On trips to visit relatives in Minnesota, I've noticed on the drive up I-35 that the northbound control city from Des Moines is Minneapolis, but heading back south from the Twin Cities the control city is not Des Moines, but rather Albert Lea - indeed, you don't even see Des Moines on the southbound signage until you're past Albert Lea.
That got me thinking: where else have you seen highways - interstate or otherwise - where the signage on a given road in City A points to City B, but the signs for the same road in City B, heading back the other way, have a control city other than City A? I'm sure there are lots. (In fact, I'd be somewhat surprised if some other member hasn't made a thread about this subject already.)
Lots for Colorado.
I-70 East in Colorado is Limon. I-70 West in Kansas sporadically does Denver.
I-76 East in Colorado is Fort Morgan. I-76 West in Nebraska is Denver.
I-25 North in Colorado is Fort Collins. I-25 South in Wyoming is Denver.
In Brattleboro, VT, Springfield is used going south, but Massachusetts uses Greenfield instead of Brattleboro presumably because of MA 2.
I-75 southbound in the Upper Peninsula uses St. Ignace. Northbound in the LP uses Mackinac Bridge.
Because of US 101's lengthy usage of San Francisco and Los Angeles at various points:
- The San Jose area (specifically, the suburb of Mountain View) is the first place LA is signed as a southbound control city. Northbound, San Jose is not even mentioned at all until Salinas! (Which is reflective of pre-1990 population trends when San Francisco used to be the larger city)
- SF is not signed from anywhere in the Los Angeles metro area at all (first sign for it appears in Ventura near Route 126)
---
thought of another example involving the Bay Area:
- I-80 is signed for San Francisco westbound starting in the Sacramento suburb of Foothill Farms, but the eastbound control cities for I-80 in SF are Oakland/Bay Bridge, with Sacramento only first getting a mention at the 80/880 split in West Oakland (at the foot of the bridge).
For that matter, Oakland does not begin to be a westbound control city on I-80 until the Crockett end of the Carquinez Bridge.
Tulsa is mentioned as a control city in St Louis at the beginning of I-44. There is no mention of St Louis in Tulsa; Joplin and Claremore are control cities listed there.
No mention of Chicago on I-55 in Memphis. We all know I-57 south is famously signed for Memphis at its origin at the south end of the Dan Ryan Expressway/I-94 in Chicago
I don't think Iowa, Indiana, or Wisconsin use "Illinois" on I-80, 90, or 94, respectively
Birmingham is used I-59 SB from its east end near Chattanooga, but Chattanooga is not used from Birmingham.
Tampa is used from Lake City, FL for I-75, but at Tampa the destination Lake City is not used at all.
MN/ND:
I-94 Fargo -> Minneapolis
I-94 Minneapolis -> St. Cloud (which this one I can understand)
WI:
I-90 La Crosse -> Madison
I-90 Madison -> Wisconsin Dells
Florida
I-95 Daytona Beach> Miami
I-95 Miami> West Palm Beach
I-5 in Oregon:
SB: Portland > Salem
NB: Eugene > Portland
I'm guessing the reason why they skip Salem going Northbound is because Portland is a bigger draw. So this one makes sense to me.
Quote from: PNWRoadgeek on October 11, 2024, 06:05:50 PMI-5 in Oregon:
SB: Portland > Salem
NB: Eugene > Portland
I'm guessing the reason why they skip Salem going Northbound is because Portland is a bigger draw. So this one makes sense to me.
From Ashland on I-5 NB> Eugene
From Eugene on I-5 SB> Roseburg
The next city of good size South of Eugene is Sacramento that is way to far away to be of any interest yet.
I-80 west from Salt Lake City uses Reno on most signs, but go out to Reno and look back east and all you'll see are signs for Elko.
A smaller one: Sbd US-31 from Benton Harbor MI skips over Niles and uses South Bend IN, but nbd from South Bend uses Niles.
Quote from: US 89 on October 12, 2024, 01:08:26 AMI-80 west from Salt Lake City uses Reno on most signs, but go out to Reno and look back east and all you'll see are signs for Elko.
I get this because Elko is growing, SLC is quite far away, and Nevada wanting to sign a Nevada thing. I would prefer SLC though, especially considering that Utah signs Reno from SLC.
A rather obvious California set:
I-10 west in Phoenix is signed for Los Angeles at the I-17 split south of downtown:
https://www.google.com/maps/@33.426696,-112.029706,3a,75y,266.26h,94.33t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sG2ofpM74XKOI9maYFyCSeg!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fcb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile%26w%3D900%26h%3D600%26pitch%3D-4.332151927569882%26panoid%3DG2ofpM74XKOI9maYFyCSeg%26yaw%3D266.2646343218235!7i16384!8i8192?coh=205410&entry=ttu&g_ep=EgoyMDI0MTAwOS4wIKXMDSoASAFQAw%3D%3D
I-10 east in California does not mention Phoenix at all as a pullthrough control for quite some time, famously using "Indio/Other Desert Cities" at the Route 111 split. Phoenix finally shows up as the eastbound control city at the interchange with the Route 86 expressway:
https://www.google.com/maps/@33.7197286,-116.195333,3a,23.1y,147.65h,88.37t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sle7K7mwuGvQ_3qWWrvX_6Q!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fcb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile%26w%3D900%26h%3D600%26pitch%3D1.6259196619111123%26panoid%3Dle7K7mwuGvQ_3qWWrvX_6Q%26yaw%3D147.64799622114964!7i16384!8i8192?coh=205410&entry=ttu&g_ep=EgoyMDI0MTAwOS4wIKXMDSoASAFQAw%3D%3D
Another obvious one, at Flagstaff, I-40 west is for LA. In Barstow, I-40 east is Needles.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on October 12, 2024, 11:41:54 AMAnother obvious one, at Flagstaff, I-40 west is for LA. In Barstow, I-40 east is Needles.
This I don't get, I-40 should absolutely be signed for Flagstaff out of Barstow. Needles is just there because California absolutely needs to sign a California thing before you leave. That's also why they sign Ludlow on mileage signs. You could also argue Kingman, especially once I-11 is finished(It might never be, but when it eventually is finished)
And get this, once you enter California on I-40 west, BARSTOW is signed. Again, use LA, but this is more egregious than Flagstaff. The reason why is because I-40 is one of the main routes to LA from the Central US. Why Barstow and not LA? Just because Barstow is where I-40 ends. No, no no no no no. LA, please.
The signs on I-10 are just as bad, though I'll excuse that because of Other Desert Cities.
Quote from: TheStranger on October 12, 2024, 11:30:20 AMPhoenix finally shows up as the eastbound control city at the interchange with the Route 86 expressway:
https://www.google.com/maps/@33.7197286,-116.195333,3a,23.1y,147.65h,88.37t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sle7K7mwuGvQ_3qWWrvX_6Q!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fcb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile%26w%3D900%26h%3D600%26pitch%3D1.6259196619111123%26panoid%3Dle7K7mwuGvQ_3qWWrvX_6Q%26yaw%3D147.64799622114964!7i16384!8i8192?coh=205410&entry=ttu&g_ep=EgoyMDI0MTAwOS4wIKXMDSoASAFQAw%3D%3D
And even then, it has to appear underneath Blythe, a city of about 17,000 people.
Youngstown, OH- I-80 East New York
New York ( Teaneck, NJ) I-80 West Paterson ( NJ).
Quote from: GaryV on October 11, 2024, 10:45:45 AMI-75 southbound in the Upper Peninsula uses St. Ignace. Northbound in the LP uses Mackinac Bridge.
Actually in the U.P. it changes to Mackinac Bridge at exit 348 and the last two U.P. exits use Mackinac Bridge.
Quote from: roadman65 on October 11, 2024, 01:59:38 PMBirmingham is used I-59 SB from its east end near Chattanooga, but Chattanooga is not used from Birmingham.
Tampa is used from Lake City, FL for I-75, but at Tampa the destination Lake City is not used at all.
Same thing with Ocala. I'm guessing it had something to do with the cities being far smaller back when the freeways were first built. Plus, it passes through 3 different FDOT districts: 2, 7, and 5.
St. Petersburg also used to be a control city for I-75 before it was realigned. I think the last remaining sign was only just removed a few weeks ago at I-10, if I'm not mistaken...
Not sure, but I don't think there are any I-80 EB control city signs for "Del Water Gap", whereas there are several in the WB direction. The closest EB sign I can find is at I-380 for Stroudsburg.
Quote from: PNWRoadgeek on October 12, 2024, 11:10:30 AMQuote from: US 89 on October 12, 2024, 01:08:26 AMI-80 west from Salt Lake City uses Reno on most signs, but go out to Reno and look back east and all you'll see are signs for Elko.
I get this because Elko is growing, SLC is quite far away, and Nevada wanting to sign a Nevada thing. I would prefer SLC though, especially considering that Utah signs Reno from SLC.
I-80 east used to be signed for "Salt Lake" within Reno. Those signs were replaced and control city changed to "Elko" sometime in the 2000s or early 2010s (those were some of the last surviving dark green porcelain signs left in Nevada).
At least according a website I recall seeing years ago that had reproduced an 'official' control cities list (maybe from AASHTO or FHWA?) from years past, Elko should have been signed all along.
Quote from: roadfro on October 13, 2024, 03:32:42 PMQuote from: PNWRoadgeek on October 12, 2024, 11:10:30 AMQuote from: US 89 on October 12, 2024, 01:08:26 AMI-80 west from Salt Lake City uses Reno on most signs, but go out to Reno and look back east and all you'll see are signs for Elko.
I get this because Elko is growing, SLC is quite far away, and Nevada wanting to sign a Nevada thing. I would prefer SLC though, especially considering that Utah signs Reno from SLC.
I-80 east used to be signed for "Salt Lake" within Reno. Those signs were replaced and control city changed to "Elko" sometime in the 2000s or early 2010s (those were some of the last surviving dark green porcelain signs left in Nevada).
At least according a website I recall seeing years ago that had reproduced an 'official' control cities list (maybe from AASHTO or FHWA?) from years past, Elko should have been signed all along.
This is supposed to be the most up to date list, but in reality it's missing quite a bit (I.e. mostly the new interstates like 14, parts of 26, 41, 42, extensions of 49 and 69, 68, 99, and a few others) ... https://transportation.org/traffic/resources/interstate-control-cities/
In Maryland:
* I-68 westbound has Frostburg as the control city leaving Cumberland. It is skipped over for Cumberland heading eastbound.
In Ohio:
* I-77 southbound leaving Cleveland has Akron, then Canton, then Marietta. Northbound, Cleveland is used for everything north of Marietta.
I-41 in Wisconsin is technically an example of this, but it's an odd one. NB I-41 uses Green Bay as far south as the US 45 interchange in Oshkosh (https://maps.app.goo.gl/drF2VxWWmis7j42B6). SB I-41 in Green Bay just doesn't put a control city on its pull-through signs: see the I-43 interchange (https://maps.app.goo.gl/fxppoKSroHrXFNMJ9), the WIS 32 interchange (https://maps.app.goo.gl/UAcDCpSyxodtkwLK9), and the WIS 172 interchange (https://maps.app.goo.gl/mxKPQz3eXoe6NqR76). The intersecting highways use Appleton for SB I-41 (WIS 172 example (https://maps.app.goo.gl/bJmacZqvzyvVU2Uu5)), which still isn't Oshkosh.
I-78 in NJ uses Clinton WB from Newark west, but west of Clinton for I-78 EB either Newark or New York is used skipping Clinton all together.
Maryland: Uses New York. Ignores everything southbound from New York.
Quote from: ElishaGOtis on October 13, 2024, 06:30:58 PMQuote from: roadfro on October 13, 2024, 03:32:42 PMQuote from: PNWRoadgeek on October 12, 2024, 11:10:30 AMQuote from: US 89 on October 12, 2024, 01:08:26 AMI-80 west from Salt Lake City uses Reno on most signs, but go out to Reno and look back east and all you'll see are signs for Elko.
I get this because Elko is growing, SLC is quite far away, and Nevada wanting to sign a Nevada thing. I would prefer SLC though, especially considering that Utah signs Reno from SLC.
I-80 east used to be signed for "Salt Lake" within Reno. Those signs were replaced and control city changed to "Elko" sometime in the 2000s or early 2010s (those were some of the last surviving dark green porcelain signs left in Nevada).
At least according a website I recall seeing years ago that had reproduced an 'official' control cities list (maybe from AASHTO or FHWA?) from years past, Elko should have been signed all along.
This is supposed to be the most up to date list, but in reality it's missing quite a bit (I.e. mostly the new interstates like 14, parts of 26, 41, 42, extensions of 49 and 69, 68, 99, and a few others) ... https://transportation.org/traffic/resources/interstate-control-cities/
It's kinda strange to me that Strasburg is listed as a control city for I-66, pretty sure it's just Front Royal, Manassas, and D.C currently listed. I'm pretty sure the only place I've seen Strasburg signed is as the second line on mileage signs.
Another one that Oregon does:
EB I-84: Portland > The Dalles
WB I-84: Pendleton > Portland(The Dalles is sometimes listed, but as a secondary)
At the western end of I-70 in Cove Fort, UT, Denver (along with Richfield) appears on EB signs, but in Denver itself, Grand Junction is the WB control city. (In fact, UT signs a bunch of small towns on its part of the Interstate such as Green River, Salina and Crescent Junction, so Grand Junction is the last major destination along that route.)
Crescent Junction is not even a town - it's a road junction with one off-brand gas station.
In general, the control points used on I-70 in Utah are Las Vegas (or "To Jct I-15), Richfield, Salina, Green River, and Grand Junction. A few others like Crescent Jct or the occasional Denver do slip in on occasion.
Concord NH is used on I-93 right after you leave Boston. In Concord the southbound control cities are Manchester and Laconia.
Quote from: TheCatalyst31 on October 13, 2024, 07:19:15 PMI-41 in Wisconsin is technically an example of this, but it's an odd one. NB I-41 uses Green Bay as far south as the US 45 interchange in Oshkosh (https://maps.app.goo.gl/drF2VxWWmis7j42B6). SB I-41 in Green Bay just doesn't put a control city on its pull-through signs: see the I-43 interchange (https://maps.app.goo.gl/fxppoKSroHrXFNMJ9), the WIS 32 interchange (https://maps.app.goo.gl/UAcDCpSyxodtkwLK9), and the WIS 172 interchange (https://maps.app.goo.gl/mxKPQz3eXoe6NqR76). The intersecting highways use Appleton for SB I-41 (WIS 172 example (https://maps.app.goo.gl/bJmacZqvzyvVU2Uu5)), which still isn't Oshkosh.
I was just up there on Sunday. I am surprised on the pull through signs it just says 41 South. No mention of even Appleton when there is plenty of room to put it on the sign. BTW, the old signage (early 2000s) on US 41 at entrance ramps did say Oshkosh in the Appleton area and then Milwaukee in the Oshkosh area.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/54069611933_20a5d622ac_k.jpg)
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53811554079_c66d6545e3_k.jpg)
I said this before, but the proof is in the photos. ( Lol)
Top pic is taken in Hooker, GA outside Chattanooga.
Bottom is in Birmingham, AL, however uses Gadsden instead, but gets to Chattanooga after Gadsden.
Quote from: Henry on October 14, 2024, 11:07:37 PMAt the western end of I-70 in Cove Fort, UT, Denver (along with Richfield) appears on EB signs, but in Denver itself, Grand Junction is the WB control city. (In fact, UT signs a bunch of small towns on its part of the Interstate such as Green River, Salina and Crescent Junction, so Grand Junction is the last major destination along that route.)
Given the trajectory of the west end of I-70 in Utah, the control city west of Grand Junction should just be Vegas, in my opinion. What do you think?
A large fraction, maybe over half (I'd have to check the AADT figures), of westbound I-70 exits at US 6 to go towards Salt Lake. So putting Vegas on signs at Grand Junction probably isn't a great idea considering Vegas more or less means "away from Salt Lake" in most of Utah.
Quote from: US 89 on October 26, 2024, 05:25:49 PMA large fraction, maybe over half (I'd have to check the AADT figures), of westbound I-70 exits at US 6 to go towards Salt Lake. So putting Vegas on signs at Grand Junction probably isn't a great idea considering Vegas more or less means "away from Salt Lake" in most of Utah.
I could see a mileage sign or 2 that would use both Salt Lake and Las Vegas. Once past the 6 cutoff, then sign 70 as Las Vegas as the primary and St George as the secondary since a lot of people would head for Zion National Park from there.
Quote from: hobsini2 on October 29, 2024, 07:52:32 AMQuote from: US 89 on October 26, 2024, 05:25:49 PMA large fraction, maybe over half (I'd have to check the AADT figures), of westbound I-70 exits at US 6 to go towards Salt Lake. So putting Vegas on signs at Grand Junction probably isn't a great idea considering Vegas more or less means "away from Salt Lake" in most of Utah.
I could see a mileage sign or 2 that would use both Salt Lake and Las Vegas. Once past the 6 cutoff, then sign 70 as Las Vegas as the primary and St George as the secondary since a lot of people would head for Zion National Park from there.
And St. George is a pretty sizeable city itself nowadays.
Salt Lake and Cheyenne on I-80.
Cheyenne is used in Salt Lake, but Laramie is used in Cheyenne.
Richmond is posted on BGSs in Chesapeake, Hampton, and Newport News.
None of those cities are mentioned on any guide sign in the Richmond area.
WB CA 60 in Riverside is signed for Los Angeles, but EB CA 60 is signed for Pomona
SB CA 14 in Mojave is signed for Los Angeles, but NB CA 14 is signed for Palmdale/Lancaster
NB I-15 starting at CA 91 is signed for Barstow, but Barstow is not used as a control city on SB I-15 at all (in Nevada, it's L.A. and in California it's San Bernardino)
CA 58 is signed for Bakersfield all the way in Barstow, but in Bakersfield, it's signed for Tehachapi and Mojave.
Quote from: ilpt4u on October 11, 2024, 01:48:45 PMNo mention of Chicago on I-55 in Memphis. We all know I-57 south is famously signed for Memphis at its origin at the south end of the Dan Ryan Expressway/I-94 in Chicago
Maybe now that I-57 is in the process of getting signed between Little Rock and Walnut Ridge, this might change at some point in the next couple of decades when I-57 gets fully built out between Walnut Ridge and Poplar Bluff.
Any wagers as to what Arkansas uses for a control city on their I-40 BGS for I-57 once they get around to installing signage?
Quote from: MikieTimT on December 10, 2024, 12:41:23 PMQuote from: ilpt4u on October 11, 2024, 01:48:45 PMNo mention of Chicago on I-55 in Memphis. We all know I-57 south is famously signed for Memphis at its origin at the south end of the Dan Ryan Expressway/I-94 in Chicago
Maybe now that I-57 is in the process of getting signed between Little Rock and Walnut Ridge, this might change at some point in the next couple of decades when I-57 gets fully built out between Walnut Ridge and Poplar Bluff.
Any wagers as to what Arkansas uses for a control city on their I-40 BGS for I-57 once they get around to installing signage?
There's some signage in Arkansas along the US 67 freeway for St. Louis.
Quote from: hbelkins on December 10, 2024, 01:14:28 PMQuote from: MikieTimT on December 10, 2024, 12:41:23 PMQuote from: ilpt4u on October 11, 2024, 01:48:45 PMNo mention of Chicago on I-55 in Memphis. We all know I-57 south is famously signed for Memphis at its origin at the south end of the Dan Ryan Expressway/I-94 in Chicago
Maybe now that I-57 is in the process of getting signed between Little Rock and Walnut Ridge, this might change at some point in the next couple of decades when I-57 gets fully built out between Walnut Ridge and Poplar Bluff.
Any wagers as to what Arkansas uses for a control city on their I-40 BGS for I-57 once they get around to installing signage?
There's some signage in Arkansas along the US 67 freeway for St. Louis.
But currently US 67 goes to St. Louis.
In New London, I-95 north is Providence. Rhode Island skips right to New York. Connecticut's equivalent would be if they skipped to Boston but they don't.
Quote from: hobsini2 on October 29, 2024, 07:52:32 AMQuote from: US 89 on October 26, 2024, 05:25:49 PMA large fraction, maybe over half (I'd have to check the AADT figures), of westbound I-70 exits at US 6 to go towards Salt Lake. So putting Vegas on signs at Grand Junction probably isn't a great idea considering Vegas more or less means "away from Salt Lake" in most of Utah.
I could see a mileage sign or 2 that would use both Salt Lake and Las Vegas. Once past the 6 cutoff, then sign 70 as Las Vegas as the primary and St George as the secondary since a lot of people would head for Zion National Park from there.
Up to about 10-15 years ago, Las Vegas was used as the bottom-most destination on a few three-city mileage signs west of Grand Junction in CO. Vegas has since been replaced with I-15 mileage (via Cove Fort).
Oddly enough, there has never been any mileage signs in far western Colorado for Salt Lake City, despite the odds that more long-distance travelers will head towards
Salt Lake than Vegas.
And even then, the existing mileage signs on I-70 to I-15 is misleading for those catching I-15 via US-6 toward Salt Lake. So in a sense, CDOT should just use Richfield or Cove Fort, Utah for the 3rd control city instead of I-15, as Green River is already the first Utah destination on CDOT mileage signs.
Quote from: thenetwork on December 10, 2024, 08:06:33 PMQuote from: hobsini2 on October 29, 2024, 07:52:32 AMQuote from: US 89 on October 26, 2024, 05:25:49 PMA large fraction, maybe over half (I'd have to check the AADT figures), of westbound I-70 exits at US 6 to go towards Salt Lake. So putting Vegas on signs at Grand Junction probably isn't a great idea considering Vegas more or less means "away from Salt Lake" in most of Utah.
I could see a mileage sign or 2 that would use both Salt Lake and Las Vegas. Once past the 6 cutoff, then sign 70 as Las Vegas as the primary and St George as the secondary since a lot of people would head for Zion National Park from there.
Up to about 10-15 years ago, Las Vegas was used as the bottom-most destination on a few three-city mileage signs west of Grand Junction in CO. Vegas has since been replaced with I-15 mileage (via Cove Fort).
Oddly enough, there has never been any mileage signs in far western Colorado for Salt Lake City, despite the odds that more long-distance travelers will head towards
Salt Lake than Vegas.
And even then, the existing mileage signs on I-70 to I-15 is misleading for those catching I-15 via US-6 toward Salt Lake. So in a sense, CDOT should just use Richfield or Cove Fort, Utah for the 3rd control city instead of I-15, as Green River is already the first Utah destination on CDOT mileage signs.
Past US 6 no reason not to use Las Vegas on the bottom line of signs. Cove Fort has about as many people as my High School graduating class.
I'll say this, "Jct I-15" is a far better control point than "Cove Fort". Even within Utah, not a lot of people know where Cove Fort is or could point to it on a map.
Quote from: US 89 on December 14, 2024, 12:47:54 PMI'll say this, "Jct I-15" is a far better control point than "Cove Fort". Even within Utah, not a lot of people know where Cove Fort is or could point to it on a map.
As a Mormon, I find a lack of awareness of Cove Fort to be a "you problem" rather than public one.
Quote from: Rothman on December 14, 2024, 02:24:08 PMQuote from: US 89 on December 14, 2024, 12:47:54 PMI'll say this, "Jct I-15" is a far better control point than "Cove Fort". Even within Utah, not a lot of people know where Cove Fort is or could point to it on a map.
As a Mormon, I find a lack of awareness of Cove Fort to be a "you problem" rather than public one.
It has almost no permanent population and is a poor reference for anyone not intimately familiar with Mormon history or local geography, whether Mormon or from Utah or neither. As a non-Mormon living in Utah, the only people I ever encounter who know where Cove Fort is are big into geography or meteorology (that section of I-15 often gets quite a bit more snow than the sections to the north and south, especially in a northerly flow). If there were more gas stations or restaurants than that one Chevron off I-15, or if the historic site itself were actually visible from 15, the name might be more recognizable.
Cove Fort is fine for informational signs or novelty signs like the one in Baltimore. But for regular distance signs intended for navigational use, there is no reason to not use an equivalent destination that is more likely to be understood by the average road user. Compared to other Utah interstates, a large portion of I-70 traffic is out of state, especially the part over the Swell where it is likely a majority.
Quote from: US 89 on December 14, 2024, 03:44:07 PMQuote from: Rothman on December 14, 2024, 02:24:08 PMQuote from: US 89 on December 14, 2024, 12:47:54 PMI'll say this, "Jct I-15" is a far better control point than "Cove Fort". Even within Utah, not a lot of people know where Cove Fort is or could point to it on a map.
As a Mormon, I find a lack of awareness of Cove Fort to be a "you problem" rather than public one.
It has almost no permanent population and is a poor reference for anyone not intimately familiar with Mormon history or local geography, whether Mormon or from Utah or neither. As a non-Mormon living in Utah, the only people I ever encounter who know where Cove Fort is are big into geography or meteorology (that section of I-15 often gets quite a bit more snow than the sections to the north and south, especially in a northerly flow). If there were more gas stations or restaurants than that one Chevron off I-15, or if the historic site itself were actually visible from 15, the name might be more recognizable.
Cove Fort is fine for informational signs or novelty signs like the one in Baltimore. But for regular distance signs intended for navigational use, there is no reason to not use an equivalent destination that is more likely to be understood by the average road user. Compared to other Utah interstates, a large portion of I-70 traffic is out of state, especially the part over the Swell where it is likely a majority.
Lots of control cities and destination towns are out there on signs where a bunch of people have never heard of them. Cove Fort is no different in that regard, but it is different in of its historical significance and the fact it does draw visitors.
In short, it's fine the way it is...just like 99% of the other control cities or destinations out there...
Harsh but true fact: In the age of GPS, you could make the control city on the westbound Mass Pike Ludlow instead of Albany and eastbound to Natick instead of Boston and it wouldn't matter for like 95% of motorists. This is just a fun thing that roadgeeks do for fun.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on December 10, 2024, 05:05:24 PMIn New London, I-95 north is Providence. Rhode Island skips right to New York. Connecticut's equivalent would be if they skipped to Boston but they don't.
But they
do skip Worcester, which I've always found to be kind of silly.
Quote from: Rothman on December 14, 2024, 04:05:10 PMQuote from: US 89 on December 14, 2024, 03:44:07 PMQuote from: Rothman on December 14, 2024, 02:24:08 PMQuote from: US 89 on December 14, 2024, 12:47:54 PMI'll say this, "Jct I-15" is a far better control point than "Cove Fort". Even within Utah, not a lot of people know where Cove Fort is or could point to it on a map.
As a Mormon, I find a lack of awareness of Cove Fort to be a "you problem" rather than public one.
It has almost no permanent population and is a poor reference for anyone not intimately familiar with Mormon history or local geography, whether Mormon or from Utah or neither. As a non-Mormon living in Utah, the only people I ever encounter who know where Cove Fort is are big into geography or meteorology (that section of I-15 often gets quite a bit more snow than the sections to the north and south, especially in a northerly flow). If there were more gas stations or restaurants than that one Chevron off I-15, or if the historic site itself were actually visible from 15, the name might be more recognizable.
Cove Fort is fine for informational signs or novelty signs like the one in Baltimore. But for regular distance signs intended for navigational use, there is no reason to not use an equivalent destination that is more likely to be understood by the average road user. Compared to other Utah interstates, a large portion of I-70 traffic is out of state, especially the part over the Swell where it is likely a majority.
Lots of control cities and destination towns are out there on signs where a bunch of people have never heard of them. Cove Fort is no different in that regard, but it is different in of its historical significance and the fact it does draw visitors.
In short, it's fine the way it is...just like 99% of the other control cities or destinations out there...
A place that doesn't have a single restaurant shouldn't be a control city.
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on December 20, 2024, 03:13:55 PMQuote from: Roadgeekteen on December 10, 2024, 05:05:24 PMIn New London, I-95 north is Providence. Rhode Island skips right to New York. Connecticut's equivalent would be if they skipped to Boston but they don't.
But they do skip Worcester, which I've always found to be kind of silly.
This is another example, as New London is signed on I-395 in the Worcester area.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on December 20, 2024, 03:44:37 PMQuote from: Rothman on December 14, 2024, 04:05:10 PMQuote from: US 89 on December 14, 2024, 03:44:07 PMQuote from: Rothman on December 14, 2024, 02:24:08 PMQuote from: US 89 on December 14, 2024, 12:47:54 PMI'll say this, "Jct I-15" is a far better control point than "Cove Fort". Even within Utah, not a lot of people know where Cove Fort is or could point to it on a map.
As a Mormon, I find a lack of awareness of Cove Fort to be a "you problem" rather than public one.
It has almost no permanent population and is a poor reference for anyone not intimately familiar with Mormon history or local geography, whether Mormon or from Utah or neither. As a non-Mormon living in Utah, the only people I ever encounter who know where Cove Fort is are big into geography or meteorology (that section of I-15 often gets quite a bit more snow than the sections to the north and south, especially in a northerly flow). If there were more gas stations or restaurants than that one Chevron off I-15, or if the historic site itself were actually visible from 15, the name might be more recognizable.
Cove Fort is fine for informational signs or novelty signs like the one in Baltimore. But for regular distance signs intended for navigational use, there is no reason to not use an equivalent destination that is more likely to be understood by the average road user. Compared to other Utah interstates, a large portion of I-70 traffic is out of state, especially the part over the Swell where it is likely a majority.
Lots of control cities and destination towns are out there on signs where a bunch of people have never heard of them. Cove Fort is no different in that regard, but it is different in of its historical significance and the fact it does draw visitors.
In short, it's fine the way it is...just like 99% of the other control cities or destinations out there...
A place that doesn't have a single restaurant shouldn't be a control city.
That policy would certainly trigger lots of revisions countrywide. :D
Quote from: Rothman on December 20, 2024, 06:16:12 PMQuote from: JayhawkCO on December 20, 2024, 03:44:37 PMQuote from: Rothman on December 14, 2024, 04:05:10 PMQuote from: US 89 on December 14, 2024, 03:44:07 PMQuote from: Rothman on December 14, 2024, 02:24:08 PMQuote from: US 89 on December 14, 2024, 12:47:54 PMI'll say this, "Jct I-15" is a far better control point than "Cove Fort". Even within Utah, not a lot of people know where Cove Fort is or could point to it on a map.
As a Mormon, I find a lack of awareness of Cove Fort to be a "you problem" rather than public one.
It has almost no permanent population and is a poor reference for anyone not intimately familiar with Mormon history or local geography, whether Mormon or from Utah or neither. As a non-Mormon living in Utah, the only people I ever encounter who know where Cove Fort is are big into geography or meteorology (that section of I-15 often gets quite a bit more snow than the sections to the north and south, especially in a northerly flow). If there were more gas stations or restaurants than that one Chevron off I-15, or if the historic site itself were actually visible from 15, the name might be more recognizable.
Cove Fort is fine for informational signs or novelty signs like the one in Baltimore. But for regular distance signs intended for navigational use, there is no reason to not use an equivalent destination that is more likely to be understood by the average road user. Compared to other Utah interstates, a large portion of I-70 traffic is out of state, especially the part over the Swell where it is likely a majority.
Lots of control cities and destination towns are out there on signs where a bunch of people have never heard of them. Cove Fort is no different in that regard, but it is different in of its historical significance and the fact it does draw visitors.
In short, it's fine the way it is...just like 99% of the other control cities or destinations out there...
A place that doesn't have a single restaurant shouldn't be a control city.
That policy would certainly trigger lots of revisions countrywide. :D
Let me clarify. Interstate control city.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on December 20, 2024, 07:42:16 PMQuote from: Rothman on December 20, 2024, 06:16:12 PMQuote from: JayhawkCO on December 20, 2024, 03:44:37 PMQuote from: Rothman on December 14, 2024, 04:05:10 PMQuote from: US 89 on December 14, 2024, 03:44:07 PMQuote from: Rothman on December 14, 2024, 02:24:08 PMQuote from: US 89 on December 14, 2024, 12:47:54 PMI'll say this, "Jct I-15" is a far better control point than "Cove Fort". Even within Utah, not a lot of people know where Cove Fort is or could point to it on a map.
As a Mormon, I find a lack of awareness of Cove Fort to be a "you problem" rather than public one.
It has almost no permanent population and is a poor reference for anyone not intimately familiar with Mormon history or local geography, whether Mormon or from Utah or neither. As a non-Mormon living in Utah, the only people I ever encounter who know where Cove Fort is are big into geography or meteorology (that section of I-15 often gets quite a bit more snow than the sections to the north and south, especially in a northerly flow). If there were more gas stations or restaurants than that one Chevron off I-15, or if the historic site itself were actually visible from 15, the name might be more recognizable.
Cove Fort is fine for informational signs or novelty signs like the one in Baltimore. But for regular distance signs intended for navigational use, there is no reason to not use an equivalent destination that is more likely to be understood by the average road user. Compared to other Utah interstates, a large portion of I-70 traffic is out of state, especially the part over the Swell where it is likely a majority.
Lots of control cities and destination towns are out there on signs where a bunch of people have never heard of them. Cove Fort is no different in that regard, but it is different in of its historical significance and the fact it does draw visitors.
In short, it's fine the way it is...just like 99% of the other control cities or destinations out there...
A place that doesn't have a single restaurant shouldn't be a control city.
That policy would certainly trigger lots of revisions countrywide. :D
Let me clarify. Interstate control city.
Clarification disapproved.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on December 20, 2024, 07:42:16 PMQuote from: Rothman on December 20, 2024, 06:16:12 PMQuote from: JayhawkCO on December 20, 2024, 03:44:37 PMQuote from: Rothman on December 14, 2024, 04:05:10 PMQuote from: US 89 on December 14, 2024, 03:44:07 PMQuote from: Rothman on December 14, 2024, 02:24:08 PMQuote from: US 89 on December 14, 2024, 12:47:54 PMI'll say this, "Jct I-15" is a far better control point than "Cove Fort". Even within Utah, not a lot of people know where Cove Fort is or could point to it on a map.
As a Mormon, I find a lack of awareness of Cove Fort to be a "you problem" rather than public one.
It has almost no permanent population and is a poor reference for anyone not intimately familiar with Mormon history or local geography, whether Mormon or from Utah or neither. As a non-Mormon living in Utah, the only people I ever encounter who know where Cove Fort is are big into geography or meteorology (that section of I-15 often gets quite a bit more snow than the sections to the north and south, especially in a northerly flow). If there were more gas stations or restaurants than that one Chevron off I-15, or if the historic site itself were actually visible from 15, the name might be more recognizable.
Cove Fort is fine for informational signs or novelty signs like the one in Baltimore. But for regular distance signs intended for navigational use, there is no reason to not use an equivalent destination that is more likely to be understood by the average road user. Compared to other Utah interstates, a large portion of I-70 traffic is out of state, especially the part over the Swell where it is likely a majority.
Lots of control cities and destination towns are out there on signs where a bunch of people have never heard of them. Cove Fort is no different in that regard, but it is different in of its historical significance and the fact it does draw visitors.
In short, it's fine the way it is...just like 99% of the other control cities or destinations out there...
A place that doesn't have a single restaurant shouldn't be a control city.
That policy would certainly trigger lots of revisions countrywide. :D
Let me clarify. Interstate control city.
Still eliminates "Mackinac Bridge".
Quote from: GaryV on December 21, 2024, 07:02:09 AMQuote from: JayhawkCO on December 20, 2024, 07:42:16 PMQuote from: Rothman on December 20, 2024, 06:16:12 PMQuote from: JayhawkCO on December 20, 2024, 03:44:37 PMQuote from: Rothman on December 14, 2024, 04:05:10 PMQuote from: US 89 on December 14, 2024, 03:44:07 PMQuote from: Rothman on December 14, 2024, 02:24:08 PMQuote from: US 89 on December 14, 2024, 12:47:54 PMI'll say this, "Jct I-15" is a far better control point than "Cove Fort". Even within Utah, not a lot of people know where Cove Fort is or could point to it on a map.
As a Mormon, I find a lack of awareness of Cove Fort to be a "you problem" rather than public one.
It has almost no permanent population and is a poor reference for anyone not intimately familiar with Mormon history or local geography, whether Mormon or from Utah or neither. As a non-Mormon living in Utah, the only people I ever encounter who know where Cove Fort is are big into geography or meteorology (that section of I-15 often gets quite a bit more snow than the sections to the north and south, especially in a northerly flow). If there were more gas stations or restaurants than that one Chevron off I-15, or if the historic site itself were actually visible from 15, the name might be more recognizable.
Cove Fort is fine for informational signs or novelty signs like the one in Baltimore. But for regular distance signs intended for navigational use, there is no reason to not use an equivalent destination that is more likely to be understood by the average road user. Compared to other Utah interstates, a large portion of I-70 traffic is out of state, especially the part over the Swell where it is likely a majority.
Lots of control cities and destination towns are out there on signs where a bunch of people have never heard of them. Cove Fort is no different in that regard, but it is different in of its historical significance and the fact it does draw visitors.
In short, it's fine the way it is...just like 99% of the other control cities or destinations out there...
A place that doesn't have a single restaurant shouldn't be a control city.
That policy would certainly trigger lots of revisions countrywide. :D
Let me clarify. Interstate control city.
Still eliminates "Mackinac Bridge".
Delaware Water Gap is still safe, though. With two restaurants and one bar according to Google Maps, I wonder if it's the control point with the smallest nonzero number of restaurants.
Quote from: GaryV on December 21, 2024, 07:02:09 AMStill eliminates "Mackinac Bridge".
Going forward, MDOT has dropped "Mackinac Bridge" from their list of control cities in their "Guidelines for Signing on State Trunkline Highways (https://mdotjboss.state.mi.us/TSSD/getTSDocument.htm?docGuid=73e44000-f742-425f-927b-d9b3aa2cf33a&fileName=Signing%20Trunkline%20Guide.pdf)".
Quote from: bulldog1979 on December 22, 2024, 01:54:16 PMQuote from: GaryV on December 21, 2024, 07:02:09 AMStill eliminates "Mackinac Bridge".
Going forward, MDOT has dropped "Mackinac Bridge" from their list of control cities in their "Guidelines for Signing on State Trunkline Highways (https://mdotjboss.state.mi.us/TSSD/getTSDocument.htm?docGuid=73e44000-f742-425f-927b-d9b3aa2cf33a&fileName=Signing%20Trunkline%20Guide.pdf)".
Wonder how many decades it will take to replace all those signs?
Ehh, they'll probably make it a priority. Why fix potholes when you can resign control cities?
Quote from: bulldog1979 on December 22, 2024, 01:54:16 PMQuote from: GaryV on December 21, 2024, 07:02:09 AMStill eliminates "Mackinac Bridge".
Going forward, MDOT has dropped "Mackinac Bridge" from their list of control cities in their "Guidelines for Signing on State Trunkline Highways (https://mdotjboss.state.mi.us/TSSD/getTSDocument.htm?docGuid=73e44000-f742-425f-927b-d9b3aa2cf33a&fileName=Signing%20Trunkline%20Guide.pdf)".
Or the fact that they totally missed it. I highly doubt they are going to be replacing any of the Mackinac Bridge signs along I-75 or US-127. Then they say St. Ignace is a minor control city despite it being the control city between Sault Ste. Marie and the bridge. Ann Arbor is a minor control city along US-23? That is wrong, Brighton is never used. Flint is never a control city on M-13, in fact Lansing is all the way back in Saginaw and neither is Pinconning as Standish is the control city north of Bay City. And all these control cities that have highway numbers as the control city, never seen any of that in Michigan either. Wondering why it says pending completion for M-6.
Quote from: Flint1979 on December 23, 2024, 07:54:45 AMOr the fact that they totally missed it. I highly doubt they are going to be replacing any of the Mackinac Bridge signs along I-75 or US-127. Then they say St. Ignace is a minor control city despite it being the control city between Sault Ste. Marie and the bridge. Ann Arbor is a minor control city along US-23? That is wrong, Brighton is never used. Flint is never a control city on M-13, in fact Lansing is all the way back in Saginaw and neither is Pinconning as Standish is the control city north of Bay City. And all these control cities that have highway numbers as the control city, never seen any of that in Michigan either. Wondering why it says pending completion for M-6.
The doc may say revised 2023, but I don't think they did enough revisions. Probably a lot of old text remains.
Quote from: GaryV on December 23, 2024, 11:13:15 AMQuote from: Flint1979 on December 23, 2024, 07:54:45 AMOr the fact that they totally missed it. I highly doubt they are going to be replacing any of the Mackinac Bridge signs along I-75 or US-127. Then they say St. Ignace is a minor control city despite it being the control city between Sault Ste. Marie and the bridge. Ann Arbor is a minor control city along US-23? That is wrong, Brighton is never used. Flint is never a control city on M-13, in fact Lansing is all the way back in Saginaw and neither is Pinconning as Standish is the control city north of Bay City. And all these control cities that have highway numbers as the control city, never seen any of that in Michigan either. Wondering why it says pending completion for M-6.
The doc may say revised 2023, but I don't think they did enough revisions. Probably a lot of old text remains.
I think we do fine with the control cities in Michigan. It pretty simply tells you where you are going. I know someone would probably ask why Lansing is the control city on M-13 in Saginaw and I can reason with that. The reason would be is because that is where most of any longer distance traffic is going and is the shortest and quickest way between Saginaw and Lansing. Now you won't see Saginaw as a control city in Lansing though.