Oddly Designated Control Cities

[TheStranger]

Wasn't there a sign for Stockton on former 160 in Sacramento near the W-X portion of Business 80?

Yes.  It's in place because that segment of 160 runs along former US 99W/US 50 (which, of course, did go to Stockton).  I think the current sign there though is city-installed.

Also, L.A. should use "Downtown" more often as a "control city."  The only place where I've seen it used is on the 110 South at the Four Level and on 10 West to 110 North.

I think the usage should be similar to that of "downtown" vs. "San Francisco" in SF - SF until the city limits, then "downtown" from then on.

101 is signed for "Los Angeles/Civic Center" in East Los Angeles when it continues on the northern part of the Santa Ana Freeway (while 5 splits to the east for the Golden State Freeway to Burbank).  Not sure if that's in LA city limits, though it is so close to downtown (and 5 continues into the city limits as well) that "Civic Center/Downtown LA" would make way more sense, IMO.

Routes where "downtown LA" could be logical as a control:

- I-10 west from about I-710 to I-110
- I-10 east from I-405 to I-110
- Route 60 west from I-710 to I-10
- US 101 north (Santa Ana Freeway) from I-5 to the Four-Level
- US 101 south from the Hollywood Split (170/134) to the Four-Level
- Route 170 south in its entirety
- Route 110/I-110 south from I-5 to I-10
- I-110 north from I-105 to I-10
- I-5 north from I-710 to US 101

Likewise, in Sacramento, "downtown" could work as a control city for...

- I-5 north from Florin Road to US 50
- I-5 south from I-80 to about J Street
- US 50 west from Watt Avenue to 15th Street
- Route 99 north from 47th Avenue to US 50

[jwolfer]

Not so much odd, but it's funny how El Paso is the control city in southern Tuscon. Even though it's a whole state and a half away.
BigMatt

El Paso makes sense since it is the next city on I-10... Maybe Las Cruces since that is where I-25 intersects.

[Interstate Trav]

Another thing i find interesting is that in Las Vegas at the old Blue Diamond Road interchange I-15 North was signed Las Vegas, now it has a big overhead Sign for Salt Lake City.  Even though your 7 miles from the Las Vegas City limits and almost 10 miles from Downtown. 

I always thought that Las Vegas should be the control point for I-15 north until about the I-215 jct then if they want to add Salt Lakc eCity, fine, but also include Downtown Las Vegas.

This thought doesn't account for the fact that there is a lot more that is considered "Las Vegas" beyond the city limits of the City of Las Vegas. All unincorporated areas of the urban Las Vegas Valley are considered to be part of "Las Vegas" and have "Las Vegas" as a mailing address--the Strip, McCarran Airport, and the University of Nevada, Las Vegas (UNLV) are all located outside Las Vegas city limits. The Blue Diamond/I-15 interchange lies within unincorporated Las Vegas, so it is logical to use the next control point.

Also, if you're talking about the original interchange, that was built at a time when urban Las Vegas did not extend to the interchange, so it was more appropriate to use Las Vegas on signs.

I understand that, but when you still have some miles to go before reaching Downtown I think it can be confusing to suddenly list the next Major Control City, expecially one that is over 400 miles away. 
Whether or not Blue Diamond Road is considered Las Vegas, until you reach Downtown I strongly think Las Vegas should at least be a destination city.  I just think it's almost jumping the gun to change to Salt Lakce City before reaching the Strip or downtown.   

Notice how on I-215 West I-15 North is signed for Las Vegas/ The Strip.  That's how it should be signed, instead of Just Salt Lake City.

Also I notice that I-515 is signed for Las Vegas while being in the Las Vegas valley.

[Interstate Trav]

Another thing i find interesting is that in Las Vegas at the old Blue Diamond Road interchange I-15 North was signed Las Vegas, now it has a big overhead Sign for Salt Lake City.  Even though your 7 miles from the Las Vegas City limits and almost 10 miles from Downtown. 

I always thought that Las Vegas should be the control point for I-15 north until about the I-215 jct then if they want to add Salt Lakc eCity, fine, but also include Downtown Las Vegas. 

Similarly, once I-5 enters the Sacramento city limits, "Los Angeles" becomes the southbound control city - over 7 or 8 miles north of downtown.

I would think they would want to sign Downtown Sacramento and add Los Angeles.  Sacramento seems to sign control cities like Arizona and Nevada do.  Where as Los Angeles and San Francisco sign much closer points.

I feel sometimes Sacramento-area control cities are too biased in favor of longer-distance destinations - Roseville for instance is only used as a control city on Route 160 north, and downtown Sacramento only for 160 south (and former 275 east).  Wouldn't Roseville, Elk Grove, and Folsom all be worth mentioning?  Or Stockton, for that matter.

50 east has very few signs for Placerville in the area now - most of the ones in use today have South Lake Tahoe as the control.

In SF, at least "downtown San Francisco" gets used (280 north), though it is fascinating that at the 280/1 split on the Daly City/San Francisco border, 280 north is signed for "San Francisco" even though both roads immediately enter the SF city limits.

I would have to agree, some cities seem to use further away control cities.  Sometimes they miss important points along the route in favor of a city that is a long ways away.

[Interstate Trav]

Not so much odd, but it's funny how El Paso is the control city in southern Tuscon. Even though it's a whole state and a half away.
BigMatt

El Paso makes sense since it is the next city on I-10... Maybe Las Cruces since that is where I-25 intersects.

Arizona always signs the next Major City, I think Las Cruces deserves some mention.

[roadman65]

I-40 uses LA because of US 66 in Arizona.  In Nevada, Los Angeles is used on I-15 south of Vegas because of US 91.

Nonetheless both routes require a change in routes and the former needs two other interstates to complete the trip to the City of Angels.

[ftballfan]

I-275 northbound has Flint as a control city, even though from the northern terminus of I-275, traffic would have to take I-96 west to US 23 north or I-696 east to I-75 north. Of course, if the freeway was completed as originally planned, it would connect to I-75 directly.

Lansing, Novi, or even Brighton would make more sense than Flint along I-275 north.

[roadfro]

Another thing i find interesting is that in Las Vegas at the old Blue Diamond Road interchange I-15 North was signed Las Vegas, now it has a big overhead Sign for Salt Lake City.  Even though your 7 miles from the Las Vegas City limits and almost 10 miles from Downtown. 

I always thought that Las Vegas should be the control point for I-15 north until about the I-215 jct then if they want to add Salt Lakc eCity, fine, but also include Downtown Las Vegas.

This thought doesn't account for the fact that there is a lot more that is considered "Las Vegas" beyond the city limits of the City of Las Vegas. All unincorporated areas of the urban Las Vegas Valley are considered to be part of "Las Vegas" and have "Las Vegas" as a mailing address--the Strip, McCarran Airport, and the University of Nevada, Las Vegas (UNLV) are all located outside Las Vegas city limits. The Blue Diamond/I-15 interchange lies within unincorporated Las Vegas, so it is logical to use the next control point.

Also, if you're talking about the original interchange, that was built at a time when urban Las Vegas did not extend to the interchange, so it was more appropriate to use Las Vegas on signs.

I understand that, but when you still have some miles to go before reaching Downtown I think it can be confusing to suddenly list the next Major Control City, expecially one that is over 400 miles away. 
Whether or not Blue Diamond Road is considered Las Vegas, until you reach Downtown I strongly think Las Vegas should at least be a destination city.  I just think it's almost jumping the gun to change to Salt Lakce City before reaching the Strip or downtown.   

Notice how on I-215 West I-15 North is signed for Las Vegas/ The Strip.  That's how it should be signed, instead of Just Salt Lake City.

Also I notice that I-515 is signed for Las Vegas while being in the Las Vegas valley.

Also note that on I-215/CC 215 east at that same junction, I-15 North is only signed for Salt Lake City. As it is at practically every cross street within Las Vegas area.

I-515 north has no pull through signs at all. At the 215/564 interchange in Henderson, I-515 north is signed for Las Vegas...which does make sense. There may be one other side street that says "Las Vegas", but this would be dubious as it would actually be within the unincorporated Las Vegas area and not necessary.

The control city is meant to be a guide for long distance travelers to give some indication of where the route goes, or where you can get while following the route. Using a point just a few miles away when you're already in that city's major metro area isn't conducive, and I would argue that that is more confusing.

[DandyDan]

Another one I thought of: In western Iowa, all exits that lead to westbound I-680, including eastbound I-80 NE of Council Bluffs, include "North Omaha" as a control city.  Of course, North Omaha is not an actual city, just a part of Omaha.  You could just as logically put "West Omaha" there, or if you want a real city, Lincoln, especially as 680 exits from SB I-29.

Another noninterstate oddity in Omaha is the fact Millard is listed as the control city for NE 50 north of I-80 and eastbound US 275/NE 92 even though Millard was taken over in 1971.

[JustDrive]

Yes.  It's in place because that segment of 160 runs along former US 99W/US 50 (which, of course, did go to Stockton).  I think the current sign there though is city-installed.

From what I recall, it was NB on (former) 160 and it was pointing east on Broadway to take you to Stockton, even though Stockton is south of Sacramento.  And EB on Broadway, there are no signs that tell you that SB 99 takes you there.  A rather oddly-designated control city.

[TheStranger]

Yes.  It's in place because that segment of 160 runs along former US 99W/US 50 (which, of course, did go to Stockton).  I think the current sign there though is city-installed.

From what I recall, it was NB on (former) 160 and it was pointing east on Broadway to take you to Stockton, even though Stockton is south of Sacramento.  And EB on Broadway, there are no signs that tell you that SB 99 takes you there.  A rather oddly-designated control city.

Yeah, that sign seems to have been supplanted-in-place with no thought to current traffic patterns or routings.

In any case, from 21st/Broadway, right on Broadway isn't even the fastest way to there: simply continuing on former 160 to the WX Freeway would give you two options at 15th/16th Street, either westbound 50 (northbound 99) to 5 south, or 99 south.

[Interstate Trav]

Another thing i find interesting is that in Las Vegas at the old Blue Diamond Road interchange I-15 North was signed Las Vegas, now it has a big overhead Sign for Salt Lake City.  Even though your 7 miles from the Las Vegas City limits and almost 10 miles from Downtown. 

I always thought that Las Vegas should be the control point for I-15 north until about the I-215 jct then if they want to add Salt Lakc eCity, fine, but also include Downtown Las Vegas.

This thought doesn't account for the fact that there is a lot more that is considered "Las Vegas" beyond the city limits of the City of Las Vegas. All unincorporated areas of the urban Las Vegas Valley are considered to be part of "Las Vegas" and have "Las Vegas" as a mailing address--the Strip, McCarran Airport, and the University of Nevada, Las Vegas (UNLV) are all located outside Las Vegas city limits. The Blue Diamond/I-15 interchange lies within unincorporated Las Vegas, so it is logical to use the next control point.

Also, if you're talking about the original interchange, that was built at a time when urban Las Vegas did not extend to the interchange, so it was more appropriate to use Las Vegas on signs.

I understand that, but when you still have some miles to go before reaching Downtown I think it can be confusing to suddenly list the next Major Control City, expecially one that is over 400 miles away. 
Whether or not Blue Diamond Road is considered Las Vegas, until you reach Downtown I strongly think Las Vegas should at least be a destination city.  I just think it's almost jumping the gun to change to Salt Lakce City before reaching the Strip or downtown.   

Notice how on I-215 West I-15 North is signed for Las Vegas/ The Strip.  That's how it should be signed, instead of Just Salt Lake City.

Also I notice that I-515 is signed for Las Vegas while being in the Las Vegas valley.

Also note that on I-215/CC 215 east at that same junction, I-15 North is only signed for Salt Lake City. As it is at practically every cross street within Las Vegas area.

I-515 north has no pull through signs at all. At the 215/564 interchange in Henderson, I-515 north is signed for Las Vegas...which does make sense. There may be one other side street that says "Las Vegas", but this would be dubious as it would actually be within the unincorporated Las Vegas area and not necessary.

The control city is meant to be a guide for long distance travelers to give some indication of where the route goes, or where you can get while following the route. Using a point just a few miles away when you're already in that city's major metro area isn't conducive, and I would argue that that is more confusing.

I know do actually know that about CC 215 west of I-15.  But for example when CC 215 ends at I-15 North of Downtown, I-15 South is signed Las Vegas, Los Angeles.  That is still within the Las Vegas Valley.

I understand about long distance travelers, and guiding them, but when your not into the major Downtown area it could also be confusing to someone from out of the area.  If your within the city area and the City is listed on an On Ramp, to me it would say this route goes further into this city.

Los Angeles does it, San Francisco does it, it makes sense to sign downtown, along with the next city. 

I said before I have no problem with Salt Lakc City being signed, but Las Vegas, or Downtown Las Vegas should be listed.

Isn't Las Vegas listed at St Rose Parkway?  I knw technically the Las Vegas Metro area starts around Sloan.

Out of curiosity then by your standards I-515 should be signed for something else when in the Las Vegas Valley, should it be Reno?
How is Las Vegas the right choice at the I-215, I-515 jct, your technically in the Las Vegas area, and you just told me how it is dubiuos to sign Las Vegas

I for the record don't mean that I think all the onramps North of I-215 should be resigned, I would say add Downtown Las Vegas to them.  I mean South of I-215 it should still be Las Vegas or Las Vegas listed with Salt Lake City.

Please explain to me how listing both would be confusing.

[Occidental Tourist]

I think the usage should be similar to that of "downtown" vs. "San Francisco" in SF - SF until the city limits, then "downtown" from then on.

101 is signed for "Los Angeles/Civic Center" in East Los Angeles when it continues on the northern part of the Santa Ana Freeway (while 5 splits to the east for the Golden State Freeway to Burbank).  Not sure if that's in LA city limits, though it is so close to downtown (and 5 continues into the city limits as well) that "Civic Center/Downtown LA" would make way more sense, IMO.

Routes where "downtown LA" could be logical as a control:

- I-10 west from about I-710 to I-110
- I-10 east from I-405 to I-110
- Route 60 west from I-710 to I-10
- US 101 north (Santa Ana Freeway) from I-5 to the Four-Level
- US 101 south from the Hollywood Split (170/134) to the Four-Level
- Route 170 south in its entirety
- Route 110/I-110 south from I-5 to I-10
- I-110 north from I-105 to I-10
- I-5 north from I-710 to US 101

Likewise, in Sacramento, "downtown" could work as a control city for...

- I-5 north from Florin Road to US 50
- I-5 south from I-80 to about J Street
- US 50 west from Watt Avenue to 15th Street
- Route 99 north from 47th Avenue to US 50

I agree for the most part.  My only issues are with the 5, 10 and 60 at the East LA Interchange and the 5 south at the 170. 

Going north on the 5, or west on the 10 and 60 at the East LA Interchange, it's just as easy to get Downtown using the 10 as it is to use the 101.  Of course, part of it depends on what you define as Downtown.  If you define Downtown as the Civic Center, courts, Olvera Street, Union Station, or Bunker Hill, then the 101 is the closer route.  If you define it as the Financial District, Staples Center, Convention Center, or Garment District, then the 10 is the closer route.  If it's old downtown -- the old Broadway theater and shopping corridor -- then it's a coin flip.  If Downtown is some or all of these things, then it's also a coin flip.

Perhaps the answer is to have "Downtown North/Civic Center" for the 101 and "Downtown South/Convention Center<CR>Santa Monica" for the 10. Or a shorter "Downtown<CR>Civic Center" for the 101 and "Downtown<CR>Convention Center<CR>Santa Monica" for the 10.

I've always thought that approaching the East LA and Golden State/San Bernardino Fwy interchanges, there should be lots of advance signs identifying various secondary destinations, e.g., some of the following:  For the 5:  Burbank (Airport), Glendale, San Fernando; for the 10:  Convention Center, Staples Center, Coliseum, Galen Center, Mid-City, LA Int'l Airport, West LA; and for the 101: Civic Center, State & Federal Courts, Union Station, Dodger Stadium, Hollywood, San Fernando Valley.

A similar issue with the 5/170 split.  Currently the 5 gets a control city of Los Angeles and the 170 gets a control city of Hollywood.  Both routes take you into Downtown.  Not counting traffic at a particular time of day, the 170 is actually the shorter route to Downtown from that point.  15 years ago, the 5 would have been the faster route due to the volume of traffic on the 170/101, but not anymore.  Plus, the 5 doesn't take trucks Downtown because of the truck restriction on the 110, so trucks have to go all the way to the East LA interchange or take surface streets in Boyle Heights to get Downtown.

So there seems to be two potential options with the 5/170 to address this.  First option: Label the 5 as "Downtown LA via Burbank" and the 170 as "Downtown LA via Hollywood".  Maybe stick the little airport icon next to "Burbank".

Second option:  Label the 5 as "Downtown LA - Auto Route" and label the 170 as "Downtown LA - Truck Route".

[roadfro]

I know do actually know that about CC 215 west of I-15.  But for example when CC 215 ends at I-15 North of Downtown, I-15 South is signed Las Vegas, Los Angeles.  That is still within the Las Vegas Valley.

I understand about long distance travelers, and guiding them, but when your not into the major Downtown area it could also be confusing to someone from out of the area.  If your within the city area and the City is listed on an On Ramp, to me it would say this route goes further into this city.

Los Angeles does it, San Francisco does it, it makes sense to sign downtown, along with the next city. 

I said before I have no problem with Salt Lakc City being signed, but Las Vegas, or Downtown Las Vegas should be listed.

Isn't Las Vegas listed at St Rose Parkway?  I knw technically the Las Vegas Metro area starts around Sloan.

Out of curiosity then by your standards I-515 should be signed for something else when in the Las Vegas Valley, should it be Reno?
How is Las Vegas the right choice at the I-215, I-515 jct, your technically in the Las Vegas area, and you just told me how it is dubiuos to sign Las Vegas

I for the record don't mean that I think all the onramps North of I-215 should be resigned, I would say add Downtown Las Vegas to them.  I mean South of I-215 it should still be Las Vegas or Las Vegas listed with Salt Lake City.

Please explain to me how listing both would be confusing.

I am failing to understand how a driver in the Las Vegas area but south of the actual downtown core would be confused by seeing "Salt Lake City" as a control city for I-15 North, as compared to "Las Vegas" or "Downtown Las Vegas". I am just not sold on the fact that "Downtown" is a necessary 'control city' for a major interstate highway. Don't get me wrong, I understand the merits of keeping Las Vegas on the signs for a bit, but it's not needed all the way into the urban core.

The comparison with I-15 versus I-515 is not quite the same. You're comparing city signing between a national interstate and a metro area spur...different criteria to factor in. (It's also worth noting that the I-215/I-515 interchange is actually in the city of Henderson, not the Las Vegas unincorporated area.)

I know is that NDOT has been gradually removing second city references from signs for quite some time, preferring to stick more with a single destination for any pull-through or guidance signage--which is consistent with MUTCD recommendations. They have removed most references to "Downtown LV" that used to exist along US 95. They also have removed all the old dual references to North Las Vegas and Salt Lake City that used to be on I-15 north signs, as well as dual references to Phoenix and Needles for I-515/US 93/US 95 south (favoring Phoenix only).

[Interstate Trav]

I know do actually know that about CC 215 west of I-15.  But for example when CC 215 ends at I-15 North of Downtown, I-15 South is signed Las Vegas, Los Angeles.  That is still within the Las Vegas Valley.

I understand about long distance travelers, and guiding them, but when your not into the major Downtown area it could also be confusing to someone from out of the area.  If your within the city area and the City is listed on an On Ramp, to me it would say this route goes further into this city.

Los Angeles does it, San Francisco does it, it makes sense to sign downtown, along with the next city. 

I said before I have no problem with Salt Lakc City being signed, but Las Vegas, or Downtown Las Vegas should be listed.

Isn't Las Vegas listed at St Rose Parkway?  I knw technically the Las Vegas Metro area starts around Sloan.

Out of curiosity then by your standards I-515 should be signed for something else when in the Las Vegas Valley, should it be Reno?
How is Las Vegas the right choice at the I-215, I-515 jct, your technically in the Las Vegas area, and you just told me how it is dubiuos to sign Las Vegas

I for the record don't mean that I think all the onramps North of I-215 should be resigned, I would say add Downtown Las Vegas to them.  I mean South of I-215 it should still be Las Vegas or Las Vegas listed with Salt Lake City.

Please explain to me how listing both would be confusing.

I am failing to understand how a driver in the Las Vegas area but south of the actual downtown core would be confused by seeing "Salt Lake City" as a control city for I-15 North, as compared to "Las Vegas" or "Downtown Las Vegas". I am just not sold on the fact that "Downtown" is a necessary 'control city' for a major interstate highway. Don't get me wrong, I understand the merits of keeping Las Vegas on the signs for a bit, but it's not needed all the way into the urban core.

The comparison with I-15 versus I-515 is not quite the same. You're comparing city signing between a national interstate and a metro area spur...different criteria to factor in. (It's also worth noting that the I-215/I-515 interchange is actually in the city of Henderson, not the Las Vegas unincorporated area.)

I know is that NDOT has been gradually removing second city references from signs for quite some time, preferring to stick more with a single destination for any pull-through or guidance signage--which is consistent with MUTCD recommendations. They have removed most references to "Downtown LV" that used to exist along US 95. They also have removed all the old dual references to North Las Vegas and Salt Lake City that used to be on I-15 north signs, as well as dual references to Phoenix and Needles for I-515/US 93/US 95 south (favoring Phoenix only).

Considering how much traffic in Las Vegas is tourist traffic and how many California license plates are onI-15 South of Downtown, what I mean is that when your driving into Las Vegas, and all of a sudden Salt Lakce City takes over before reaching downtown, or in this case the Las Vegas strip it can be confusing.

I'm talking about being south of the Strip and Downtown, before you even reach exits for the Strip.  South of I-215.

Like I said north of I-215 I can understand signing Salt Lake City, although I also said Downtown Las Vegas could be referenced as well.

But south of I-215 when your not even to the Las Vegas strip yet, having Salt Lakce City be signed at onramps is confusing.  For an out of town driver I mean, because if your not from that area and you don't already know that I-15 keeps going into downtown then the change in Control Points can confuse most tourists.  I'm guessing that's why there are no overhead guide signs on I-15 until downtown, especially at the I-215 jct, except the ont that used to say Las Vegas Strip next 4 exits. 

I can't see the argument that south of I-215 Salt Lakce City needs to be signed on onramps, Las Vegas should be listed as the primary until I-215, since the toruist part of Las Vegas isn't even until then, not to mention the City limits.  Putting up Salt Lake City feels like jumping the gun, at onramps. 

I understand what your saying about I-515 but US 95 is a major north, south highway, and in the future there is talk of changing it to I-11.  Then would you think Las Vegas shouldn't be signed?

[TheStranger]

So there seems to be two potential options with the 5/170 to address this.  First option: Label the 5 as "Downtown LA via Burbank" and the 170 as "Downtown LA via Hollywood".  Maybe stick the little airport icon next to "Burbank".

Second option:  Label the 5 as "Downtown LA - Auto Route" and label the 170 as "Downtown LA - Truck Route".

I REALLY like this (it reminds me of signage in southeast France for Paris via various routes).  Another example where this could be useful?

At the 805/5 split in Sorrento Valley, both routes can take you to downtown San Diego - 805 to 163 is actually shorter and avoids the Sea World and Lindbergh Field traffic!  So I've thought of say, an arrangement like this:

5 SOUTH
Airport/Sea World
Downtown

805 SOUTH
Chula Vista
Downtown Via Route 163

Likewise, for 5/170, while 170 could be easily signed for downtown as is, the route isn't all that long so signing it as "170 to 101" could work too to make it clear 101 is the continuing route to Hollywood & downtown LA.

[roadfro]

Considering how much traffic in Las Vegas is tourist traffic and how many California license plates are onI-15 South of Downtown, what I mean is that when your driving into Las Vegas, and all of a sudden Salt Lakce City takes over before reaching downtown, or in this case the Las Vegas strip it can be confusing.

I'm talking about being south of the Strip and Downtown, before you even reach exits for the Strip.  South of I-215.

Like I said north of I-215 I can understand signing Salt Lake City, although I also said Downtown Las Vegas could be referenced as well.

But south of I-215 when your not even to the Las Vegas strip yet, having Salt Lakce City be signed at onramps is confusing.  For an out of town driver I mean, because if your not from that area and you don't already know that I-15 keeps going into downtown then the change in Control Points can confuse most tourists.  I'm guessing that's why there are no overhead guide signs on I-15 until downtown, especially at the I-215 jct, except the ont that used to say Las Vegas Strip next 4 exits. 

I can't see the argument that south of I-215 Salt Lakce City needs to be signed on onramps, Las Vegas should be listed as the primary until I-215, since the toruist part of Las Vegas isn't even until then, not to mention the City limits.  Putting up Salt Lake City feels like jumping the gun, at onramps. 

I understand what your saying about I-515 but US 95 is a major north, south highway, and in the future there is talk of changing it to I-11.  Then would you think Las Vegas shouldn't be signed?

Again, I am not understanding the confusion you seem to think exists. But I think we shall have to agree to disagree on this topic...I don't want this particular conversation to derail the thread.

[roadman65]

Why complain about Salt Lake being used before Downtown Vegas is reached.  Kansas uses  Kansas City from Wichita northward  along I-35  until it reaches the suburbs of KC then it becomes Des Moines.  For example in Olathe, KS which is just as you enter the Metro Kansas City area on I-35, you still have several miles to go to Downtown Kansas City and Des Moines is already the control city for NB I-35.

Top it off, the Northbound Control City for the southern junction of I-435 (that is a beltway bypass of Kansas City) for I-35 is Des Moines and St. Louis is used for I-70 Eastbound west of KC near the Kansas Motor Speedway spite you have to go through yet Kansas City to get there.

In Missouri, though, on I-435 you have Kansas City used for both I-35 and I-70 heading into Downtown of Kansas City and the I-435 Beltway has control cities used for the next perpindicular interstates heading away from KC.  For example, near Independence, the control cities on I-435 from I-70 are Wichita (inner) and Des Moines (outer).

This in Vegas is nothing new.

[Michael in Philly]

^^Having a major city disappear 15 miles before you reach it, to be replaced by one 200 miles farther, is ridiculous.  (If someone from out of town is actually trying to find his way from Olathe into Kansas City by following the signs to "Kansas City" instead of the route numbers, he's s.o.l.)  But so many things in American control-city practices (including the term "control city") are ridiculous that I tend to avoid these discussions.

[Interstate Trav]

Considering how much traffic in Las Vegas is tourist traffic and how many California license plates are onI-15 South of Downtown, what I mean is that when your driving into Las Vegas, and all of a sudden Salt Lakce City takes over before reaching downtown, or in this case the Las Vegas strip it can be confusing.

I'm talking about being south of the Strip and Downtown, before you even reach exits for the Strip.  South of I-215.

Like I said north of I-215 I can understand signing Salt Lake City, although I also said Downtown Las Vegas could be referenced as well.

But south of I-215 when your not even to the Las Vegas strip yet, having Salt Lakce City be signed at onramps is confusing.  For an out of town driver I mean, because if your not from that area and you don't already know that I-15 keeps going into downtown then the change in Control Points can confuse most tourists.  I'm guessing that's why there are no overhead guide signs on I-15 until downtown, especially at the I-215 jct, except the ont that used to say Las Vegas Strip next 4 exits. 

I can't see the argument that south of I-215 Salt Lakce City needs to be signed on onramps, Las Vegas should be listed as the primary until I-215, since the toruist part of Las Vegas isn't even until then, not to mention the City limits.  Putting up Salt Lake City feels like jumping the gun, at onramps. 

I understand what your saying about I-515 but US 95 is a major north, south highway, and in the future there is talk of changing it to I-11.  Then would you think Las Vegas shouldn't be signed?

Again, I am not understanding the confusion you seem to think exists. But I think we shall have to agree to disagree on this topic...I don't want this particular conversation to derail the thread.

I agree to disagree as well. 

[Interstate Trav]

Why complain about Salt Lake being used before Downtown Vegas is reached.  Kansas uses  Kansas City from Wichita northward  along I-35  until it reaches the suburbs of KC then it becomes Des Moines.  For example in Olathe, KS which is just as you enter the Metro Kansas City area on I-35, you still have several miles to go to Downtown Kansas City and Des Moines is already the control city for NB I-35.

Top it off, the Northbound Control City for the southern junction of I-435 (that is a beltway bypass of Kansas City) for I-35 is Des Moines and St. Louis is used for I-70 Eastbound west of KC near the Kansas Motor Speedway spite you have to go through yet Kansas City to get there.

In Missouri, though, on I-435 you have Kansas City used for both I-35 and I-70 heading into Downtown of Kansas City and the I-435 Beltway has control cities used for the next perpindicular interstates heading away from KC.  For example, near Independence, the control cities on I-435 from I-70 are Wichita (inner) and Des Moines (outer).

This in Vegas is nothing new.

I'm not as much complaining, as I'm just pointing out that when your not even into Las Vegas, let alone the Strip, your just into part of the Valley, to all of a sudden have the Control Point change to the next City that is over 400 miles away, isn't good practice.  I just said I think Downtown should be signed, or something related to Las Vegas until atleast reaching the tourism part of the City.

Just because your in the Metro Area doesn't mean your in the City itself yet.  That's one thing nice about Southern California Control cities, they usually sign cities pretty well all the way into them before changing to the next one.

[Interstate Trav]

^^Having a major city disappear 15 miles before you reach it, to be replaced by one 200 miles farther, is ridiculous.  (If someone from out of town is actually trying to find his way from Olathe into Kansas City by following the signs to "Kansas City" instead of the route numbers, he's s.o.l.)  But so many things in American control-city practices (including the term "control city") are ridiculous that I tend to avoid these discussions.

That's exactly what I'm trying to say.  Until you reach the downtown area or atleast the city limits or are well into the city, the city should be signed before changing to the next one.

[kendancy66]

At its beginning from I-95, yes.

I believe, somewhere around there, there is a sign on I-95 southbound with a Miami control city.

Both of those are at the the same place, at the point where I-85 South starts from I-95.  I believe it has been signed that way all the way back to the Richmond-Petersburg Turnpike era

[roadman65]

Niagara instead of Niagara Falls on the Queen Elizabeth Way between Hamilton, ON and St.Catherines, ON.  It might be to save on lettering almost like Salt Lake for Salt Lake City on some I-15 signage in Utah.

[1995hoo]

Niagara instead of Niagara Falls on the Queen Elizabeth Way between Hamilton, ON and St.Catherines, ON.  It might be to save on lettering almost like Salt Lake for Salt Lake City on some I-15 signage in Utah.

Since there is also a town named Niagara-on-the-Lake, maybe it's meant to refer to the area generally. The peninsula is named the Niagara Peninsula, after all, though I suppose putting "Niagara" to refer to the peninsula as a whole on signs once you're already on the peninsula would run afoul of some of the same principles cited elsewhere in this thread.