 170: "Downtown Los Angeles" southbound
Bay Area
Route 85: Southbound at US 101 in Mountain View, "Los Angeles" and northbound at US 101 in south San Jose, "San Francisco" (make it more obvious that it is a bypass route for north-south travelers)
Sacramento area
Route 99: Southbound, "Elk Grove" south of US 50 (as well as northbound past Route 104)
I-5: "Elk Grove" south of US 50 and north of Route 12
Business 80: "Roseville" north of US 50 going eastbound, "Elk Grove via Route 99" south of Route 160 going westbound
I-80: "Roseville" eastbound northeast of US 50 (as well as "TO Route 99/I-5 north")
US 50: "TO Route 99/I-5 south" eastbound past I-80, "Folsom" east of Route 99
Quote from: TheStranger on May 07, 2010, 09:24:49 PM
I-805: Southbound, National City and San Ysidro
I-5, metro San Diego: Southbound, San Ysidro south of downtown
Route 905 (future I-905): Eastbound from I-5 and I-805, "Otay Mesa Border Crossing", while westbound from Route 125, "Imperial Beach/San Diego"
Route 15: Southbound, "Barrio Logan" or "National City"
I'd really like to see Tijuana (either as is, or Tijuana BC) acknowledged as a legitimate destination. Certainly it is larger and more important than any of those smaller suburbs on the US side.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on May 07, 2010, 09:27:29 PM
Quote from: TheStranger on May 07, 2010, 09:24:49 PM
I-805: Southbound, National City and San Ysidro
I-5, metro San Diego: Southbound, San Ysidro south of downtown
Route 905 (future I-905): Eastbound from I-5 and I-805, "Otay Mesa Border Crossing", while westbound from Route 125, "Imperial Beach/San Diego"
Route 15: Southbound, "Barrio Logan" or "National City"
I'd really like to see Tijuana (either as is, or Tijuana BC) acknowledged as a legitimate destination. Certainly it is larger and more important than any of those smaller suburbs on the US side.
Tijuana would work as a replacement for "San Ysidro" from I-5 and I-805 south from approximately National City on...for 905, I don't know if that quite applies (not sure if the Otay Mesa crossing leads you to Tijuana city limits, certainly it is far from the central portions of it).
I think Tijuana is more important than National City!
hell, if Santa Ana gets to be a control city...
Quote from: agentsteel53 on May 07, 2010, 10:05:57 PM
I think Tijuana is more important than National City!
hell, if Santa Ana gets to be a control city...
National City probably could serve as a one or two-mile long control city, much like Daly City does for I-280. TJ from San Diego south though would make sense, for I-805 I say that maybe even extend that from Route 15 south.
Another San Diego idea: for Route 125, northbound to I-8 should be "El Cajon" and southbound could be "Otay Mesa Border Crossing".
As for Santa Ana along I-5...I'm surprised Anaheim isn't paired with it as a control city, as it is the community much more familiar to tourists/travelers.
Quote from: TheStranger on May 07, 2010, 11:22:52 PM
Quote from: agentsteel53 on May 07, 2010, 10:05:57 PM
I think Tijuana is more important than National City!
hell, if Santa Ana gets to be a control city...
Another San Diego idea: for Route 125, northbound to I-8 should be "El Cajon" and southbound could be "Otay Mesa Border Crossing".
How about pairing Riverside on I-15 north with Las Vegas and in Vegas, pair San Diego with Los Angeles on I-15 south? After all, Los Angeles is a good hour or more from I-15.
St. Louis area
* I-55: Currently Memphis and Chicago for primary; generally Cape Girardeau, East St. Louis, and Springfield for secondary. I'd leave the primary alone, but add Festus-Crystal City as a secondary on the Missouri side since it has a decently important interchange with the US 67 expressway, and replace East St. Louis on the Illinois side with Troy.
* I-44: No changes, though replacing Tulsa with Springfield is tempting.
* I-64: Currently Wentzville, Chesterfield (EB only) and Louisville for primaries. I'd drop Chesterfield and make I-64 be signed as the route for St. Louis traffic eastbound; it's only a mile shorter than I-70 to the PSB, but I-64 goes through a more appealing part of the region. Since it's about eight miles shorter to use I-64 over I-270 and I-70, I'd also replace Wentzville with Kansas City, unless I-70 has had Kansas City changed to Wentzville.
* I-70: Currently Kansas City and Indianapolis, plus at the intersection with I-64 in Wentzville it is signed as the route into St. Louis. I'd change it so at Wentzville the eastbound control is either St. Charles, Lambert Airport, or Lambert Airport/Indianapolis. Westbound at the PSB I'd change to control to either Lambert Airport or St. Charles. At I-270 I'd change the control to Wentzville or if I-64 gets Kansas City, leave the I-70 control city as Kansas City.
* I-170: Currently Clayton and nothing. Keep Clayton, add Florrisant, Lambert Airport, or both for northbound traffic.
* I-255: I'd replace "to I-270" with Alton.
* I-270: Replace Chicago at the I-70 interchange in Bridgeton with Indianapolis, which is what Illinois uses. For northbound I-270, the control city would stay Kansas City until the I-64 interchange, though if Kansas City is replaced with Wentzville on I-70, I-270 would also use Wentzville. Between I-64 and I-70 the northbound control city would be St. Charles.
* IL 255: Alton and either To I-270 or Memphis; change To I-270 to always be Memphis
* MO 364: Currently St. Louis for eastbound, nothing for westbound. Westbound would get St. Peters, eastbound would change to Maryland Heights. When MO 364 reaches I-64, the I-64 to MO 94 section would use Wentzville and St. Peters.
* MO 367: As is; though I would like to drop St. Louis and use the road name instead (Lewis and Clark Boulevard).
* MO 370: Currently St. Charles County and nothing. Nothing would become Indianapolis, westbound would change to Wenztville or Kansas City, since using MO 370 appears about a mile shorter than I-270 and I-70.
For Indianapolis:
I-65 South: Columbus, IN, Louisville
I-65 North: Lafayette, Chicago
I-69 North: Muncie, Fort Wayne
I-70 West: Terre Haute, St. Louis (old signs at the intersection with 465 on the west side did used to have both these cities but have been replaced with St. Louis and the Airport)
I-70 East: Richmond, Dayton
I-69 South (future): Bloomington, Evansville
US 31 North: Kokomo, South Bend
Quote from: golden eagle on May 07, 2010, 11:41:16 PM
How about pairing Riverside on I-15 north with Las Vegas and in Vegas, pair San Diego with Los Angeles on I-15 south? After all, Los Angeles is a good hour or more from I-15.
I think that's a relic from the US-91 days - held over because the majority of traffic still to this day goes to LA.
Quote from: TheStranger on May 07, 2010, 11:22:52 PM
As for Santa Ana along I-5...I'm surprised Anaheim isn't paired with it as a control city, as it is the community much more familiar to tourists/travelers.
Santa Ana is the county seat, and also I think Anaheim being a well-known place dates only to the Disney era.
Santa Ana being a control city is a joke. Los Angeles and San Diego are the places people actually intend to go.
Well, that and Disneyland but that would be an even bigger joke as a control city.
Krusty the Clown: hey kids! now we're gonna go the happiest place on earth! Tijuana!I rest my case :sombrero:
Quote from: agentsteel53 on May 08, 2010, 12:37:40 AM
Quote from: golden eagle on May 07, 2010, 11:41:16 PM
How about pairing Riverside on I-15 north with Las Vegas and in Vegas, pair San Diego with Los Angeles on I-15 south? After all, Los Angeles is a good hour or more from I-15.
I think that's a relic from the US-91 days - held over because the majority of traffic still to this day goes to LA.
If we can still have "San Diego" mentioned on US 395 in Inyo County and on US 101 in the Santa Barbara/Ventura area...maybe the first sign for SD along I-15 could be southbound in Hesperia, at the very least. Not all the way in Vegas though.
Riverside is indeed the I-15/Route 15 northbound control city (up to Temecula), starting at I-15 in Bario Logan.
golden eagle: Other routes where the control city isn't even on the numbered highway in question, but is accessible via connections made by it, include Route 120 for San Francisco (via I-5, I-205, I-580 and I-80 - essentially former US 50) in the Manteca/Lathrop area, Route 152 for San Jose at I-5 (via US 101 north), and Route 99 to Los Angeles (via I-5 which is old US 99).
As for I-5 using Santa Ana...
1. Anaheim does have a convention center and other attractions (the Orange County sports teams) besides Disneyland...which has been the case for nearly 50 years.
2. San Diego doesn't become a control city for I-405 southbound until after Long Beach, so that represents the "suburban control city" between Orange County and Los Angeles; I think the same logic was used for Santa Ana along former US 101/current I-5. (Having said that, San Diego should start to garner mention around the I-605 junction, going southward.)
West Vriginia:
Interstates:
77: Currently the progression is Wytheville, VA; Bluefield, Beckley, Charleston, Parkersburg, and Marrieta, OH. Using Charleston as the dividing point, I would at least cosign with "Cleveland" and "Charlotte".
79: Currently the progression is Charleston, Clarksburg, Fairmont, Morgantown, and Washington, PA. I would simplify this to Charleston and a co-signed Morgantown - Pittsburgh, then Pittsburgh.
81: Currently a confused mis-mash of smaller and far off towns in the entire area where one can be in four states in 30 minutes, but then in a single state for hours. I would just use Virginia southbound and Maryland-Pennsylvania northbound in the entire state.
64: Currently the progression is Ashland, KY (used to be Lexington), Huntington, Charleston, Beckley, Lewisburg, White Sulphur Springs, and Lexington, VA. I would bring back Lexington (the interstate does not really take you to Ashland), then Huntington, Charleston, Beckley, Lewisburg, and then just Virginia.
68: Currently its Morgantown and Cumberland. I would co-sign Cumberland with Baltimore - Washington, DC.
70/470: Westbound split is "Wheeling Bypass - Columbus, OH" and "Downtown Wheeling", which is fine. Eastbound use of "Washington" is OK, since it does not confuse motorists as its the way to either Washington.
Corridors:
D-50: 79 exit is just marked "Clarksburg", should be "Clarksburg - Parkersburg". 77 exit is just a street name, should be "Clarksburg".
L-19: I would sign the 79 exit as "Summersville - Beckley - TO 77 south - Charlotte". I would sign the 77/64 exit as "Summersville - Morgantown - TO 79 north - Pittsburgh".
G - 119: Current exit in Charleston is "Oakwood Road" which is a semi-destroyed by the construction side street, which causes many people to think 119 is "Oakwood Road", along with Logan. Progression is Logan, Williamson and then Pikeville, KY. I would simplify to Pikeville, KY and Charleston.
H - 33/48: Currently a mis-mash as it is not completed, but is using tiny local towns. As completed, I would make the progression TO 79/Weston - Elkins - Front Royal, VA TO 81/66.
OTHER MAIN ROADS:
US 35: Currently Charleston and Point Pleasant. Southbound, the road does not go to Charleston, it ends 21 miles away in Scott Depot. Northbound Point Pleasant might be OK, but its a small town and technically the road does not go there (its on the other side of the river). I would sign the exit as "Point Pleasant - Dayton - Cincinnati - Columbus" and use mileage to Dayton as well as Point Pleasant. Southbound, along with Charleston, I would use "TO 64".
Seattle: For the most part, the ones in use right now aren't bad. There was some updating done on a few of them, I think, but this is what I'd do:
If using 1 control city only (moving to the next control city as you enter that one...so I-5 from Everett north should be Vancouver)
I-5 North from Seattle: Everett, then Vancouver BC
I-5 South from US Border: Seattle, Tacoma, Olympia, Portland
I-90 East from Seattle: Bellevue, Ellensburg (I-82 Junction), Spokane, Couer D'alene ID
I-90 West from ID Border: Spokane, Ellensburg, Seattle
I-82 East/South from Ellensburg: Tri-Cities, Boise (via I-84)
I-82 West/North from OR Border: Tri-Cities, Ellensburg
I-405 South from Lynnwood: Bellevue, Renton, Sea-Tac Airport
I-405 North from Tukwila: Renton, Bellevue, Everett
I-705, I-205: No changes
2 control cities, or Junction points: (A/B, once A is reached, go to B/C, etc...)
I-5 North from OR Border: Centralia / Olympia, Olympia / Seattle, Tacoma / Seattle, Seattle / Everett, Everett / Vancouver BC, Bellingham / Vancouver BC, Vancouver BC / (None)
I-5 South from CN Border: Bellingham / Seattle, Everett / Seattle, Seattle / Tacoma, Tacoma / Olympia, Olympia / Portland OR, Centralia / Portland OR, Vancouver WA / Portland OR
I-90 east from Seattle: Mercer Island / Bellevue, Bellevue / Issaquah, Issaquah / Spokane, Snoqualmie Pass / Spokane, Ellensburg / Spokane, Moses Lake / Spokane, Ritzville / Spokane, Spkane / Coeur D'Alene, C'ouer D'Alene / None
I-90west from ID Border: In reverse of I-90 east, with Seattle always being the second listed until Bellevue
ok my computer hates this text box, so I can't see what I'm typing, so I'm just going to stop here.
fdfd
Quote from: TheStranger on May 07, 2010, 09:24:49 PM
Bay Area
Route 85: Southbound at US 101 in Mountain View, "Los Angeles" and northbound at US 101 in south San Jose, "San Francisco" (make it more obvious that it is a bypass route for north-south travelers)
The problem with your CA-85 suggestions is that the US 101 pull through signs at these interchanges already show Los Angeles (south 101) and San Francisco (north 101) as the control cities. Putting the same control cities on the CA-85 exit signs would be very, very confusing to motorists. While I agree that CA-85 can be considered a bypass around San Jose, that only applies to automobile traffic. Big rigs are banned on CA-85 between Stevens Creek Blvd and US 101.
I think the current control cities (Cupertino/Mtn View and Cupertino/Santa Cruz) work just fine.
Quote from: myosh_tino on May 08, 2010, 03:47:45 PM
Quote from: TheStranger on May 07, 2010, 09:24:49 PM
Bay Area
Route 85: Southbound at US 101 in Mountain View, "Los Angeles" and northbound at US 101 in south San Jose, "San Francisco" (make it more obvious that it is a bypass route for north-south travelers)
The problem with your CA-85 suggestions is that the US 101 pull through signs at these interchanges already show Los Angeles (south 101) and San Francisco (north 101) as the control cities. Putting the same control cities on the CA-85 exit signs would be very, very confusing to motorists. While I agree that CA-85 can be considered a bypass around San Jose, that only applies to automobile traffic. Big rigs are banned on CA-85 between Stevens Creek Blvd and US 101.
I think the current control cities (Cupertino/Mtn View and Cupertino/Santa Cruz) work just fine.
With the big rig ban, it makes sense then that 101 gets the major control cities, though I think 85 then should be signed as "Central San Jose Bypass - Autos" (keeping in mind that 101 doesn't go through downtown either) at each end. Something like that.
If trucks were allowed on 85, then I would think of the best approach being "101 San Jose/85 Cupertino, San Francisco" at the south end, and "101 San Jose/85 Los Angeles, Gilroy" on the north end.
I-77 NB: Cambridge, Dover/New Philadelphia, Canton, Akron, Cleveland (instead of just Cleveland from the State Line all the way to Canton as the control city)
I-77 SB: Akron, Canton, Dover/New Philadelphia, Cambridge, Marietta
I-80 EB (free section only): Youngstown, Sharon, PA (instead of New York City)
I-480 EB: Hopkins Airport, Twinsburg, Ravenna (as SR 14)
I-480 WB: Twinsburg, Hopkins Airport, Ohio Turnpike
SR 8 NB: Cuyahoga Falls, Macedonia
SR 8 SB: Cuyahoga Falls, Akron
Quote from: Brandon on May 07, 2010, 04:30:14 PM
I-80: Hodgepodge of Indiana, Iowa, Toledo, and Des Moines for primary controls.
I'd thought South Bend would be used for a control city before Toledo.
Not my area, but anyway:
Omaha, NE/Council Bluffs, IA
* I-29: As is (Kansas City, Sioux City
* I-80: As is (Lincoln, Des Moines
* I-480: Eastbound: Downtown Omaha, Sioux City. Westbound: Downtown Omaha, Lincoln. I'd use the airport symbol for Eppley Airfield, plus a supplemental sign or two.
* I-680: Eastbound: Sioux City, then Des Moines. Westbound: Sioux City, then Lincoln. Currently does not have control cities on the Nebraska side.
* US 75: As is (Bellevue), though I might add Plattsmouth on a few signs.
On I-75, south of Atlanta and the Airport, I'd add Savannah as a control city over Tampa, as is on a few overhead signs.
Be well,
Bryant
Kentucky's control cities are pretty well chosen for the interstates, although I'd choose Evansville over St. Louis for I-64 westbound in Louisville. I like what's done in Lexington to add the first local destination as well as the distant control cities for I-64 and I-75. In Louisville that would be Clarksville (Ind.) and Shepherdsville for I-65, New Albany (Ind.) and Shelbyville for I-64, and LaGrange for I-71.
I'd make radical changes to West Virginia, especially I-64 east of Beckley. The control city there is Lewisburg, a small and inconsequential town near the state line that's known for an osteopathic medical school and the home of the state fair. I'd sign I-64 east from I-77 for Richmond.
Bay Area: The control city for I-580 East should be Los Angeles, not Stockton.
Generally speaking the "piddly little town that happens to be near the state border" control city practice should be prohibited. If nobody outside of your state has heard of it, its not a good control city.
Quote from: flowmotion on May 09, 2010, 10:39:24 PM
Generally speaking the "piddly little town that happens to be near the state border" control city practice should be prohibited. If nobody outside of your state has heard of it, its not a good control city.
indeed - or the international boundary, as the case may be. I've noticed that the US has no problem with signing Canadian destinations, but Mexican ones are few and far between.
Quote from: flowmotion on May 09, 2010, 10:39:24 PM
Bay Area: The control city for I-580 East should be Los Angeles, not Stockton.
That dates back to when I-580 was US 50 (which indeed followed today's 205 and 5 to Stockton). It is also the only all-freeway route between the Bay Area and that city (which isn't a small community - IIRC it's on par with Buffalo for population), at least until the freeway gap between Brentwood and Stockton on Route 4 is filled in.
QuoteGenerally speaking the "piddly little town that happens to be near the state border" control city practice should be prohibited. If nobody outside of your state has heard of it, its not a good control city.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.davidjcorcoran.com%2Fhighways%2For%2F84%2F730to82%2F7.JPG&hash=64b931404ae92519320eb96674e3ddd37618ec3e)
What do you mean? This never happens!
(Pendleton/Boise - Tri-Cities/Seattle would be better I guess) Although in fairness most people in Oregon have never heard of Ontario- it is significant to Idahoans though as the place with the sales tax-free Wal-Mart
Quote from: Bryant5493 on May 09, 2010, 04:24:33 PM
On I-75, south of Atlanta and the Airport, I'd add Savannah as a control city over Tampa, as is on a few overhead signs.
But I-75 doesn't go to Savannah; I'd stick with Tampa, use Macon, or sign it as South I-75 To I-16/Tampa/Savannah.
Quote from: hbelkinsKentucky's control cities are pretty well chosen for the interstates, although I'd choose Evansville over St. Louis for I-64 westbound in Louisville.
I disprove of using Evansville over St. Louis, but I have a significant bias here. Maybe if Evansville was more than two exits on I-64, a more significant junction, had a city population near 200,000, or a metro area population closer to 500,000. In regards to a more significant junction, I'm thinking along the lines of somewhere with a decent split in the traffic stream, such as I-75/I-16 in Macon. Should I-69 be completed, it appears it would still be more efficient to access Memphis or Paducah from Louisville via the existing parkways over I-64 and I-69.
Quote from: Revive 755 on May 09, 2010, 11:39:01 PM
Quote from: Bryant5493 on May 09, 2010, 04:24:33 PM
On I-75, south of Atlanta and the Airport, I'd add Savannah as a control city over Tampa, as is on a few overhead signs.
But I-75 doesn't go to Savannah; I'd stick with Tampa, use Macon, or sign it as South I-75 To I-16/Tampa/Savannah.
Fair point. But there should be more signage for Savannah, other than the guide signs at the I-475 split and on I-75 south of said split.
Be well,
Bryant
Isn't New Albany already listed as a control city in Louisville, and for that matter, isn't Jeffersonville mentioned at least at the Spagetti Junction. As for Evansville, it really is a tough call for I-64. It is listed as a point of interest on mileage signs and Illinois does refer to it as a control city at regular interchanges between Mt. Vernon and the Indiana border, but I understand how being 15 or so miles south might be a hinderance. Then again, Dayton is not exactly on I-70 either yet it is a control city from Indy to Columbus, perhaps the size of the city makes it justifiable. Speaking of Lexington, my list (never going to happen) for control cities from Indianapolis was based on the Lexington model.
Connecticut:
I-95 (South/East to North/West)
NYC - Bridgeport/Stamford - New Haven - New London - Providence
I-91 (South to North)
New Haven - Hartford - Windsor Locks (because of BDL) - Springfield
I-84 (East to West)
Mass Pike (to Boston/Worcester)/Manchester - Hartford - Waterbury - Danbury - Hudson Valley
I-291 (West to East)
Windsor/Hartford (I-91) - Manchester/Boston/Willimantic (Providence) (I-84)
I-384 (East to West)
Willimantic/Providence - Manchester - Hartford
I-395 (South to North)
New London - Norwich - Worcester
I-691 (West to East)
Waterbury/Meriden - Hartford/New Haven/Middletown
CT 2 (West to East)
Hartford - Glastonbury/Portland - Colchester - Norwich
CT 8 (South to North)
Bridgeport - Waterbury - Torrington
Some of these can be paired together for obvious reasons.
Quote from: golden eagle on May 08, 2010, 11:05:31 PM
Quote from: Brandon on May 07, 2010, 04:30:14 PM
I-80: Hodgepodge of Indiana, Iowa, Toledo, and Des Moines for primary controls.
I'd thought South Bend would be used for a control city before Toledo.
Nope, South Bend never appears as a control on the Indiana Toll Road. It's always Chicago and Ohio. Considering that South Bend itself is only 2 exits on the Toll Road, Ohio fits better, IMHO.
Quote from: tdindy88 on May 10, 2010, 01:28:23 AM
Isn't New Albany already listed as a control city in Louisville, and for that matter, isn't Jeffersonville mentioned at least at the Spagetti Junction.
Jeffersonville is indeed mentioned on I-65 north at the Spaghetti Junction:
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=Louisville&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=43.664131,71.542969&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Louisville,+Jefferson,+Kentucky&ll=38.256228,-85.741854&spn=0,0.017467&t=h&z=16&layer=c&cbll=38.256362,-85.741818&panoid=9h-Fzv-ncxkrkJmPo97ECA&cbp=12,10.71,,0,5.22
At I-264, I-65 north is signed for Louisville/Indianapolis (even though it is in Louisville city limits) -
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=Louisville&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=43.664131,71.542969&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Louisville,+Jefferson,+Kentucky&ll=38.184818,-85.723636&spn=0.010693,0.017467&t=h&z=16&layer=c&cbll=38.18491,-85.723734&panoid=plSXj2K26HSourzbI1vSug&cbp=12,324.53,,0,5
I'd sign 264 East as Lexington/Cincinnati.
For U.S. 59 (Eastex Freeway) north of Houston, I change the control city from Cleveland to Lufkin/Texarkana.
Quote from: flowmotion on May 09, 2010, 10:39:24 PM
Bay Area: The control city for I-580 East should be Los Angeles, not Stockton.
Generally speaking the "piddly little town that happens to be near the state border" control city practice should be prohibited. If nobody outside of your state has heard of it, its not a good control city.
Heading east from Los Angeles, the first sign you see listing Phoenix as the control city is not until you're almost through the Indio/Coachella area, east of Palm Springs. And Phoenix isn't even listed first on the sign--little Blythe, California is listed first! Now how many people go to Blythe as a destination?
Really, the control signs on I-10 heading east from Los Angeles should read, "San Bernardino/Phoenix." East of the junction with I-215, the signs should read "Palm Springs/Phoenix." And once you get east of the Palm Springs turnoff, the control city should be Phoenix only, not Indio or Blythe.
Quote from: hm insulators on May 11, 2010, 05:13:33 PM
Heading east from Los Angeles, the first sign you see listing Phoenix as the control city is not until you're almost through the Indio/Coachella area, east of Palm Springs. And Phoenix isn't even listed first on the sign--little Blythe, California is listed first! Now how many people go to Blythe as a destination?
Really, the control signs on I-10 heading east from Los Angeles should read, "San Bernardino/Phoenix." East of the junction with I-215, the signs should read "Palm Springs/Phoenix." And once you get east of the Palm Springs turnoff, the control city should be Phoenix only, not Indio or Blythe.
CalTrans almost always will have an intermediate destination before a longer-distance major destination for control cities, i.e. the following examples on I-80:
Vallejo/Sacramento
Fairfield/Sacramento
Vacaville/Sacramento
In that case, as long as Phoenix starts garnering mention as far west as I-215 (as you note) - 318 miles west - something like "Blythe/Phoenix" works but for a short distance (not for the entire distance east of the Indio/Palm Springs area), more in line with the above I-80 examples.
(For that matter, should Route 210's control city east of Route 259 be "Redlands/Phoenix" as opposed to merely "Redlands"? Likewise, Route 60 east of Riverside is currently signed for "Beaumont/Indio", so maybe "Indio/Phoenix" would work better there as well.)
---
This reminds me...
At the eastern landing of the Bay Bridge, a small green sign notes that Los Angeles can be accessed via I-580 (to I-5, which isn't noted). I don't think there is any companion signage for San Francisco in the metro LA area, though SF becomes US 101's control city from Ventura on. Not sure if there's anything else similar in existence in the state.
In Slidell, La., I'd have Gulfport replace Bay St. Louis on I-10 East.
In New Orleans, I'd have Business U.S. 90 West signed Gretna/Westwego at the CBD end and Westwego starting at Stumpf Blvd.
Between Columbia and Clinton, S.C., I'd have I-26 West signed Spartanburg/Greenville.
[Removed unnecessary markup. -S.]
Quote from: brownpelican on May 12, 2010, 02:08:16 AM
In Slidell, La., I'd have Gulfport replace Bay St. Louis on I-10 East.
I agree. Biloxi and/or Mobile are feasible too.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on May 09, 2010, 10:45:07 PMIndeed - or the international boundary, as the case may be. I've noticed that the US has no problem with signing Canadian destinations, but Mexican ones are few and far between.
To be fair to the US (or rather to the border state DOTs), there are relatively few through roads which lead to the Mexican border and change directly into a through highway of equivalent standard which leads directly to a major Mexican city. TxDOT does a good job with Juárez as a control city in the El Paso area, but this really exists only on US 54 (since the other major highways run largely on a tangent to the border), and treats Juárez itself as the next major city, as opposed to Chihuahua (which I believe has a slightly larger population) or even Mexico City. US 67, which turns directly into Mex. 16 at the border, is another exception, but it is not developed to freeway standard in west Texas and so does not have control cities in the strict sense. Ojinaga appears on distance signs, however (though I'm not sure how far north of Presidio this occurs). I-19, on the other hand, never actually crosses the border or even leads directly to a port of entry. It makes interconnection possible with freeways on the Mexican side, but the connections are multiple and indirect.
On the Canadian side, Canadian destinations tend to be signed in the US where a direct connection of comparable standard exists. You see this quite often, for example, on two-lane state highways in eastern Washington state, as well as on I-5 northbound, which becomes the BC 99 freeway at the border. On the other hand, the Detroit-area Interstates have indirect connections to the border and to Ont. 401 on the Canadian side, so you don't (for example) see control-city signing for London, Hamilton, or Toronto on the American side.
So, to put it more simply, I don't think the lack of control city signing for Mexican destinations results from a belief that "there is nothing worthwhile down there," though I'd certainly agree that many Americans seem to have that belief.
Quote from: J N Winkler on May 14, 2010, 04:40:14 AM
To be fair to the US (or rather to the border state DOTs), there are relatively few through roads which lead to the Mexican border and change directly into a through highway of equivalent standard which leads directly to a major Mexican city.
I think Tijuana should count as that - while the 1D is a dang sight hard to find, when you cross from San Ysidro, you are promptly
in Tijuana. There is no need to follow any road; you are practically downtown just a block or two away from San Ysidro.
therefore, Ensenada (which 1D - a toll road comparable to 5 in quality - leads to) should not be signed, but Tijuana should.
(interestingly, there is a distance sign on either 5 or 805 - I forget which - that has the distance to Ensenada. I think it has Tijuana as well. It's pretty far south; haven't seen it in years so I don't remember it well.)
Quote from: agentsteel53 on May 14, 2010, 10:45:44 AM
Quote from: J N Winkler on May 14, 2010, 04:40:14 AM
To be fair to the US (or rather to the border state DOTs), there are relatively few through roads which lead to the Mexican border and change directly into a through highway of equivalent standard which leads directly to a major Mexican city.
therefore, Ensenada (which 1D - a toll road comparable to 5 in quality - leads to) should not be signed, but Tijuana should.
(interestingly, there is a distance sign on either 5 or 805 - I forget which - that has the distance to Ensenada. I think it has Tijuana as well. It's pretty far south; haven't seen it in years so I don't remember it well.)
The 805 had a sign to Ensenada, which was 78 miles IIRC. It's been almost seven years since I moved away from San Diego, but I'm assuming it's still there.
In Memphis, I-240 North would be signed Downtown (Memphis) instead of Little Rock since the highway goes from west-east to north-south at I-55.
[Removed unnecessary coloring. -S.]
Quote from: brownpelican on June 02, 2010, 02:26:14 AM
In Memphis, I-240 North would be signed Downtown (Memphis) instead of Little Rock since the highway goes from west-east to north-south at I-55.
When I-69 is officially signed through there and built northward, I almost feel like Dyersburg would also work as a control city (as the point where I-155 ends at today's US 51/future I-69), in conjunction with downtown Memphis.
If anything, I-55 would be better off signed for Little Rock along with St. Louis (as it goes east-west with the four US routes, towards I-40 west) at that junction.
What is the control city for I-70 W of Denver?
Quote from: ausinterkid on June 02, 2010, 03:59:51 AM
What is the control city for I-70 W of Denver?
Grand Junction.
Then after GJ?
I-10:
I would leave westbound Baton Rouge and eastbound Slidell in the city proper. From there I would change eastbound from Bay St. Louis to Biloxi and maybe alternate it with Gulfport.
I-55:
I would add Jackson as a northbound city along with Hammond south of I-12.
U.S. 90 Business:
I would leave eastbound as it is. I would change westbound from Westwego-Gretna to Houma and Thibodaux.
I-12, I-59, and the I-x10s would stay the same.
I'd personally like to see Pittsburgh PA used in conjunction with Wheeling WV as a control city on I-70E from Columbus to Washington PA. I mean, if Ohio can use New York City on I-80E, why not use Pittsburgh? In fact, they already do on I-70E at Buckeye Lake.
The pic is a little warped, but you get the idea :)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Flh5.ggpht.com%2F_vV2-Fg-7T40%2FS0dSDCD5YFI%2FAAAAAAAAA_g%2F_evOtIgj91Q%2Fs512%2FIMG_0359.jpg&hash=2ce5ddd5f826b86504eddd3d0e41cbb5c3e8e0f7)
Quote from: ausinterkid on June 02, 2010, 07:33:13 AM
Then after GJ?
I'm not sure there really is a consistent control city for the rest of I-70 west to its terminus. I believe mileage signs use Green River, Salina and Richfield at different points, but I don't know that any of them are consistently a control city. Las Vegas also appears on mileage signs beginning in W Colorado.
Quote from: shoptb1 on June 02, 2010, 10:39:11 AM
I'd personally like to see Pittsburgh PA used in conjunction with Wheeling WV as a control city on I-70E from Columbus to Washington PA. I mean, if Ohio can use New York City on I-80E, why not use Pittsburgh? In fact, they already do on I-70E at Buckeye Lake.
That's because I-70 doesn't go to Pittsburgh. It instead goes to Washington, PA. Thurthermore, Wheeling should be the control city for I-70 past Zanesville, while Zanesville should be the control city past Columbus.
Quote from: The Premier on June 02, 2010, 08:09:09 PM
Quote from: shoptb1 on June 02, 2010, 10:39:11 AM
I'd personally like to see Pittsburgh PA used in conjunction with Wheeling WV as a control city on I-70E from Columbus to Washington PA. I mean, if Ohio can use New York City on I-80E, why not use Pittsburgh? In fact, they already do on I-70E at Buckeye Lake.
That's because I-70 doesn't go to Pittsburgh. It instead goes to Washington, PA. Thurthermore, Wheeling should be the control city for I-70 past Zanesville, while Zanesville should be the control city past Columbus.
Point taken, but does I-80 go through New York City, or even New York for that matter? No. :nod:
I-80 dumps you off onto I-95 where you're in close proximity to NYC, though, and you're pretty much in the NYC metro area. You have to make a deliberate action to even enter Pittsburgh's metro area.
I kind of like the the idea that Britain has where "trailblazer" destinations such as these are enclosed in brackets (or as we call them over here, parentheses). So if you can easily reach this destination from this road, but not directly, it gets bracketed. So "I-80 WEST: Youngstown/(New York City)"
Quote from: Scott5114 on June 02, 2010, 10:04:31 PM
So if you can easily reach this destination from this road, but not directly, it gets bracketed. So "I-80 WEST: Youngstown/(New York City)"
how easy is easy? would Las Vegas count on I-70? LA?
Quote from: agentsteel53 on June 02, 2010, 10:06:03 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on June 02, 2010, 10:04:31 PM
So if you can easily reach this destination from this road, but not directly, it gets bracketed. So "I-80 WEST: Youngstown/(New York City)"
how easy is easy? would Las Vegas count on I-70? LA?
This makes me wonder if I-70 at the I-15 junction is further away from Los Angeles, than I-40 in Arizona at the easternmost point (Flagstaff?) that it is signed for LA.
California does use indirect control cities at times:
San Francisco for Route 120 west (via I-5, I-205, AND I-580)
Sacramento for I-680 north (via I-80)
San Jose for Route 152 west of I-5 (via US 101)
Santa Cruz for Route 85 south of US 101 (via Route 17)
San Francisco for I-580 west from I-5 to the MacArthur Maze (via I-80 - note that I-580 west to the Maze and I-80 west to SF used to be part of US 50)
Stockton for I-580 east from the Macarthur Maze to I-205, and I-205 east (via I-5 - all of this route was once US 50)
Pittsburg for Route 242 north (via Route 4 - note that both were at one time part of Route 24)
Rio Vista for Route 160 north (via Route 12 west)
Quote from: TheStranger on June 02, 2010, 10:46:28 PM
This makes me wonder if I-70 at the I-15 junction is further away from Los Angeles, than I-40 in Arizona at the easternmost point (Flagstaff?) that it is signed for LA.
LA to Cove Fort is 519 miles. LA to Flagstaff is 467. I just can't remember if 40 is signed for LA more than about 52 miles east of Flagstaff. There was at one point that distance sign (of over 1000 miles!) at San Jon, NM, but I haven't seen it in a while.
Quote from: Scott5114 on June 02, 2010, 10:04:31 PM
I kind of like the the idea that Britain has where "trailblazer" destinations such as these are enclosed in brackets (or as we call them over here, parentheses). So if you can easily reach this destination from this road, but not directly, it gets bracketed. So "I-80 WEST: Youngstown/(New York City)"
I'm pretty much just stirring a pot here, but I've long thought that we need some equivalent of the European signs that show destinations on intersecting freeways. For example, here's a mileage sign on Bundesautobahn A99 in Bavaria, which shows distances to control cities along the intersecting A8 and A9 Bundesautobahnen.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Flh3.ggpht.com%2F_vV2-Fg-7T40%2FTAcXM-cgrDI%2FAAAAAAAAB1E%2F12W101uOX3A%2FA99_00220.jpg&hash=0d5c2d0c9f4914c1f98fa7f6411e0892c7562264)
shoptb1: I might have to come up with a few US equivalents for the Road-Related Illustrations thread...
EDIT: Here's my first try, in the following post:
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=575.msg64470#msg64470
Quote from: The Premier on June 02, 2010, 08:09:09 PM
Quote from: shoptb1 on June 02, 2010, 10:39:11 AM
I'd personally like to see Pittsburgh PA used in conjunction with Wheeling WV as a control city on I-70E from Columbus to Washington PA. I mean, if Ohio can use New York City on I-80E, why not use Pittsburgh? In fact, they already do on I-70E at Buckeye Lake.
That's because I-70 doesn't go to Pittsburgh. It instead goes to Washington, PA. Thurthermore, Wheeling should be the control city for I-70 past Zanesville, while Zanesville should be the control city past Columbus.
Disagree about Zanesville. Cambridge, maybe, since it is an interstate crossroads, but not Zanesville.
Quote from: hbelkins on June 03, 2010, 01:03:38 PM
Quote from: The Premier on June 02, 2010, 08:09:09 PM
Quote from: shoptb1 on June 02, 2010, 10:39:11 AM
I'd personally like to see Pittsburgh PA used in conjunction with Wheeling WV as a control city on I-70E from Columbus to Washington PA. I mean, if Ohio can use New York City on I-80E, why not use Pittsburgh? In fact, they already do on I-70E at Buckeye Lake.
That's because I-70 doesn't go to Pittsburgh. It instead goes to Washington, PA. Thurthermore, Wheeling should be the control city for I-70 past Zanesville, while Zanesville should be the control city past Columbus.
Disagree about Zanesville. Cambridge, maybe, since it is an interstate crossroads, but not Zanesville.
Zanesville is secondary status. Just like Mansfield along I-71 and Lima along I-75.
Quote from: The Premier on June 02, 2010, 08:09:09 PM
Quote from: shoptb1 on June 02, 2010, 10:39:11 AM
I'd personally like to see Pittsburgh PA used in conjunction with Wheeling WV as a control city on I-70E from Columbus to Washington PA. I mean, if Ohio can use New York City on I-80E, why not use Pittsburgh? In fact, they already do on I-70E at Buckeye Lake.
That's because I-70 doesn't go to Pittsburgh. It instead goes to Washington, PA. Thurthermore, Wheeling should be the control city for I-70 past Zanesville, while Zanesville should be the control city past Columbus.
Considering that Dayton is now used as a control city along I-70, even though I-70 doesn't go there, and that I-70 originally went through Pittsburgh, one could make an valid arguement for using Pittsburgh as a control city for I-70 EB between Columbus and Washington, Pa.
Quote from: osu-lsu on June 03, 2010, 01:28:00 PM
Quote from: The Premier on June 02, 2010, 08:09:09 PM
Quote from: shoptb1 on June 02, 2010, 10:39:11 AM
I'd personally like to see Pittsburgh PA used in conjunction with Wheeling WV as a control city on I-70E from Columbus to Washington PA. I mean, if Ohio can use New York City on I-80E, why not use Pittsburgh? In fact, they already do on I-70E at Buckeye Lake.
That's because I-70 doesn't go to Pittsburgh. It instead goes to Washington, PA. Thurthermore, Wheeling should be the control city for I-70 past Zanesville, while Zanesville should be the control city past Columbus.
Considering that Dayton is now used as a control city along I-70, even though I-70 doesn't go there, and that I-70 originally went through Pittsburgh, one could make an valid arguement for using Pittsburgh as a control city for I-70 EB between Columbus and Washington, Pa.
There's a great deal of difference between I-70's service of Dayton and Pittsburgh.
Quote from: InterstateNG on June 03, 2010, 03:51:28 PM
Quote from: osu-lsu on June 03, 2010, 01:28:00 PM
Quote from: The Premier on June 02, 2010, 08:09:09 PM
Quote from: shoptb1 on June 02, 2010, 10:39:11 AM
I'd personally like to see Pittsburgh PA used in conjunction with Wheeling WV as a control city on I-70E from Columbus to Washington PA. I mean, if Ohio can use New York City on I-80E, why not use Pittsburgh? In fact, they already do on I-70E at Buckeye Lake.
That's because I-70 doesn't go to Pittsburgh. It instead goes to Washington, PA. Thurthermore, Wheeling should be the control city for I-70 past Zanesville, while Zanesville should be the control city past Columbus.
Considering that Dayton is now used as a control city along I-70, even though I-70 doesn't go there, and that I-70 originally went through Pittsburgh, one could make an valid arguement for using Pittsburgh as a control city for I-70 EB between Columbus and Washington, Pa.
There's a great deal of difference between I-70's service of Dayton and Pittsburgh.
I-70 definitely passes much closer to Dayton (about 7 miles north of the core) than Pittsburgh (about 30 miles southwest).
A similar situation I can think of is I-65 being signed for Chicago even though it ends in Gary, 30 miles from the Loop - but this only involves one highway switch (from 65 north to 90 north) as opposed to 70 to Pittsburgh (which requires one to take 70 east to 79 north, then to 376 east).
Having said that, Pittsburgh would work as a secondary control city.
Giving Pittsburgh as a control city for I-70 would not be much different than giving Chicago as a control city for I-80. I-80 cuts through the South Suburbs, but never really comes close to the city. The closest it comes is 5 miles to the city limits, but over 20 miles to the Loop. However, controls east and west say "Chicago".
Quote from: TheStranger on June 03, 2010, 04:11:54 PM
Having said that, Pittsburgh would work as a secondary control city.
I agree... while the Route number I-70 stays away from Pittsburgh, the best "route" for traffic from that area to get to PGH is the I-70 -> 79 ->376 connection. And, at the risk of sounding like I'm just touting my city, PGH is big enough of a destination that I feel it's warranted.
Quote from: Mr_Northside on June 04, 2010, 12:37:43 PM
I agree... while the Route number I-70 stays away from Pittsburgh, the best "route" for traffic from that area to get to PGH is the I-70 -> 79 ->376 connection. And, at the risk of sounding like I'm just touting my city, PGH is big enough of a destination that I feel it's warranted.
The problem is that PGH has no direct 2DI connection. It's a triangle...I-70, I-76, and I-79 all serve the Pittsburgh metro area, and I think that all should have Pittsburgh as a control city...if not primary, then at least secondary.
Quote from: shoptb1 on June 05, 2010, 03:13:45 PM
Quote from: Mr_Northside on June 04, 2010, 12:37:43 PM
I agree... while the Route number I-70 stays away from Pittsburgh, the best "route" for traffic from that area to get to PGH is the I-70 -> 79 ->376 connection. And, at the risk of sounding like I'm just touting my city, PGH is big enough of a destination that I feel it's warranted.
The problem is that PGH has no direct 2DI connection. It's a triangle...I-70, I-76, and I-79 all serve the Pittsburgh metro area, and I think that all should have Pittsburgh as a control city...if not primary, then at least secondary.
I almost feel like in the Cleveland area, I-480 east of I-271 and I-80 between I-480 and I-76 should have Pittsburgh as a secondary control city as well, even though 80 exits itself at I-76...
I-40 at the junction with I-25 (locally known as the Big Eye), shows a control city eastbound as Santa Rosa ( population 2500). Most interstate travelers would be unframiliar with such as small town. My suggestion: Amarillo ( population 170,000). New Mexico prefers the smaller control cities, except in the south where they use Tucson or El Paso on the BGS.
El Paso is a pretty large control city ... especially considering that the next place on I-10 to the east of there of any significance is San Antonio, which is another 550+ miles further! :-D
Quote from: sandiaman on June 05, 2010, 04:59:15 PM
I-40 at the junction with I-25 (locally known as the Big Eye), shows a control city eastbound as Santa Rosa ( population 2500). Most interstate travelers would be unframiliar with such as small town. My suggestion: Amarillo ( population 170,000). New Mexico prefers the smaller control cities, except in the south where they use Tucson or El Paso on the BGS.
Ever since I first saw that, I thought Santa Rosa seemed a bit too small for a control city, especially at a major highway junction like I-40/I-25. If they still wanted to use a smaller city and one that was in the state, they could use Tucumcari, which is what I-40 West in Amarillo is signed for.
Quote from: huskeroadgeek on June 05, 2010, 06:07:48 PM
Ever since I first saw that, I thought Santa Rosa seemed a bit too small for a control city, especially at a major highway junction like I-40/I-25. If they still wanted to use a smaller city and one that was in the state, they could use Tucumcari, which is what I-40 West in Amarillo is signed for.
I agree, Tucumcari should be used as the control city for NM along I-40 east of Albuquerque.
Quote from: TheStranger on June 05, 2010, 03:31:20 PM
I almost feel like in the Cleveland area, I-480 east of I-271 and I-80 between I-480 and I-76 should have Pittsburgh as a secondary control city as well, even though 80 exits itself at I-76...
Perhaps, but when you get to the I-76/I-80 Switcheroo in Youngstown, it's a safe assumption that half of the EB I-80 traffic on the Turnpike stays on I-80 while only the other half of EB I-80 continue on I-76 towards Pittsburgh. Same with EB I-76 Traffic coming from the Akron area. Therefore, only listing Youngstown as the lone control city from Cleveland or Akron to the I-76/I-80 junction is the proper choice of destination. If there was a bigger majority of traffic (at least 75%) that remain on both the Ohio & Penna Pikes from Cleveland or Akron, then including Pittsburgh could be warranted.
Quote from: sandiaman on June 05, 2010, 04:59:15 PM
I-40 at the junction with I-25 (locally known as the Big Eye), shows a control city eastbound as Santa Rosa ( population 2500). Most interstate travelers would be unframiliar with such as small town. My suggestion: Amarillo ( population 170,000). New Mexico prefers the smaller control cities, except in the south where they use Tucson or El Paso on the BGS.
Do they use Las Cruces for a control city on I-25? What about Truth or Consequences?
Quote from: golden eagle on June 06, 2010, 10:19:24 PM
Quote from: sandiaman on June 05, 2010, 04:59:15 PM
I-40 at the junction with I-25 (locally known as the Big Eye), shows a control city eastbound as Santa Rosa ( population 2500). Most interstate travelers would be unframiliar with such as small town. My suggestion: Amarillo ( population 170,000). New Mexico prefers the smaller control cities, except in the south where they use Tucson or El Paso on the BGS.
Do they use Las Cruces for a control city on I-25? What about Truth or Consequences?
At the I-40/I-25 junction the following control cities are signed:
I-40 East-Santa Rosa
I-40 West-Gallup
I-25 North-Santa Fe
I-25 South-Las Cruces
Truth or Consequences would be interesting to see on a sign at a major road junction though.
Quote from: thenetwork on June 06, 2010, 08:30:45 PM
Quote from: TheStranger on June 05, 2010, 03:31:20 PM
I almost feel like in the Cleveland area, I-480 east of I-271 and I-80 between I-480 and I-76 should have Pittsburgh as a secondary control city as well, even though 80 exits itself at I-76...
Perhaps, but when you get to the I-76/I-80 Switcheroo in Youngstown, it's a safe assumption that half of the EB I-80 traffic on the Turnpike stays on I-80 while only the other half of EB I-80 continue on I-76 towards Pittsburgh. Same with EB I-76 Traffic coming from the Akron area. Therefore, only listing Youngstown as the lone control city from Cleveland or Akron to the I-76/I-80 junction is the proper choice of destination. If there was a bigger majority of traffic (at least 75%) that remain on both the Ohio & Penna Pikes from Cleveland or Akron, then including Pittsburgh could be warranted.
Do you have any numbers to show how much 80 east traffic stays on the turnpike for 76 towards Pennsylvania?
I've always been interested in seeing what the most popular route is from Los Angeles to SF (there is no signage for SF anywhere in the LA metro area, as opposed to signage for 101 south beginning in Santa Clara, and for 580 east-to-5 south starting in Oakland/Berkeley from both directions of I-80) going northbound, as there are three obvious options: 101 (first signed for SF in Ventura about 65 miles from downtown LA), 5 (first signed for SF via 580 in Wheeler Ridge) to 580, and 5 to 152 to 101.
What is the control city on I-15 N after Salt Lake?
Quote from: ausinterkid on June 07, 2010, 02:14:14 AM
What is the control city on I-15 N after Salt Lake?
I believe Ogden, and then Pocatello.
Quote from: TheStranger on June 07, 2010, 01:44:31 AM
Do you have any numbers to show how much 80 east traffic stays on the turnpike for 76 towards Pennsylvania?
I don't know the exact count, but there was an article in one of the NE Ohio papers about 6-7 years ago which listed the Turnpike's 5 busiest toll plazas. Excluding the mainline toll barriers at each end of the pike, Exit 218 was in the top 5 -- I-280/SR-420 south of Toledo topped the list at #1. The I-90 junction in Elyria and the I-480 western terminus in North Ridgeville were also in the top 5, in no particular order. I can't recall the fifth interchange, though.
Quote from: thenetwork on June 07, 2010, 09:39:00 AM
Quote from: TheStranger on June 07, 2010, 01:44:31 AM
Do you have any numbers to show how much 80 east traffic stays on the turnpike for 76 towards Pennsylvania?
I don't know the exact count, but there was an article in one of the NE Ohio papers about 6-7 years ago which listed the Turnpike's 5 busiest toll plazas. Excluding the mainline toll barriers at each end of the pike, Exit 218 was in the top 5 -- I-280/SR-420 south of Toledo topped the list at #1. The I-90 junction in Elyria and the I-480 western terminus in North Ridgeville were also in the top 5, in no particular order. I can't recall the fifth interchange, though.
It might be the I-71 or I-77 interchanges. Those would make the most sense.
Quote from: njroadhorse on June 07, 2010, 05:08:32 PM
Quote from: thenetwork on June 07, 2010, 09:39:00 AM
Quote from: TheStranger on June 07, 2010, 01:44:31 AM
Do you have any numbers to show how much 80 east traffic stays on the turnpike for 76 towards Pennsylvania?
I don't know the exact count, but there was an article in one of the NE Ohio papers about 6-7 years ago which listed the Turnpike's 5 busiest toll plazas. Excluding the mainline toll barriers at each end of the pike, Exit 218 was in the top 5 -- I-280/SR-420 south of Toledo topped the list at #1. The I-90 junction in Elyria and the I-480 western terminus in North Ridgeville were also in the top 5, in no particular order. I can't recall the fifth interchange, though.
It might be the I-71 or I-77 interchanges. Those would make the most sense.
It has to be the I-71 interchange because it was the only main connection to Cleveland. I-77 didn't have a direct connection until 2001.
When I was traveling down I-59 in Hattiesburg, the exit for U.S. 11 has South Hattiesburg. Nothing wrong with that, but I'd also include Purvis on there, though the Purvis exit is about ten miles down the road.
Seattle used to be used as a control city on I-5 northbound north of Salem or Woodburn, with Portland as the intermediary control city. They've since switched it to Portland being the final control city along the stretch.
Quote from: hm insulators on May 11, 2010, 05:13:33 PM
Quote from: flowmotion on May 09, 2010, 10:39:24 PM
Bay Area: The control city for I-580 East should be Los Angeles, not Stockton.
Generally speaking the "piddly little town that happens to be near the state border" control city practice should be prohibited. If nobody outside of your state has heard of it, its not a good control city.
Heading east from Los Angeles, the first sign you see listing Phoenix as the control city is not until you're almost through the Indio/Coachella area, east of Palm Springs. And Phoenix isn't even listed first on the sign--little Blythe, California is listed first! Now how many people go to Blythe as a destination?
Really, the control signs on I-10 heading east from Los Angeles should read, "San Bernardino/Phoenix." East of the junction with I-215, the signs should read "Palm Springs/Phoenix." And once you get east of the Palm Springs turnoff, the control city should be Phoenix only, not Indio or Blythe.
I disagree, I think that San Bernardino alone is fine for 10 east from Los Angeles. Indio does get mentioned at the 15 jct though. But how many travelers are really headed east on the 10 from Los Angeles to Phoenix. The traffic volume drops a lot after Indio. I think that may be part of the reason Phoenix isn't mentioned until Indio. (Well a mileage sign after Monterey Ave just before Indio)
I think the worst one in the southern California area is Santa Ana, on I-5 between San Diego and Los Angeles.
nearly nobody goes to Santa Ana. Most everyone couldn't differentiate it from Irvine, Anaheim, etc on the map - they're all featureless suburbs. To give Santa Ana precedence over Irvine or whatnot is arbitrary. To give it preference over San Diego is bordering on absurd. To give it preference over Los Angeles - in fact, to pull off the old button copy legend for LA and tape Santa Ana over it - is criminal.
if you're going to Santa Ana, you know it. Through traffic, which is who really could use the control cities, is going between San Diego and Los Angeles on I-5. The local traffic is, as likely as not, going to some other faceless Orange County hellhole.
(I hate to admit it, but if you're going to pick a destination between San Diego and Los Angeles that is useful as a control, because out-of-towners are likely to be looking for it, your most logical choice would be Disneyland.)
I still maintain Limon CO is a weird choice for a control city- if you had to pick one city in the country that has gained lots of recognition simply because it's a control city (not the other way around), I'd bet it's Limon. Most Coloradans I've run into know where Limon is, presumably because it's so well marked in Denver metro.
I feel like "Kansas" or even "Kansas City" would be a better choice. If that were ever to be changed, I'd bet a lot that the town of Limon would fight the change hard, since it seems like most people know of it because it's a control city.
I'm sort of surprised that El Paso is the control city for I-10 east of Tucson instead of Las Cruces, but I guess it doesn't really matter.
It would also be neat to see Las Vegas marked as a control city in addition to LA on I-40 west of Flagstaff.
Topeka would probably be better than Kansas City. It's already used by KDOT for I-70 and I-335. Why not Salina, though? It may not be as major, but there's a major interstate-to-interstate junction there, and if you're headed south to Oklahoma and Texas that's where you'll be turning off.
That's true- Topeka would be a good call.
Salina itself is similar to Limon, but the junctions (at least coming from Denver) are more significant, so that would be a step up. The only thing I associate with Salina is a May 2007 roadtrip through there where I was absolutely shocked to see the Pizza Hut completely packed on a Tuesday at about 2:00 PM, making me think there's not much going on in Salina. For Oklahoma, sure, that's the best way, but Denver->Dallas you're best off getting of in...Limon! to head down 287 (from what I gathered from Wyomingites (sample size 5 or 6 unrelated) who did that drive often. Why the 287 trek was deemed faster than going over Raton Pass is beyond me, but that seemed to be the preferred route- nobody ever mentioned going through Kansas as an option)
I kind of like the two tier system they are using on TN 840.
The local tier is listed at all entrance ramps and are Franklin, Murfreesboro, and Lebanon going east and Murfreesboro, Franklin and Dickson going West.
The long distance signs are at the interstate junctions only and are Knoxville going east and Memphis going west.
I-65 uses Louisville north of Nashville and Huntsville south. As many of you know, it used to be Birmingham southbound. In 840 style, I'd use Huntsville and Bowling Green for the local and Birmingham and Louisville for the long distance.
Quote from: mightyace on February 10, 2011, 03:36:36 AM
I-65 uses Louisville north of Nashville and Huntsville south. As many of you know, it used to be Birmingham southbound. In 840 style, I'd use Huntsville and Bowling Green for the local and Birmingham and Louisville for the long distance.
The mileage signs on I-65 southbound still show Birmingham. I suppose that's because you can't get to Huntsville by staying on I-65, and it would be out of the way to use I-565.
Quote from: golden eagle on June 14, 2010, 12:38:29 AM
When I was traveling down I-59 in Hattiesburg, the exit for U.S. 11 has South Hattiesburg. Nothing wrong with that, but I'd also include Purvis on there, though the Purvis exit is about ten miles down the road.
I have noticed that in Mississippi there are a lot of exits that say [cardinal direction] + [city] to emphasize the part of the city you will be accessing when you get off the freeway. Examples on US 78/I-22 are West Tupelo and West Holly Springs. I think I've seen West Jackson somewhere in there, too.
Quote from: codyg1985 on February 10, 2011, 10:20:18 AM
Quote from: mightyace on February 10, 2011, 03:36:36 AM
I-65 uses Louisville north of Nashville and Huntsville south. As many of you know, it used to be Birmingham southbound. In 840 style, I'd use Huntsville and Bowling Green for the local and Birmingham and Louisville for the long distance.
The mileage signs on I-65 southbound still show Birmingham. I suppose that's because you can't get to Huntsville by staying on I-65, and it would be out of the way to use I-565.
Really? I remember Nashville used to be the control city on I-65 in Birmingham, but was switched to Huntsville around the late 90s-early 2000s. Maybe TennDOT felt no need to change it. I'm not opposed to Huntsville being the control city, but perhaps they could use both Huntsville and Nashville as control cities in B'ham.
Quote from: golden eagle on February 10, 2011, 11:15:14 AM
Quote from: codyg1985 on February 10, 2011, 10:20:18 AM
Quote from: mightyace on February 10, 2011, 03:36:36 AM
I-65 uses Louisville north of Nashville and Huntsville south. As many of you know, it used to be Birmingham southbound. In 840 style, I'd use Huntsville and Bowling Green for the local and Birmingham and Louisville for the long distance.
The mileage signs on I-65 southbound still show Birmingham. I suppose that's because you can't get to Huntsville by staying on I-65, and it would be out of the way to use I-565.
Really? I remember Nashville used to be the control city on I-65 in Birmingham, but was switched to Huntsville around the late 90s-early 2000s. Maybe TennDOT felt no need to change it. I'm not opposed to Huntsville being the control city, but perhaps they could use both Huntsville and Nashville as control cities in B'ham.
On I-65 in TN, the control city is Huntsville going south, but for some reason the mileage signs were not changed to reflect that. I-65 in Alabama going north is Huntsville as well, but in Morgan County the control city off exit ramps and on mileage signs is for Nashville.
Quote from: codyg1985 on February 10, 2011, 10:34:33 AM
Quote from: golden eagle on June 14, 2010, 12:38:29 AM
When I was traveling down I-59 in Hattiesburg, the exit for U.S. 11 has South Hattiesburg. Nothing wrong with that, but I'd also include Purvis on there, though the Purvis exit is about ten miles down the road.
I have noticed that in Mississippi there are a lot of exits that say [cardinal direction] + [city] to emphasize the part of the city you will be accessing when you get off the freeway. Examples on US 78/I-22 are West Tupelo and West Holly Springs. I think I've seen West Jackson somewhere in there, too.
West Jackson on US 78/I-22?
On BGS for I-220, yeah.
This is easy.. not a lot of choice in Marin County!
I'm in Novato, California on US-101 smack dab between Santa Rosa and San Francisco. So there's that. Signs tend to use Eureka for some reason, which is way way further north, and way way smaller. (Santa Rosa is about 55 miles from San Francisco, and almost 170,000 people!)
The only other significant interstate highway nearby is I-580 which ends south of here (can't get much more control city than the endpoint - which is San Rafael).
CA-1 uses San Francisco (S) and Jenner (N) as control cities at the closest junction to where I am right now. I don't really know what I'd say there.. Jenner is an odd choice, as it has about 250 people living in it. But there really aren't many towns between it and when it joins back up with US-101. Should a control city on a state route ever be past the point where a route joins another one? I can't really think of examples off the top of my head. If it was the only route, yes, but nobody would ever take CA-1 as a 'travel route' to go up to say, Humboldt County, they'd take US-101. CA-1 is definitely the scenic, 'i don't care if it takes me hours and hours longer' route.
Quote from: relaxok on February 10, 2011, 08:19:35 PMShould a control city on a state route ever be past the point where a route joins another one?
only at the point where the route no longer goes through anything major before its terminus. the last westbound control city on I-210 for example is Sacramento, because by that time you are likely to be taking it all the way to the 5.
Quote from: codyg1985 on February 10, 2011, 01:52:31 PM
Quote from: golden eagle on February 10, 2011, 11:15:14 AM
Quote from: codyg1985 on February 10, 2011, 10:20:18 AM
Quote from: mightyace on February 10, 2011, 03:36:36 AM
I-65 uses Louisville north of Nashville and Huntsville south. As many of you know, it used to be Birmingham southbound. In 840 style, I'd use Huntsville and Bowling Green for the local and Birmingham and Louisville for the long distance.
The mileage signs on I-65 southbound still show Birmingham. I suppose that's because you can't get to Huntsville by staying on I-65, and it would be out of the way to use I-565.
Really? I remember Nashville used to be the control city on I-65 in Birmingham, but was switched to Huntsville around the late 90s-early 2000s. Maybe TennDOT felt no need to change it. I'm not opposed to Huntsville being the control city, but perhaps they could use both Huntsville and Nashville as control cities in B'ham.
On I-65 in TN, the control city is Huntsville going south, but for some reason the mileage signs were not changed to reflect that. I-65 in Alabama going north is Huntsville as well, but in Morgan County the control city off exit ramps and on mileage signs is for Nashville.
I noticed that on my trip to Huntsville last August, I remember at one point seeing mileage signs for Nashville as far south as Cullman.
While ALDOT does not use Nashville as a control city in Birmingham anymore, they have no problems using Memphis as a control city:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fs761.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fxx260%2Fjdbarnes1234%2F101_0298.jpg&hash=3794d402cb4c7b30666dd96633946265938c5994)]
Quote from: Adam Smith on February 10, 2011, 07:43:50 PM
Quote from: codyg1985 on February 10, 2011, 10:34:33 AM
Quote from: golden eagle on June 14, 2010, 12:38:29 AM
When I was traveling down I-59 in Hattiesburg, the exit for U.S. 11 has South Hattiesburg. Nothing wrong with that, but I'd also include Purvis on there, though the Purvis exit is about ten miles down the road.
I have noticed that in Mississippi there are a lot of exits that say [cardinal direction] + [city] to emphasize the part of the city you will be accessing when you get off the freeway. Examples on US 78/I-22 are West Tupelo and West Holly Springs. I think I've seen West Jackson somewhere in there, too.
West Jackson on US 78/I-22?
On BGS for I-220, yeah.
Yep, I meant for I-220. Dangling participle FTL.
Quote from: jdb1234 on February 11, 2011, 02:35:36 AM
Quote from: codyg1985 on February 10, 2011, 01:52:31 PM
Quote from: golden eagle on February 10, 2011, 11:15:14 AM
Quote from: codyg1985 on February 10, 2011, 10:20:18 AM
Quote from: mightyace on February 10, 2011, 03:36:36 AM
I-65 uses Louisville north of Nashville and Huntsville south. As many of you know, it used to be Birmingham southbound. In 840 style, I'd use Huntsville and Bowling Green for the local and Birmingham and Louisville for the long distance.
The mileage signs on I-65 southbound still show Birmingham. I suppose that's because you can't get to Huntsville by staying on I-65, and it would be out of the way to use I-565.
Really? I remember Nashville used to be the control city on I-65 in Birmingham, but was switched to Huntsville around the late 90s-early 2000s. Maybe TennDOT felt no need to change it. I'm not opposed to Huntsville being the control city, but perhaps they could use both Huntsville and Nashville as control cities in B'ham.
On I-65 in TN, the control city is Huntsville going south, but for some reason the mileage signs were not changed to reflect that. I-65 in Alabama going north is Huntsville as well, but in Morgan County the control city off exit ramps and on mileage signs is for Nashville.
I noticed that on my trip to Huntsville last August, I remember at one point seeing mileage signs for Nashville as far south as Cullman.
While ALDOT does not use Nashville as a control city in Birmingham anymore, they have no problems using Memphis as a control city:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fs761.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fxx260%2Fjdbarnes1234%2F101_0298.jpg&hash=3794d402cb4c7b30666dd96633946265938c5994)]
But for some reason after that sign there is no more mention of Memphis going westbound until you reach Tupelo, MS. Also, the control city changes from Jasper to Hamilton with Tupelo thrown in every now and then for good measure until you get past Hamilton, then it's Tupelo. The control city is only for Birmingham going east, though.
Quote from: Adam Smith on February 10, 2011, 07:43:50 PM
Quote from: codyg1985 on February 10, 2011, 10:34:33 AM
Quote from: golden eagle on June 14, 2010, 12:38:29 AM
When I was traveling down I-59 in Hattiesburg, the exit for U.S. 11 has South Hattiesburg. Nothing wrong with that, but I'd also include Purvis on there, though the Purvis exit is about ten miles down the road.
I have noticed that in Mississippi there are a lot of exits that say [cardinal direction] + [city] to emphasize the part of the city you will be accessing when you get off the freeway. Examples on US 78/I-22 are West Tupelo and West Holly Springs. I think I've seen West Jackson somewhere in there, too.
West Jackson on US 78/I-22?
On BGS for I-220, yeah.
There are a bunch of cardinal directions in Jackson. I-220 is signed as West Jackson at I-55 southbound in Ridgeland. I-20 at the Stack is signed South Jackson, while the ramp to I-55 north is signed North Jackson/Grenada.
Someone already posted suggestions for Washington on Page 1, and I agree for the most part. Everett, Tacoma, and Olympia really deserve some more play on I-5. Everett gets mentioned somewhat frequently as a secondary city northbound, but the others not so much.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on February 10, 2011, 12:00:28 AM
I think the worst one in the southern California area is Santa Ana, on I-5 between San Diego and Los Angeles.
nearly nobody goes to Santa Ana. Most everyone couldn't differentiate it from Irvine, Anaheim, etc on the map - they're all featureless suburbs. To give Santa Ana precedence over Irvine or whatnot is arbitrary. To give it preference over San Diego is bordering on absurd. To give it preference over Los Angeles - in fact, to pull off the old button copy legend for LA and tape Santa Ana over it - is criminal.
if you're going to Santa Ana, you know it. Through traffic, which is who really could use the control cities, is going between San Diego and Los Angeles on I-5. The local traffic is, as likely as not, going to some other faceless Orange County hellhole.
(I hate to admit it, but if you're going to pick a destination between San Diego and Los Angeles that is useful as a control, because out-of-towners are likely to be looking for it, your most logical choice would be Disneyland.)
The control city "Santa Ana" used on I-5 (and also for SB Route 57 and EB I-10 at the I-110 interchange) should be "Orange County". Route 91 westbound would be "Orange County" too instead of "Beach Cities". In fact, it should be the control city for SB I-405 from Long Beach to I-605.
Once in Orange County, these freeways can then be Los Angeles for NB I-5/WB Route 91 and San Diego for SB I-5/SB I-405.
I don't really like the idea of counties (as well as states) being control cities. Perhaps, Santa Ana or Anaheim could be used as a secondary city for either Los Angeles or San Diego-bound traffic.
SN: Why does my spell checker not recognize Los Angeles?
I kinda like the idea of using 2 control points on signs in some cases....like where a major US route meets an interstate. IMHO, use the next 2 MAJOR control points.
Example: using US 167 in Ruston. For I-20 west, use Shreveport and Dallas. I-20 east, Monroe and Vxburg.
Just an idea. :D
I agree. IMHO, there's no legitimate reason why two control cities can't be used. The term "secondary city" appears a lot in this thread, but more and more often, I'm seeing new signs go up with only one city.
Quote from: Kacie Jane on February 13, 2011, 10:05:53 PM
I agree. IMHO, there's no legitimate reason why two control cities can't be used. The term "secondary city" appears a lot in this thread, but more and more often, I'm seeing new signs go up with only one city.
Here, in Illinois, we use a two-tier system of controls. For example, I-55 has primary controls of St Louis and Chicago at major interchanges. However, there are secondary controls at other interchanges of Chicago, Joliet, Bloomington (also Bloomington-Normal), Springfield, and East St Louis. If I hop on I-55 at one of my local interchanges (let's say US-30), I have a choice of Bloomington or Chicago, but if I change interstates from I-80 to I-55 here, I have a choice of St Louis or Chicago.
Quote from: Kacie Jane on February 13, 2011, 10:05:53 PM
I agree. IMHO, there's no legitimate reason why two control cities can't be used. The term "secondary city" appears a lot in this thread, but more and more often, I'm seeing new signs go up with only one city.
Yep.
I've already said many times on this forum that American control-city practices are a pet peeve of mine. They really ought to be as informative to the motorist as possible.
Quote from: FreewayDan on February 13, 2011, 10:30:17 AM
The control city "Santa Ana" used on I-5 (and also for SB Route 57 and EB I-10 at the I-110 interchange) should be "Orange County". Route 91 westbound would be "Orange County" too instead of "Beach Cities". In fact, it should be the control city for SB I-405 from Long Beach to I-605.
Once in Orange County, these freeways can then be Los Angeles for NB I-5/WB Route 91 and San Diego for SB I-5/SB I-405.
nobody cares about Orange County. people take I-5 because they want to get between San Diego and Los Angeles.
91 seems to serve only local traffic, who generally have little need for control cities.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on February 14, 2011, 12:20:13 AM
nobody cares about Orange County. people take I-5 because they want to get between San Diego and Los Angeles.
91 seems to serve only local traffic, who generally have little need for control cities.
Then for that matter, San Diego all the way for SB I-5 & Route 57; strike Santa Ana.
Here are the control cities i would use for my homestate and my birth state:
Cities in () are not officially served by the route but go toward them.
Illinois/Wisconsin:
I-39: Bloomington/Normal, LaSalle/Peru, Rockford/(Chicago-SB only), Beloit, Janesville, Madison, (Wisconsin Dells-NB only), Stevens Point, Wausau, (Merill-NB only)
I-43: Beloit, Milwaukee/(Chicago-SB only), Sheboygan, Manitowoc, Green Bay
I-55: St Louis, Springfield, Bloomington/Normal, Joliet, Chicago
I-57: Sikeston/(Memphis-SB only), Mt Vernon, Effingham, Champaign, Kankakee, Chicago
I-64: St Louis, Mt Vernon, (Evansville-EB only)/Louisville
I-70: St Louis, Effingham, Terre Haute/Indianapolis
I-72: Hannibal, Quincy, Jacksonville, Springfield, Decatur, Champaign/(Indianapolis-EB only)
I-74: (Iowa City)/(Dubuque), Davenport-NB only/Moline/Rock Island, (Joliet-EB only)/Galesburg, Peoria, Bloomington/Normal, Champaign, Danville/Indianapolis
I-80: Iowa City/Des Moines, Moline/Rock Island-WB only, LaSalle/Peru, (Chicago-EB only)/Joliet, Gary/South Bend/Toledo
I-88: Moline/Rock Island, Rock Falls, DeKalb, Aurora, (Chicago-EB only)
I-90: Albert Lea/(Rochester-WB only), La Crosse, Tomah/(St Paul-WB only), Wisconsin Dells, Madison, Janesville, Beloit, Rockford/Elgin-WB only, O'Hare (only East of I-290), Chicago, Gary/South Bend/Toledo
I-94: St Paul, Eau Claire, Tomah/(La Crosse-WB only), Wisconsin Dells, Madison, Milwaukee, Chicago, Gary/Detroit
I-155: Peoria, Lincoln/(Springfield)
I-180: Princeton, (Peoria)/Hennepin
I-190: O'Hare, (Chicago Loop)
I-255: (Memphis-SB only)/(Joplin-SB only), (Chicago-NB only)/(Indianapolis-NB only), Alton
I-270: (Kansas City-WB only)/Lambert St Louis Airport, (Chicago-EB only)/(Indianapolis-EB only)
I-280: (Iowa City-WB only)/(Des Moines-WB only), Moline/Rock Island/Quad Cities Airport, (Peoria-EB only)/(Joliet-EB only)
I-290: (Lake Geneva-NWB only), Schaumburg, (Joliet-SB only), Oak Brook, Chicago Loop (really like Brandon's idea of Oak Brook)
I-294: (Indiana-SB only), (Wisconsin-NB only)/O'Hare, (Milwaukee-NB only)
I-355: South Suburbs (until I-355 meets I-57, then it becomes (Kankakee)), (Joliet-SB only), Schaumburg
I-474: (Moline-WB only)/(Chillicothe-WB only), Peoria Airport, (Bloomington-EB only)/(Indianapolis-EB only)
I-894: (Chicago-SEB only)/Milwaukee Mitchell Int'l Airport, (Beloit-WB only), (Madison-NB only)/(Fond du Lac-NB only)
Anyone else find it annoying that I-95 north of Baltimore does not have "Philadelphia" as a control city in addition to "New York"?
Or that I-85 south has "Atlanta" as a control city in Petersburg, but not in Charlotte?
Does I-85 go to Raleigh-Durham as well?
Quote from: golden eagle on February 19, 2011, 09:48:10 PM
Does I-85 go to Raleigh-Durham as well?
It goes through Durham but I-40 and US 70 access Raleigh from I-85.
I-10: Biloxi or Gulfport vs Pascagoula
I-95: Instead of just Miami or Daytona Beach, add West Palm Beach and Melbourne or Palm Bay.
Quote from: Henry on February 18, 2011, 09:22:21 AM
Anyone else find it annoying that I-95 north of Baltimore does not have "Philadelphia" as a control city in addition to "New York"?
EXTREMELY! Thank you. (Or why "in addition to" New York? Delaware ignores it until you reach the 295 split.)
Am I the only one who think it would be totally out of reach for VDOT to mention Knoxville on I-81 South after Lexington?
Quote from: njroadhorse on February 21, 2011, 11:39:00 PM
Am I the only one who think it would be totally out of reach for VDOT to mention Knoxville on I-81 South after Lexington?
I'd say maybe right after the I-64 interchange but otherwise I wouldn't think of mentioning Knoxville again until Roanoke at I-581.
Coos Bay on 101 heading south has Brookings as the control city, which is a little over 100 miles away. Northbound 101 uses Reedsport, which is 26 miles north of North Bend. Before ODOT replaced the freeway-style button sign that was to the north of the 101/42 partial interchange, Newport (103 miles) was a control city but one did not see Newport show up again until Florence, which is 45 miles north of North Bend.
The main control cities for 101 in Oregon should be Brookings, Coos Bay, Newport and Astoria, with Aberdeen WA coming after Astoria and San Francisco after Brookings. The gaps between them is about 100 miles/2 hours and they are the primary cities for the Oregon Coast. ODOT is all over the place for control cities compared to California. 101 in their state has four main control cities (SF and LA dominate) with San Jose getting some sign time between SF and San Jose plus you will see Eureka and Crescent City as control cities as one heads north of SF. Heading out of Crescent City is where CalTrans gets off track by using "Oregon Coast" at the 101/199 partial interchange. Other unique things also show up like PDX as a control city for 101 via 199, a "To 5" with Interstate shield (even though it's like 90 miles to get to I-5) and also the expected Grants Pass, where 199 meets state route 99 and I-5.
Rick
Quote from: njroadhorse on February 21, 2011, 11:39:00 PM
Am I the only one who think it would be totally out of reach for VDOT to mention Knoxville on I-81 South after Lexington?
Tennessee uses Bristol for I-81 north of I-40.
Quote from: njroadhorse on February 21, 2011, 11:39:00 PM
Am I the only one who think it would be totally out of reach for VDOT to mention Knoxville on I-81 South after Lexington?
Eh, Knoxville's a bit of a reach, I think. I'd say Bristol's important enough to go with that instead. Perhaps after Wytheville (I-77) I might start adding Knoxville.
Somewhere I have a photo of the first mileage sign on I-81 southbound that lists Knoxville.
Quote from: codyg1985 on February 10, 2011, 01:52:31 PM
Quote from: golden eagle on February 10, 2011, 11:15:14 AM
Quote from: codyg1985 on February 10, 2011, 10:20:18 AM
Quote from: mightyace on February 10, 2011, 03:36:36 AM
I-65 uses Louisville north of Nashville and Huntsville south. As many of you know, it used to be Birmingham southbound. In 840 style, I'd use Huntsville and Bowling Green for the local and Birmingham and Louisville for the long distance.
The mileage signs on I-65 southbound still show Birmingham. I suppose that's because you can't get to Huntsville by staying on I-65, and it would be out of the way to use I-565.
Really? I remember Nashville used to be the control city on I-65 in Birmingham, but was switched to Huntsville around the late 90s-early 2000s. Maybe TennDOT felt no need to change it. I'm not opposed to Huntsville being the control city, but perhaps they could use both Huntsville and Nashville as control cities in B'ham.
On I-65 in TN, the control city is Huntsville going south, but for some reason the mileage signs were not changed to reflect that. I-65 in Alabama going north is Huntsville as well, but in Morgan County the control city off exit ramps and on mileage signs is for Nashville.
I did find one sign in Gardendale on Friday that still uses Nashville as a control city for I-65
In Michigan
US-23 NB: Ann Arbor, Flint
US-23 SB: Ann Arbor, Toledo (OH)
US-31 NB: Benton Harbor, Holland, Grand Haven, Muskegon, Manistee (US-31 has never entered Ludington)
US-31 SB: Muskegon, Grand Haven, Holland, Benton Harbor, South Bend (IN)
US-127 NB: Lansing, Mount Pleasant, Gaylord
US-127 SB: Mount Pleasant, Lansing, Jackson, Adrian
US-131 NB: Kalamazoo, Grand Rapids, Cadillac, Petoskey
US-131 SB: Cadillac, Grand Rapids, Kalamazoo, Three Rivers
I-69 NB/EB: Lansing, Flint, Port Huron
I-69 WB/SB: Flint, Lansing, Fort Wayne (IN)
I-75 NB: Detroit, Flint, Saginaw, Gaylord, Sault Ste. Marie
I-75 SB: Gaylord, Saginaw, Flint, Detroit, Toledo (OH)
I-94 EB: Benton Harbor, Kalamazoo, Jackson, Ann Arbor, Detroit, Port Huron
I-94 WB: Detroit, Ann Arbor, Jackson, Kalamazoo, Benton Harbor, Chicago (IL)
I-96 EB: Grand Rapids, Lansing, Detroit
I-96 WB: Lansing, Grand Rapids, Muskegon
I-275 NB: Metro Airport, Lansing/Flint
I-275 SB: Metro Airport, Toledo (OH)
In my area Orlando a lot of changes can be made here.
FL 528 EB- (Cocoa, International Airport) Cocoa should be changed to Beaches! International Airport is fine.
FL 528 WB- (Orlando, International Airport, TO I-4) No change.
FL 417 NB (International Airport, Orlando, Sanford) Drop Orlando from International Drive and Landstar Boulevard as they take you miles out of the way!
FL 417 SB (Orlando, Tampa, TO I-4) No change.
I-4 E & W (No Control points in Orlando for all ramps) Need Tampa for WB ramps and Daytona Beach for EB Ramps.
I-95 NB in Brevard County (Daytona Beach, Jacksonville) Drop Jacksonville to be consistent with all signage south of there. Further south Daytona Bch is used.
FL 414 WB from US 441 (Apopka) Should be changed to FL 429 until FL 414 is completed, then Mount Dora as US 441 north from there leads into Apopka and
destination is totally useless. It takes motorists back into Apopka from FL 429 the other way on US 441 if FL 414's second Apopka exit is used.
FL 414 from I-4 (Maitland Blvd.) Street name should be dropped and Apopka- Maitland should be used instead. Further East on I-4 Apopka should be dropped in
lieu of Forest City or Casselberry.
Quote from: ftballfan on March 13, 2011, 06:15:46 PM
In Michigan
US-23 NB: Ann Arbor, Flint
US-23 SB: Ann Arbor, Toledo (OH)
US-31 NB: Benton Harbor, Holland, Grand Haven, Muskegon, Manistee (US-31 has never entered Ludington)
US-31 SB: Muskegon, Grand Haven, Holland, Benton Harbor, South Bend (IN)
US-127 NB: Lansing, Mount Pleasant, Gaylord
US-127 SB: Mount Pleasant, Lansing, Jackson, Adrian
US-131 NB: Kalamazoo, Grand Rapids, Cadillac, Petoskey
US-131 SB: Cadillac, Grand Rapids, Kalamazoo, Three Rivers
I-69 NB/EB: Lansing, Flint, Port Huron
I-69 WB/SB: Flint, Lansing, Fort Wayne (IN)
I-75 NB: Detroit, Flint, Saginaw, Gaylord, Sault Ste. Marie
I-75 SB: Gaylord, Saginaw, Flint, Detroit, Toledo (OH)
I-94 EB: Benton Harbor, Kalamazoo, Jackson, Ann Arbor, Detroit, Port Huron
I-94 WB: Detroit, Ann Arbor, Jackson, Kalamazoo, Benton Harbor, Chicago (IL)
I-96 EB: Grand Rapids, Lansing, Detroit
I-96 WB: Lansing, Grand Rapids, Muskegon
I-275 NB: Metro Airport, Lansing/Flint
I-275 SB: Metro Airport, Toledo (OH)
Some more from MI:
I-196 NB/EB: Holland, Grand Rapids, Lansing
I-196 WB/SB: Grand Rapids, Holland, Benton Harbor
I-696 EB: Pontiac/Detroit, Port Huron
I-696 WB: Pontiac, Lansing/Metro Airport
US-10 EB: Clare, Midland, Bay City
US-10 WB: Midland, Clare, Ludington/Cadillac
M-6 EB: Grand Rapids/Kalamazoo, Lansing
M-6 WB: Grand Rapids/Kalamazoo, Holland
M-14 EB: Ann Arbor/Flint, Flint/Detroit, Detroit
M-14 WB: Ann Arbor, Jackson
Quote from: agentsteel53 on February 14, 2011, 12:20:13 AM
Quote from: FreewayDan on February 13, 2011, 10:30:17 AM
The control city "Santa Ana" used on I-5 (and also for SB Route 57 and EB I-10 at the I-110 interchange) should be "Orange County". Route 91 westbound would be "Orange County" too instead of "Beach Cities". In fact, it should be the control city for SB I-405 from Long Beach to I-605.
Once in Orange County, these freeways can then be Los Angeles for NB I-5/WB Route 91 and San Diego for SB I-5/SB I-405.
nobody cares about Orange County. people take I-5 because they want to get between San Diego and Los Angeles.
91 seems to serve only local traffic, who generally have little need for control cities.
To me the most annoying thing is when your traveling on the 5 north from San Diego, and Los Angeles is the control city, then once in Orange County it changes to Santa Ana. I mean it would be one thing to say Santa Ana/Los Angeles.
Quote from: ftballfan on March 13, 2011, 06:15:46 PM
US-31 NB: Benton Harbor, Holland, Grand Haven, Muskegon, Manistee (US-31 has never entered Ludington)
US-31 entered Ludington between 1931-37. Ludington is a very reasonable control city: an intersection with a major route, location of a crossing for Lake Michigan and the end of the US-31 freeway.
QuoteI-75 NB: Detroit, Flint, Saginaw, Gaylord, Sault Ste. Marie
I-75 SB: Gaylord, Saginaw, Flint, Detroit, Toledo (OH)
Why Gaylord?
QuoteM-6 EB: Grand Rapids/Kalamazoo, Lansing
M-6 WB: Grand Rapids/Kalamazoo, Holland
Who would use M-6 to access Grand Rapids?
Quote from: InterstateNG on March 23, 2011, 08:38:42 AM
Quote from: ftballfan on March 13, 2011, 06:15:46 PM
US-31 NB: Benton Harbor, Holland, Grand Haven, Muskegon, Manistee (US-31 has never entered Ludington)
US-31 entered Ludington between 1931-37. Ludington is a very reasonable control city: an intersection with a major route, location of a crossing for Lake Michigan and the end of the US-31 freeway.
QuoteI-75 NB: Detroit, Flint, Saginaw, Gaylord, Sault Ste. Marie
I-75 SB: Gaylord, Saginaw, Flint, Detroit, Toledo (OH)
Why Gaylord?
QuoteM-6 EB: Grand Rapids/Kalamazoo, Lansing
M-6 WB: Grand Rapids/Kalamazoo, Holland
Who would use M-6 to access Grand Rapids?
Manistee is a little self-promotion (I'm from there :)). Also, even though 31 north of Ludington is not freeway, Ludington is never mentioned on guide signs (they're usually signed as Manistee/Muskegon or just Muskegon south of Manistee).
Gaylord: It's the largest community right along I-75 north of Bay City.
Some of GR's southern suburbs are better served from M-6 than I-96 or I-196 (parts of Wyoming, most of Kentwood, some of Grandville). Kalamazoo would be cosigned with either Lansing or Holland (depending on the direction) until the US-131 exit.
In Lansing, MI, signs on US-127 northbound should mention Mt. Pleasant instead of Clare