Here's a question that I'm sure people will have opinions on... or maybe there is even official guidance on the issue. How far away from a route should the "TO" banner for that route be used from a freeway exit or other intersecting road? 1/4 mile? 1 mile, or even longer?
2 1/3 miles, reasonable:
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.676771,-71.1518014,3a,75y,347.54h,90.42t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1soEn6hagUgtw7SPl2j5bbFQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Yes, arguably it could be a much longer distance for interstates than state or US routes.
Here's 5 miles (https://goo.gl/maps/JMkYNu19gg8HexRL9) in North Carolina. The roadway leading to I-40 is official US-117 Connector and is not actually apart of US-117 mainline, it's sole purpose is to bring traffic to I-40. I'd say it's reasonable.
The southern end of that connector at I-40 also lists To I-795 (https://goo.gl/maps/KFSV8e8ksJ7tbfRKA) which is about 23 miles north. Again, reasonable, as the US-117/I-795 combination operate as a single transportation corridor.
I think it depends on what kind of route. I don't think 3di's really need a limit, unless it's only touching the interstate it branched off of.
I think up to 5 miles is reasonable, but if it's more than 1 mile, the exact distance should be posted at the end of the exit ramp so people don't turn around after a couple miles thinking they missed it.
Well NJ now has implemented TO NJ 29 shields on pull through signage on all WB I-195 signs staring at the GSP, and TO NJ 138 shields on all EB I-195 pull through signs as well. I think NJDOT considers I-195, NJ 29, and NJ 138 as one cross state corridor.
Before anyone decides on a set number, I can see more desolate areas, especially western states, using guide signs a long distance from the mentioned route.
I think it depends on the context of the "TO" in question.
For example: VA 207 "TO" US 301 at I-95 exit 104 (https://www.google.com/maps/@37.9319674,-77.467191,3a,75y,345.87h,89.86t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s6SVi3YPj1ZOT3UybYbjH-Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1?hl=en). US 301 is 10 miles away via VA 207 (noted on the first mileage sign beyond I-95 (https://www.google.com/maps/@37.9411142,-77.4612592,3a,43.9y,74.32h,88.82t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s3dAv6jSnNvcZLYmnIrwIsA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1?hl=en)), but I think the "TO" is well-advised since at VA 207's terminus, US 301 takes over the physical roadway and continues straight (and much of this traffic originating at exit 104 is likely continuing straight towards the Nice Bridge, which even gets its own sign from I-95 (https://www.google.com/maps/@37.9280423,-77.464344,3a,42.3y,354.13h,89.92t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1syiglBBlTKl6T4dSWTEUVMA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1?hl=en)). Based on this, I think the "TO" would still make sense even if the distance on VA 207 was longer.
Conversely, if VA 207 simply intersected US 301 10 miles away from I-95 and continued onward to some other destination? Then the "TO" might not make as much sense.
Quote from: jmacswimmer on May 06, 2021, 10:08:37 AM
I think it depends on the context of the "TO" in question.
For example: VA 207 "TO" US 301 at I-95 exit 104 (https://www.google.com/maps/@37.9319674,-77.467191,3a,75y,345.87h,89.86t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s6SVi3YPj1ZOT3UybYbjH-Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1?hl=en). US 301 is 10 miles away via VA 207 (noted on the first mileage sign beyond I-95 (https://www.google.com/maps/@37.9411142,-77.4612592,3a,43.9y,74.32h,88.82t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s3dAv6jSnNvcZLYmnIrwIsA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1?hl=en)), but I think the "TO" is well-advised since at VA 207's terminus, US 301 takes over the physical roadway and continues straight (and much of this traffic originating at exit 104 is likely continuing straight towards the Nice Bridge, which even gets its own sign from I-95 (https://www.google.com/maps/@37.9280423,-77.464344,3a,42.3y,354.13h,89.92t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1syiglBBlTKl6T4dSWTEUVMA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1?hl=en)). Based on this, I think the "TO" would still make sense even if the distance on VA 207 was longer.
Conversely, if VA 207 simply intersected US 301 10 miles away from I-95 and continued onward to some other destination? Then the "TO" might not make as much sense.
In a sense, the VA-207 / US-301 situation is very similar to how US-117 Connector / US-117 works, except longer and with its own actual designation.
In Niagara-On-The-Lake in Ontario, they have "To QEW" trailblazer signs 13 km (9 miles) away from the freeway, and I think it's a pretty valid use as it directs tourists back to the freeway from the town.
Here's a link to one within the town which is 13 km away: https://www.google.ca/maps/@43.2584299,-79.078056,3a,25.6y,304.3h,87.3t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1syOoIo2PXggYDG2B0o1JnAQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
On another note, Highway 407 ETR has a lot of trailblazer signs everywhere. A lot of them are large signs and are placed far from the freeway. I'm guessing the company paid for these signs to get people to drive on it? I don't think it's as a valid use since it's rather useless and more like advertisements
Depends on the context. For US and state routes, a couple of miles or less. For interstates, could be longer.
To I-95 (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.1345219,-75.5272502,3a,35.5y,24.81h,87.78t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sJja6O2qNeDgvdw5fprzC6w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1?hl=en) in Dover, DE (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.1372186,-75.5244055,3a,50.2y,57.46h,84.83t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sli7YWzRFYx5AdukisKOBew!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1?hl=en), about 45 miles (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.1431404,-75.5071946,3a,49.2y,60.27h,87.11t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1soJeAwInzCSoVsE5heJXp7w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1?hl=en) south of I-95.
It's intention is to direct long distance traffic off of arterial US-13 and onto the DE-1 toll road.
What about when "to" isn't used, but implied, like the US-201 shield on A-73 at A-20 in Levis QB? That's 80 miles.
Believe that there is a TO A-15 sign near Lake George, NY, at an entrance to I-87. That would be about 120 miles south of the Canadian border.
'TO' a major highway (such as a 2di or similar) as a wayfinder in a town or city: up to several miles.
'TO' any highway as a wayfinder in a national park or similar: as long as it needs to be.
'TO' a minor highway outside a national park or similar: only up to a mile or two.
Quote from: paulthemapguy on May 06, 2021, 09:01:39 AM
Before anyone decides on a set number, I can see more desolate areas, especially western states, using guide signs a long distance from the mentioned route.
Case in point:
http://www.floodgap.com/roadgap/399/u5/#img_46 (This doesn't have a TO I-5, but it does have banners, showing 26 and 23 miles in each direction)
http://www.floodgap.com/roadgap/399/u6/#img_5 (Another example at the same intersection)
http://www.floodgap.com/roadgap/399/u6/#img_31 (30 miles)
"TO OH 32" on the I-71 ramp to I-275 East. (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.2664339,-84.3562562,3a,21.7y,56.73h,100.44t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sbWibPPi4OR4zyc0D55m0CQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) I-71 is exit 49 on I-275, and OH 32 is exit 63, so that's about 14 miles between them, which I find to be acceptable in this situation, as the "TO [Route]" signage sort of acts like a control city.
The longest one I can think of in Minnesota is 20 miles. There's a TO MN 65 blazer in Hinckley.
From the south end of I-77: "TO I-95 (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.9298072,-81.0489684,3a,75y,274.45h,88.02t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sqQ427Qy6q0ouakWG07jZMw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1?hl=en)", some 53 miles away via I-26. Probably an exception rather than the norm as far as this thread is concerned, but I think acceptable in this situation when considering long-haul traffic bound for FL.
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on May 06, 2021, 12:39:40 PM
The longest one I can think of in Minnesota is 20 miles. There's a TO MN 65 blazer in Hinckley.
Strange. I wonder if casino traffic was getting lost.
Looking around in Hinckley:
TO MN-48 / TO I-35 (https://goo.gl/maps/62v3TdRY1gTSfXtMA) (0.6 miles)
TO WEST MN-23 / TO CH-18 (https://goo.gl/maps/bcC1sBKahHAf8Lfe6) (2.7 miles / 0.5 miles)
TO MN-65 (https://goo.gl/maps/9Z4DbT9EASoPYUDt5) (16.7 miles)
Quote from: kphoger on May 06, 2021, 12:55:22 PM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on May 06, 2021, 12:39:40 PM
The longest one I can think of in Minnesota is 20 miles. There's a TO MN 65 blazer in Hinckley.
Strange. I wonder if casino traffic was getting lost.
I think what's strange, if anything, is that Dahl Rd/300th Ave isn't on the state highway system. In a relative sense, it's a fairly significant connector, so it makes sense to point out that it takes you TO MN 65 if it's not going to be signed as anything else.
Quote from: SectorZ on May 06, 2021, 11:41:28 AM
What about when "to" isn't used, but implied, like the US-201 shield on A-73 at A-20 in Levis QB? That's 80 miles.
Same thing happens down the road at Saint-Georges where A-73 ends.
Perhaps it's because the French word for "to" is "Ã " which if capitalized could look too much like the A for Autoroute?
New Hampshire uses lots of "to interstate XX" signage at intersections that aren't super close to the interstate.
Twin Mountain at the US 3/302 junction, US 3 south and US 302 west have signage directing to each direction of 93, https://goo.gl/maps/oFZoCTwzk8YzJckY7
Meredith at US 3/NH 104 to I-93, https://goo.gl/maps/Gxe18P4L4TpdWaXt7
A long time ago, pre-streetview, this intersection in Rumney at NH 25/118 used to have "to 89" signage with 118 south (over 25 miles from 89), https://goo.gl/maps/dWxu5vMh9DPEvNWDA
I also can't recall where right now, but there is/was some signage directing to I-91 in Vermont within New Hampshire as well. Like the one in 118 to 89, I think some have been removed over time.
Edit: typo
There was this, at JCT I-84/86 in Idaho (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.5696669,-113.5235784,3a,75y,78.52h,90t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sJ7AFhtapLvNYIUYHOGpktg!2e0!5s20120801T000000!7i13312!8i6656).
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on May 06, 2021, 01:10:33 PM
There was this, at JCT I-84/86 in Idaho (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.5696669,-113.5235784,3a,75y,78.52h,90t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sJ7AFhtapLvNYIUYHOGpktg!2e0!5s20120801T000000!7i13312!8i6656).
I don’t like that - if my ultimate goal is I-15 south, I should be taking the exit to Ogden and Salt Lake, both of which lie on none other than... I-15.
Quote from: US 89 on May 06, 2021, 01:14:16 PM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on May 06, 2021, 01:10:33 PM
There was this, at JCT I-84/86 in Idaho (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.5696669,-113.5235784,3a,75y,78.52h,90t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sJ7AFhtapLvNYIUYHOGpktg!2e0!5s20120801T000000!7i13312!8i6656).
I don't like that - if my ultimate goal is I-15 south, I should be taking the exit to Ogden and Salt Lake, both of which lie on none other than... I-15.
Should list "I-15 North"
So, to give a little background on what led to this thread, here's a particular case where I wasn't sure if TO would be appropriate: I-490 EB at current Exit 29 (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0203944,-77.4439572,3a,75y,150.36h,78.16t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sCovNcmnY3lJrABFn9ItZAg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1). I came up with the following replacement sign:
(https://imgur.com/vldPiit.jpg)
... and then got to wondering if NY 444, 3.1 miles away (https://www.google.com/maps/dir/43.0158345,-77.4431354/42.9825338,-77.4096133/@42.9982323,-77.4360087,13.67z/data=!4m2!4m1!3e0!5m1!1e1), was too far away to mention on the sign. In most cases I wouldn't bother, but I think it makes sense here, partly because NY 96 itself runs roughly parallel to the Thruway (so most NY 96 traffic is local), while NY 444 forms part of a larger corridor connecting to NY 64 and several regional destinations, including Bloomfield, Bristol Mtn, and Naples.
Quote from: sprjus4 on May 06, 2021, 01:15:21 PM
Quote from: US 89 on May 06, 2021, 01:14:16 PM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on May 06, 2021, 01:10:33 PM
There was this, at JCT I-84/86 in Idaho (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.5696669,-113.5235784,3a,75y,78.52h,90t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sJ7AFhtapLvNYIUYHOGpktg!2e0!5s20120801T000000!7i13312!8i6656).
I don't like that - if my ultimate goal is I-15 south, I should be taking the exit to Ogden and Salt Lake, both of which lie on none other than... I-15.
Should list "I-15 North"
Concur. That was what I was going to say as well. If you wanted to get really creative, you could even list "TO I-15 SOUTH" on the I-84 sign, sort of like a much higher-visibility version of what's done
here (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.8899792,-77.2828977,3a,20.4y,358.43h,94.2t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sGAxxWNClOi9Fu3968Y_jzQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1) (excuse the completely faded directional banners; WEST is on the left, EAST on the right).
Quote from: webny99 on May 06, 2021, 01:15:55 PM
So, to give a little background on what led to this thread, here's a particular case where I wasn't sure if TO would be appropriate: I-490 EB at current Exit 29 (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0203944,-77.4439572,3a,75y,150.36h,78.16t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sCovNcmnY3lJrABFn9ItZAg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1). I came up with the following replacement sign:
(https://imgur.com/vldPiit.jpg)
... and then got to wondering if NY 444, 3.1 miles away (https://www.google.com/maps/dir/43.0158345,-77.4431354/42.9825338,-77.4096133/@42.9982323,-77.4360087,13.67z/data=!4m2!4m1!3e0!5m1!1e1), was too far away to mention on the sign. In most cases I wouldn't bother, but I think it makes sense here, partly because NY 96 itself runs roughly parallel to the Thruway (so most NY 96 traffic is local), while NY 444 forms part of a larger corridor connecting to NY 64 and several regional destinations, including Bloomfield, Bristol Mtn, and Naples.
IMO, if the road isn't a major route, it probably shouldn't get the "to" treatment, unless the freeway passes but doesn't junction with it (turnpikes notwithstanding - since you'd need a cumbersome sign to cover some of the missed routes in some places).
I am totally down with signing anything that's really close to the freeway, anything within 1-2 minutes of getting off.
Maybe the NY 444 example here could get a supplementary sign? In that case even adding US 20 to such a sign could be a legitimate addition.
Quote from: webny99 on May 06, 2021, 01:19:51 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on May 06, 2021, 01:15:21 PM
Quote from: US 89 on May 06, 2021, 01:14:16 PM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on May 06, 2021, 01:10:33 PM
There was this, at JCT I-84/86 in Idaho (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.5696669,-113.5235784,3a,75y,78.52h,90t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sJ7AFhtapLvNYIUYHOGpktg!2e0!5s20120801T000000!7i13312!8i6656).
I don't like that - if my ultimate goal is I-15 south, I should be taking the exit to Ogden and Salt Lake, both of which lie on none other than... I-15.
Should list "I-15 North"
Concur. That was what I was going to say as well. If you wanted to get really creative, you could even list "TO I-15 SOUTH" on the I-84 sign, sort of like a much higher-visibility version of what's done here (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.8899792,-77.2828977,3a,20.4y,358.43h,94.2t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sGAxxWNClOi9Fu3968Y_jzQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1) (excuse the completely faded directional banners; WEST is on the left, EAST on the right).
Or something like this (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.3053371,-76.7494064,3a,75y,135.19h,83.15t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s93Zvc4nAmYeHreN3sjMslQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1?hl=en)?
Quote from: webny99 on May 06, 2021, 08:15:56 AM
Here's a question that I'm sure people will have opinions on... or maybe there is even official guidance on the issue. How far away from a route should the "TO" banner for that route be used from a freeway exit or other intersecting road? 1/4 mile? 1 mile, or even longer?
I say it depends on what the scale of the available maps are (e.g. the free state map, the common Rand McNally and other atlases/maps, etc). If the junctions are so close on the map that it may be unclear how to get to a certain route, then TO should be used. But that's just a minimum requirement, TO can be used for farther distances.
In Georgia, at the northbound split of I-75 and I-85, the signs have "TO Georgia 400" for I-85, which is appropriate usage. One spot where I think Georgia could use TO, but doesn't, is at I-85 northbound at the GA 316 exit, which is a major interchange but to unfamiliar drivers could be confused with the I-85 I-985 interchange (if you had looked at a map and were aware that I-985 would exit, but didn't know that GA 316 was also a major route). They could put TO I-985 on the I-85 sign.
Quote from: jmacswimmer on May 06, 2021, 01:40:41 PM
Quote from: webny99 on May 06, 2021, 01:19:51 PM
... If you wanted to get really creative, you could even list "TO I-15 SOUTH" on the I-84 sign, sort of like a much higher-visibility version of what's done here (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.8899792,-77.2828977,3a,20.4y,358.43h,94.2t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sGAxxWNClOi9Fu3968Y_jzQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1) (excuse the completely faded directional banners; WEST is on the left, EAST on the right).
Or something like this (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.3053371,-76.7494064,3a,75y,135.19h,83.15t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s93Zvc4nAmYeHreN3sjMslQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1?hl=en)?
Yes, although I'm not sure how necessary those are: you'd think it would be obvious, especially with New York and Baltimore as control cities.
Quote from: SectorZ on May 06, 2021, 01:39:47 PM
I am totally down with signing anything that's really close to the freeway, anything within 1-2 minutes of getting off.
Maybe the NY 444 example here could get a supplementary sign? In that case even adding US 20 to such a sign could be a legitimate addition.
US 20 (which is actually multiplexed with NY 5 through the area) is a slightly different case because it runs parallel to the Thruway, so most traffic here would use the Thruway to Exit 44 (NY 332) to reach it -- the small segment between NY 444 and US 20A being the exception, but that segment plays only an incidental role as part of the north-south NY 444 - NY 64 corridor.
The question of whether NY 444 is "within 1-2 minutes" is an interesting one. I might round down and call it two minutes in casual conversation, but the reality is that it's more like 5-6 minutes during any daytime hour. The fact that NY 96 in Victor is one of upstate NY's most perennially congested state routes certainly doesn't help matters.
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on May 06, 2021, 12:39:40 PM
The longest one I can think of in Minnesota is 20 miles. There's a TO MN 65 blazer in Hinckley.
The longest one fairly close to me is about 55 miles: https://goo.gl/maps/oJP5HMjFhHhAir4M6
Quote from: stridentweasel on May 06, 2021, 04:46:46 PM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on May 06, 2021, 12:39:40 PM
The longest one I can think of in Minnesota is 20 miles. There's a TO MN 65 blazer in Hinckley.
The longest one fairly close to me is about 55 miles: https://goo.gl/maps/oJP5HMjFhHhAir4M6
You even need two numbers to get to I-70!
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 06, 2021, 04:58:15 PM
You even need two numbers to get to I-70!
Yeah, the KTA isn't really good at pointing that out. The KTA isn't as good at signage as KDOT is, IMO.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 06, 2021, 04:58:15 PM
You even need two numbers to get to I-70!
You don't need any, actually. Just follow signs for KTA.
Quote from: kphoger on May 06, 2021, 05:03:24 PM
You don't need any, actually. Just follow signs for KTA.
Unless you're looking for I-70
westbound, in which case, you have to know to take westbound I-470. Unless you want to drive the Turnpike for an extra five miles, and then needlessly take I-70 all the way through Topeka.
Quote from: stridentweasel on May 06, 2021, 05:02:55 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 06, 2021, 04:58:15 PM
You even need two numbers to get to I-70!
Yeah, the KTA isn't really good at pointing that out. The KTA isn't as good at signage as KDOT is, IMO.
Although it is all the Kansas Turnpike.
Quote from: stridentweasel on May 06, 2021, 05:04:17 PM
Quote from: kphoger on May 06, 2021, 05:03:24 PM
You don't need any, actually. Just follow signs for KTA.
Unless you're looking for I-70 westbound, in which case, you have to know to take westbound I-470. Unless you want to drive the Turnpike for an extra five miles, and then needlessly take I-70 all the way through Topeka.
I'm assuming the "TO I-70" is only on there to help guide drivers to KC who want go that direction instead. That is to say, if it weren't for the fact that there are two legit ways to get to KC from that point, I'm sure "TO I-70" wouldn't be on there at all.
Quote from: kphoger on May 06, 2021, 05:09:14 PM
I'm assuming the "TO I-70" is only on there to help guide drivers to KC who want go that direction instead. That is to say, if it weren't for the fact that there are two legit ways to get to KC from that point, I'm sure "TO I-70" wouldn't be on there at all.
They could have just used a method like this: https://goo.gl/maps/26k72epai87PuNuN7 to fix the MUTCD violation of having two routes go to the same control city, but I get your point.
Quote from: stridentweasel on May 06, 2021, 05:12:16 PM
Quote from: kphoger on May 06, 2021, 05:09:14 PM
I'm assuming the "TO I-70" is only on there to help guide drivers to KC who want go that direction instead. That is to say, if it weren't for the fact that there are two legit ways to get to KC from that point, I'm sure "TO I-70" wouldn't be on there at all.
They could have just used a method like this: https://goo.gl/maps/26k72epai87PuNuN7 to fix the MUTCD violation of having two routes go to the same control city, but I get your point.
Or you could not sign KC for the Turnpike or I-35. (just use Topeka or Olathe)
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 06, 2021, 05:13:44 PM
Quote from: stridentweasel on May 06, 2021, 05:12:16 PM
Quote from: kphoger on May 06, 2021, 05:09:14 PM
I'm assuming the "TO I-70" is only on there to help guide drivers to KC who want go that direction instead. That is to say, if it weren't for the fact that there are two legit ways to get to KC from that point, I'm sure "TO I-70" wouldn't be on there at all.
They could have just used a method like this: https://goo.gl/maps/26k72epai87PuNuN7 to fix the MUTCD violation of having two routes go to the same control city, but I get your point.
Or you could not sign KC for the Turnpike or I-35. (just use Topeka or Olathe)
The idea is to get drivers going to Kansas City to use the Turnpike as opposed to free I-35.
Quote from: sprjus4 on May 06, 2021, 05:14:51 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 06, 2021, 05:13:44 PM
Quote from: stridentweasel on May 06, 2021, 05:12:16 PM
Quote from: kphoger on May 06, 2021, 05:09:14 PM
I'm assuming the "TO I-70" is only on there to help guide drivers to KC who want go that direction instead. That is to say, if it weren't for the fact that there are two legit ways to get to KC from that point, I'm sure "TO I-70" wouldn't be on there at all.
They could have just used a method like this: https://goo.gl/maps/26k72epai87PuNuN7 to fix the MUTCD violation of having two routes go to the same control city, but I get your point.
Or you could not sign KC for the Turnpike or I-35. (just use Topeka or Olathe)
The idea is to get drivers going to Kansas City to use the Turnpike as opposed to free I-35.
Then don't sign Kansas City for I-35.
Oh no! I unintentionally started another control city debate. :-(
Quote from: sprjus4 on May 06, 2021, 05:14:51 PM
The idea is to get drivers going to Kansas City to use the Turnpike as opposed to free I-35.
I think the idea is to let drivers know that BOTH routes go to Kansas City. Which they do.
Quote from: stridentweasel on May 06, 2021, 05:22:39 PM
Oh no! I unintentionally started another control city debate. :-(
Control city debates are fine as long as they stay civil and Highwaystar doesn't come back.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 06, 2021, 05:47:13 PM
Control city debates are fine as long as they stay civil and Highwaystar doesn't come back.
They take over threads like an ant colony takes over your kitchen when you leave a few too many crumbs lying around. https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=11190.3900
Quote from: stridentweasel on May 06, 2021, 05:52:06 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 06, 2021, 05:47:13 PM
Control city debates are fine as long as they stay civil and Highwaystar doesn't come back.
They take over threads like an ant colony takes over your kitchen when you leave a few too many crumbs lying around. https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=11190.3900
Or if Camden is mentioned... control cities are related to this topic, so it isn't unfathomable that they come up.
Quote from: stridentweasel on May 06, 2021, 05:02:55 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 06, 2021, 04:58:15 PM
You even need two numbers to get to I-70!
Yeah, the KTA isn't really good at pointing that out. The KTA isn't as good at signage as KDOT is, IMO.
Also of note is that you don't really have to do anything special to reach I-70. The turnpike defaults you onto I-335 here, and when that ends you're defaulted onto I-470 east, and when
that ends you're defaulted onto I-70 east toward Kansas City. You don't have to exit at any point to reach any of those.
KTA signage is gradually improving as they replace the old signs from the 90s with some that are more KDOT-like. They still have a ways to go, though.
Quote from: stridentweasel on May 06, 2021, 05:04:17 PM
Unless you're looking for I-70 westbound, in which case, you have to know to take westbound I-470. Unless you want to drive the Turnpike for an extra five miles, and then needlessly take I-70 all the way through Topeka.
Of course, if you're looking to use I-70 westbound, depending on how far west you're going, the best route is probably to exit onto I-35 and take K-99 north from Emporia. So maybe "To East 70" would be the best thing to put on the sign.
Quote from: Scott5114 on May 06, 2021, 06:17:05 PM
Quote from: stridentweasel on May 06, 2021, 05:02:55 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 06, 2021, 04:58:15 PM
You even need two numbers to get to I-70!
Yeah, the KTA isn't really good at pointing that out. The KTA isn't as good at signage as KDOT is, IMO.
Also of note is that you don't really have to do anything special to reach I-70. The turnpike defaults you onto I-335 here, and when that ends you're defaulted onto I-470 east, and when that ends you're defaulted onto I-70 east toward Kansas City. You don't have to exit at any point to reach any of those.
KTA signage is gradually improving as they replace the old signs from the 90s with some that are more KDOT-like. They still have a ways to go, though.
Quote from: stridentweasel on May 06, 2021, 05:04:17 PM
Unless you're looking for I-70 westbound, in which case, you have to know to take westbound I-470. Unless you want to drive the Turnpike for an extra five miles, and then needlessly take I-70 all the way through Topeka.
Of course, if you're looking to use I-70 westbound, depending on how far west you're going, the best route is probably to exit onto I-35 and take K-99 north from Emporia. So maybe "To East 70" would be the best thing to put on the sign.
To I-70 isn't signed for I-470 west, but Salina is signed.
I was referring to the sign in Emporia that was linked.
Interestingly, the older version of the sign (shown here in 2006) explicitly linked Kansas City and I-70:
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f4/Kta_127.jpg/800px-Kta_127.jpg)
Is 19 miles far for a "TO" trailblazer?
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.8531679,-82.0506628,3a,42.8y,212.96h,94.47t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1seFwM7Em0D-gH4m6whiVU9Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
TO I-40 at Gillespie Gap on NC 226. I wouldn't consider it unreasonable, it's an almost straight shot from that point with very little other intersecting routes and an important route in the area to get to Marion and I-40.
Quote from: index on May 06, 2021, 06:47:40 PM
Is 19 miles far for a "TO" trailblazer?
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.8531679,-82.0506628,3a,42.8y,212.96h,94.47t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1seFwM7Em0D-gH4m6whiVU9Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
TO I-40 at Gillespie Gap on NC 226.
Not for an interstate.
(https://i.imgur.com/dIejiYc.png)
This is about 50 miles.
Here's a thought: maybe there should be a standard maximum distance for "TO" markers without a mileage clarification; "TO" markers pointing to a route or destination beyond a certain distance shall be required to include a mileage measurement.
Quote from: paulthemapguy on May 24, 2021, 12:14:33 AM
Here's a thought: maybe there should be a standard maximum distance for "TO" markers without a mileage clarification; "TO" markers pointing to a route or destination beyond a certain distance shall be required to include a mileage measurement.
Anything over a couple of miles I would put a mileage number.
Quote from: paulthemapguy on May 24, 2021, 12:14:33 AM
Here's a thought: maybe there should be a standard maximum distance for "TO" markers without a mileage clarification; "TO" markers pointing to a route or destination beyond a certain distance shall be required to include a mileage measurement.
Maybe, but I would think as long as the state DOT is only posting relevant "TO"/trailblazers, then there's no reason to be concerned that they are being overused or inappropriately used.
I see this differently. You could sign I-90 as "To I-5" at I-95. That's obviously an absurdity. To me, the "To" sign should have a special purpose, not just to indicate what other highways can be reached by going that way. One example is nearby me in Burleson, Texas. Renfro Street, which was previously Spur 50, but is now a city street, is signed as "To Texas 174" on I-35W northbound. When it was Spur 50, it was signed as that and as "To Texas 174." The reason is that there's no direct way to get from northbound I-35W to SH 174, the north end of which is at their intersection. It's marked "To" not because the other highway is close, but because it's the way to get to that other highway.
Woodall Rodgers Freeway, Spur 366 in Dallas, is signed as "To US 75" and as "To I-35E" because it's meant to carry traffic interchanging between those routes. It's basically a long set of ramps between the two freeways. It isn't signed as "To" just because the other freeways are close together, but because it's often a better way to get between them, since the other connecting freeway is the often-congested Canyon section of I-30.
To me, "To" represents function, not proximity. A "To" road is one that is meant to connect other highways, not to be a notification that another highway is nearby.
I agree with that. For another example, take US 89 and I-15 in southern Utah. They run on opposite sides of a mountain range 20 miles apart... but that doesn't stop UDOT from signing roads like SR 20 with a trailblazer I-15 shield (https://goo.gl/maps/uHQ2G9xF5RZn5fLw7)... and as far as I'm concerned that's totally fine. The point of 20 is to get me over to 15 where I can continue north along a faster road.
I like the idea of marking "TO I-95" on I-5 at I-90.
Quote from: Rothman on May 25, 2021, 06:46:59 AM
I like the idea of marking "TO I-95" on I-5 at I-90.
Nah, go all the way and sign "To MA 1A" instead.
Quote from: Roadsguy on May 25, 2021, 09:30:46 AM
Quote from: Rothman on May 25, 2021, 06:46:59 AM
I like the idea of marking "TO I-95" on I-5 at I-90.
Nah, go all the way and sign "To MA 1A" instead.
Mark "TO South America" on I-35 south.
There is an unconventional I-40 trailblazer (https://www.google.com/maps/@37.0112612,-79.874309,3a,75y,166.54h,87.5t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s3VX2BzVXPK83EUsKt08UeQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) on US 220 near Rocky Mount, VA with a distance of 76 miles. It doesn't have a "TO" banner, but I could have sworn it did at some point and I figured I'd mention it anyway. It was installed to reduce confusion with VA 40, which exits just ahead...but I'm not sure that confusion is common at all.
Quote from: WillWeaverRVA on May 25, 2021, 10:29:41 AM
There is an unconventional I-40 trailblazer (https://www.google.com/maps/@37.0112612,-79.874309,3a,75y,166.54h,87.5t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s3VX2BzVXPK83EUsKt08UeQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) on US 220 near Rocky Mount, VA with a distance of 76 miles. It doesn't have a "TO" banner, but I could have sworn it did at some point and I figured I'd mention it anyway. It was installed to reduce confusion with VA 40, which exits just ahead...but I'm not sure that confusion is common at all.
What's surprising, is even with the construction of the I-73 and Greensboro Urban Loop segments, the distance is actually just about accurate (Google Maps shows about 76 miles between that point and the I-40 junction on the west side of Greensboro following US-220 and I-73 / I-840. It would've been a few miles off given the pre-existing alignment that US-220 currently follows through Downtown Greensboro and down the US-29 quasi-freeway and meeting I-40 there.
Kentucky will sign "To" trailblazers for parkways and interstates as far away as 30-something miles.
Quote from: sprjus4 on May 25, 2021, 10:33:31 AM
Quote from: WillWeaverRVA on May 25, 2021, 10:29:41 AM
There is an unconventional I-40 trailblazer (https://www.google.com/maps/@37.0112612,-79.874309,3a,75y,166.54h,87.5t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s3VX2BzVXPK83EUsKt08UeQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) on US 220 near Rocky Mount, VA with a distance of 76 miles. It doesn't have a "TO" banner, but I could have sworn it did at some point and I figured I'd mention it anyway. It was installed to reduce confusion with VA 40, which exits just ahead...but I'm not sure that confusion is common at all.
What's surprising, is even with the construction of the I-73 and Greensboro Urban Loop segments, the distance is actually just about accurate (Google Maps shows about 76 miles between that point and the I-40 junction on the west side of Greensboro following US-220 and I-73 / I-840. It would've been a few miles off given the pre-existing alignment that US-220 currently follows through Downtown Greensboro and down the US-29 quasi-freeway and meeting I-40 there.
Interestingly, some version of that sign has been there for a while. It's on @Alps' website (https://www.alpsroads.net/roads/va/us_220), and it did have a "to" banner at one time.