AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

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

Author Topic: Miami no longer present on sign bridge at I-85/95 split?  (Read 26858 times)

cpzilliacus

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10331
  • Age: 60
  • Location: Maryland
  • Last Login: November 12, 2019, 10:43:43 PM
Re: Miami no longer present on sign bridge at I-85/95 split?
« Reply #50 on: May 02, 2015, 10:24:16 PM »

Didn't Maryland used to post "NJ Turnpike" on pull thrus on the JFK Expressway at one point?

I recall seeing it on the mileage signs, and as a "control city" at the entrance ramps to I-95 northbound.
Logged
Opinions expressed here on AAROADS are strictly personal and mine alone, and do not reflect policies or positions of MWCOG, NCRTPB or their member federal, state, county and municipal governments or any other agency.

Zeffy

  • Revved to Redline
  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 4388
  • Age: 25
  • Location: Doylestown, Pennsylvania
  • Last Login: July 12, 2019, 02:55:21 PM
Re: Miami no longer present on sign bridge at I-85/95 split?
« Reply #51 on: May 08, 2015, 10:27:47 AM »

The discussion pertaining to the New Jersey Turnpike and the closely related unbuilt Somerset Freeway has been split into the New Jersey Turnpike topic. Please continue discussion on the removal of Miami as a control city from the sign bridge at the I-85 and I-95 split. Thanks!
Logged
Life's too short to play it safe.

Exploring roads in my 2018 Honda Civic Type R. Hopefully those roads are free of potholes :D

roadman65

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 9630
  • Location: Orlando, fl
  • Last Login: November 13, 2019, 11:17:41 PM
Re: Miami no longer present on sign bridge at I-85/95 split?
« Reply #52 on: May 11, 2015, 03:21:58 PM »

IMO, having Miami and Atlanta on the signs, while not required, was very useful because of the large number of snowbirds who use the highway.  Many do not know about the towns on the way and know that they are simply going to Miami.  If Miami is not there, which is the case now, I bet more thru traffic would stay on I-95 as opposed to using I-295 as the very clear bypass that it was intended.

Atlanta is not as important, since Charlotte is fairly well known, but I imagine Atlanta was chosen to be a complement to Miami on the 95/85 split sign.  For each highway one regionally familiar control city and one very distant (but nationally familiar) control city.
And Charlotte is not?  It comes way before Atlanta and has national importance where everyone has heard of it.
Logged
Every day is a winding road, you just got to get used to it.

Sheryl Crowe

1995hoo

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10414
  • Age: 46
  • Location: Fairfax County, Virginia
  • Last Login: November 14, 2019, 07:12:57 PM
Re: Miami no longer present on sign bridge at I-85/95 split?
« Reply #53 on: May 23, 2015, 01:59:21 PM »

Charlotte's prominence is much more recent than Atlanta's. I suspect the use of Atlanta on those signs dates back to before Charlotte became a financial center.
Logged
"You know, you never have a guaranteed spot until you have a spot guaranteed."
—Olaf Kolzig, as quoted in the Washington Times on March 28, 2003,
commenting on the Capitals clinching a playoff spot.

"That sounded stupid, didn't it?"—Kolzig, to the same reporter a few seconds later.

Cemajr

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 84
  • Location: Charlotte, NC
  • Last Login: November 14, 2019, 11:31:32 PM
Re: Miami no longer present on sign bridge at I-85/95 split?
« Reply #54 on: June 02, 2015, 11:51:44 AM »

I can't believe Miami would even be on the sign since its so far away. If I had designed the sign I would have either put Savannah or Jacksonville in Miami's place. As for Rocky Point I would've replaced it with Fayetteville.

Rocky Mount isn't a bad choice. Miami's use was interesting - however, you can compare it to Maryland's insistent signing of New York (City) on I-95 from Baltimore!

Yep, late last year VDOT has updated its policy on its use of Clearview, enforcing its proper use only for mixed case legend, and not for all-caps or numerals.  The updated policy also forbids the use of the narrower Clearview variants as well as any of the negative contrast variants, allowing the use of only Clearview 5-W, or Clearview 5-W-R if sign width is limited.

Good for VDOT. Now all I can hope is that MDSHA and DelDOT do the same as well, and NJDOT's rogue contractor gets the fuck out of our state...

Just drove into DC over the weekend and I recall New York City being listed as a control city on 95 in VA as you approach DC.  So I guess VDOT just has a thing for signing distant control cities along its interstates.
Logged

Henry

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 5142
  • Age: 49
  • Location: Chicago, IL/Seattle, WA
  • Last Login: November 14, 2019, 08:32:40 PM
    • Henry Watson's Online Freeway
Re: Miami no longer present on sign bridge at I-85/95 split?
« Reply #55 on: June 02, 2015, 01:04:57 PM »

I can't believe Miami would even be on the sign since its so far away. If I had designed the sign I would have either put Savannah or Jacksonville in Miami's place. As for Rocky Point I would've replaced it with Fayetteville.

Rocky Mount isn't a bad choice. Miami's use was interesting - however, you can compare it to Maryland's insistent signing of New York (City) on I-95 from Baltimore!

Yep, late last year VDOT has updated its policy on its use of Clearview, enforcing its proper use only for mixed case legend, and not for all-caps or numerals.  The updated policy also forbids the use of the narrower Clearview variants as well as any of the negative contrast variants, allowing the use of only Clearview 5-W, or Clearview 5-W-R if sign width is limited.

Good for VDOT. Now all I can hope is that MDSHA and DelDOT do the same as well, and NJDOT's rogue contractor gets the fuck out of our state...

Just drove into DC over the weekend and I recall New York City being listed as a control city on 95 in VA as you approach DC.  So I guess VDOT just has a thing for signing distant control cities along its interstates.
Of course, it doesn't compare to having Los Angeles signed along I-40 as far away as San Jon, NM, even though it goes nowhere near there! I wonder what is the furthest use for Chicago as a control city?
Logged
Go Cubs Go! Go Cubs Go! Hey Chicago, what do you say? The Cubs are gonna win today!

CtrlAltDel

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 719
  • Location: East Tennessee
  • Last Login: Today at 02:39:27 AM
Re: Miami no longer present on sign bridge at I-85/95 split?
« Reply #56 on: June 02, 2015, 04:35:56 PM »

Of course, it doesn't compare to having Los Angeles signed along I-40 as far away as San Jon, NM, even though it goes nowhere near there! I wonder what is the furthest use for Chicago as a control city?

Farthest I know is Sikeston, MO, about 385 miles away. (Richmond to Miami is about 950 for comparison).
Logged
Interstates clinched: 4, 57, 275 (IN-KY-OH), 465 (IN), 640 (TN)
State Interstates clinched: I-26 (TN), I-75 (KY), I-75 (TN), I-81 (WV), I-95 (NH)

slorydn1

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1084
  • If I pass you on the right, you're doing it wrong.

  • Age: 50
  • Location: New Bern, North Carolina
  • Last Login: May 18, 2019, 01:56:21 AM
Re: Miami no longer present on sign bridge at I-85/95 split?
« Reply #57 on: June 02, 2015, 04:46:31 PM »

I can't believe Miami would even be on the sign since its so far away. If I had designed the sign I would have either put Savannah or Jacksonville in Miami's place. As for Rocky Point I would've replaced it with Fayetteville.

Rocky Mount isn't a bad choice. Miami's use was interesting - however, you can compare it to Maryland's insistent signing of New York (City) on I-95 from Baltimore!

Yep, late last year VDOT has updated its policy on its use of Clearview, enforcing its proper use only for mixed case legend, and not for all-caps or numerals.  The updated policy also forbids the use of the narrower Clearview variants as well as any of the negative contrast variants, allowing the use of only Clearview 5-W, or Clearview 5-W-R if sign width is limited.

Good for VDOT. Now all I can hope is that MDSHA and DelDOT do the same as well, and NJDOT's rogue contractor gets the fuck out of our state...

Just drove into DC over the weekend and I recall New York City being listed as a control city on 95 in VA as you approach DC.  So I guess VDOT just has a thing for signing distant control cities along its interstates.
Of course, it doesn't compare to having Los Angeles signed along I-40 as far away as San Jon, NM, even though it goes nowhere near there! I wonder what is the furthest use for Chicago as a control city?


As a kid I can remember Chicago being listed on a BGS as far away as Youngstown Ohio at the 80/76 interchange. I haven't been through there in close to 30 years though. On GSV it shows Cleveland for I-80 westbound now.
Logged
Please Note: All posts represent my personal opinions and do not represent those of any governmental agency, non-governmental agency, quasi-governmental agency or wanna be governmental agency

Counties: Counties Visited

Zzonkmiles

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 261
  • Location: United States
  • Last Login: May 18, 2019, 07:15:46 PM
Re: Miami no longer present on sign bridge at I-85/95 split?
« Reply #58 on: June 02, 2015, 10:56:25 PM »

I can't believe Miami would even be on the sign since its so far away. If I had designed the sign I would have either put Savannah or Jacksonville in Miami's place. As for Rocky Point I would've replaced it with Fayetteville.

Rocky Mount isn't a bad choice. Miami's use was interesting - however, you can compare it to Maryland's insistent signing of New York (City) on I-95 from Baltimore!

Yep, late last year VDOT has updated its policy on its use of Clearview, enforcing its proper use only for mixed case legend, and not for all-caps or numerals.  The updated policy also forbids the use of the narrower Clearview variants as well as any of the negative contrast variants, allowing the use of only Clearview 5-W, or Clearview 5-W-R if sign width is limited.

Good for VDOT. Now all I can hope is that MDSHA and DelDOT do the same as well, and NJDOT's rogue contractor gets the fuck out of our state...

Just drove into DC over the weekend and I recall New York City being listed as a control city on 95 in VA as you approach DC.  So I guess VDOT just has a thing for signing distant control cities along its interstates.

This is correct. Baltimore and NYC are indeed listed on at least one sign bridge south of DC. There is also another sign that says "NY-NJ USE I-95 NORTH" in the same area. But unlike Miami, I think there are probably lots of people who drive between DC and NY who would probably benefit from this kind of long-distance signage. I always thought of the Miami thing as more of a novelty or conversation piece as the minivan exits civilization and begins the 400-mile journey through absolutely NOTHING before reaching Savannah.
Logged

 


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