Interchanges with control cities from many different states

[webny99]

The problem is that Toledo means nothing to most drivers in the Chicago area. If you're going to use Toledo, you might as well use Cleveland: it's much bigger, not much farther away, and a vastly higher percentage of people would know where it is (or at least be able to associate it with a general direction of travel).

[kphoger]

The problem is that Toledo means nothing to most drivers in the Chicago area. If you're going to use Toledo, you might as well use Cleveland: it's much bigger, not much farther away, and a vastly higher percentage of people would know where it is (or at least be able to associate it with a general direction of travel).

I'm good with that.

Des Moines → Chicago and Chicago → Cleveland are approximately the same distance, too.  Better yet, just use both:  Toledo/Cleveland.

[ran4sh]

I generally disagree with using entire states as control points, the routes taken to get to different parts of the same state can be very different.

Control cities should generally be known cities that much of the long-distance traffic on the route is headed for. That means, for I-90/94 east (south) in Chicago, I would attempt to determine whether most of that traffic is eventually going to I-55 (St Louis), I-57 (Memphis), I-65 (Indianapolis), I-80/90 (Cleveland), or I-94 (Detroit), and use that city. Without known traffic counts I would probably use Cleveland and Detroit as the next major destinations along the routes I-90 and I-94 themselves. The other directions are less controversial - I-94 use Milwaukee, I-90 use Madison, I-88 and I-80 use Davenport, etc.

[thspfc]

I generally disagree with using entire states as control points, the routes taken to get to different parts of the same state can be very different.

Control cities should generally be known cities that much of the long-distance traffic on the route is headed for. That means, for I-90/94 east (south) in Chicago, I would attempt to determine whether most of that traffic is eventually going to I-55 (St Louis), I-57 (Memphis), I-65 (Indianapolis), I-80/90 (Cleveland), or I-94 (Detroit), and use that city. Without known traffic counts I would probably use Cleveland and Detroit as the next major destinations along the routes I-90 and I-94 themselves. The other directions are less controversial - I-94 use Milwaukee, I-90 use Madison, I-88 and I-80 use Davenport, etc.

I would argue that the large amounts of variance in traffic flows and destinations is the very reason why a broad control destination makes sense. So I would continue to sign "Indiana" for I-90/94 east. I would sign Rockford instead of Madison for I-90, as Rockford is much closer, within Illinois, and not a ton smaller. I would sign Des Moines instead of the Quad Cities for I-88 and I-80 west, as Des Moines is much larger and the state capital.

[webny99]

In my opinion, the more specific the information, the better. That's why I think there's almost always a better option than using a state name.

In the case of "Indiana" for I-90/I-94, I would question what value that has for the average driver. All or almost all of them know that the road goes to Indiana. The more valuable information is where in Indiana does this route go, or where does it go beyond Indiana; specifically, what are the major destinations or waypoints. This road goes to Indiana is simply too vague; there are many roads that go to many different parts of Indiana. Part of the point of the control city is to make it specific to where the road itself goes (as opposed to where you might be going if you find yourself on this road) to provide the most concise information possible.

Admittedly, finding the right balance is tricky. I'd consider using Gary first (since it's the confluence of I-65, I-90, and I-94), and then start using Cleveland for I-90 once you get beyond I-65.

[NWI_Irish96]

For I-80/94 EB, I'd use Hammond/Gary. For I-80/94 WB, I'd use Joliet, and I'd also probably thrown in a 'TO I=294'. For I-80/90 EB, I'd use South Bend.

[SkyPesos]

For I-80/94 WB, I'd use Joliet, and I'd also probably thrown in a 'TO I=294'.

Maybe sign Joliet along with Chicago? A lot of drivers on I-65 heading to Chicago use I-80/94 WB as part of their route.

[ran4sh]

I generally disagree with using entire states as control points, the routes taken to get to different parts of the same state can be very different.

I would argue that the large amounts of variance in traffic flows and destinations is the very reason why a broad control destination makes sense.

You're either referring to: (1) the Chicago region only, which, why should one part of the country go against what's normal nationally, especially when that city is in the middle of the country; or (2) a general idea that a state can be an appropriate control city. Which it can't, because, for example, even as far south as Georgia, the route to Buffalo NY and New York City NY are very different, and similarly for the other direction too - from as far north as New York, the route to the GA suburbs of Chattanooga, and to Savannah GA, are very different.

Either way I'm not convinced that an entire state can be an appropriate control point.

[roadman65]

I generally disagree with using entire states as control points, the routes taken to get to different parts of the same state can be very different.

I would argue that the large amounts of variance in traffic flows and destinations is the very reason why a broad control destination makes sense.

You're either referring to: (1) the Chicago region only, which, why should one part of the country go against what's normal nationally, especially when that city is in the middle of the country; or (2) a general idea that a state can be an appropriate control city. Which it can't, because, for example, even as far south as Georgia, the route to Buffalo NY and New York City NY are very different, and similarly for the other direction too - from as far north as New York, the route to the GA suburbs of Chattanooga, and to Savannah GA, are very different.

Either way I'm not convinced that an entire state can be an appropriate control point.

In New York City, New Jersey is used due to many bedroom communities lie along different routes from the many crossings,

Though living in NJ for 25 years I felt kind of insulted that NYSDOT and NYCDOT don't recognize that we do have individual cities of interest too.

[ftballfan]

For I-80/94 EB, I'd use Hammond/Gary. For I-80/94 WB, I'd use Joliet, and I'd also probably thrown in a 'TO I=294'. For I-80/90 EB, I'd use South Bend.

There are so many options for 80/94 EB and none of them fit perfectly: Gary, South Bend, Grand Rapids, Detroit, Toledo, and Cleveland. AFAIK, all except Cleveland do mention Chicago in the opposite direction.

[roadman65]

Gary was used in Joliet for I-80 EB in 1987.  I thought Toledo was only on the signs at I-57 as Gary and Moline-Rock Island were the local ramps then.

[thspfc]

For I-80/94 EB, I'd use Hammond/Gary. For I-80/94 WB, I'd use Joliet, and I'd also probably thrown in a 'TO I=294'. For I-80/90 EB, I'd use South Bend.

There are so many options for 80/94 EB and none of them fit perfectly: Gary, South Bend, Grand Rapids, Detroit, Toledo, and Cleveland. AFAIK, all except Cleveland do mention Chicago in the opposite direction.

Gary is a dying pit of rubble that some might still consider a city. South Bend is too small and not significant enough. No idea why Grand Rapids is mentioned, it would make no sense. Detroit is getting somewhere but again, the vast majority of travelers are not going there. Toledo is pretty small and far away. Cleveland is too specific as many travelers will transition to I-80 or I-76 before Cleveland. Somebody brought up the Buffalo vs NYC comparison, which is irrelavant because unless you're going to a tiny cornfield town in a small area of Indiana, you're going to take I-90 or 94 into the state.

[JayhawkCO]

Toledo is pretty small and far away.

2010 Census:
Toledo Population - 287,208
Madison Population - 233,209

Toledo Metro Area Population - 651,419
Madison Metro Area Population - 605,435

::shrug::

Chris

[hotdogPi]

Toledo is pretty small and far away.

2010 Census:
Toledo Population - 287,208
Madison Population - 233,209

Toledo Metro Area Population - 651,419
Madison Metro Area Population - 605,435

::shrug::

Chris

Madison is significantly closer than Toledo.

[JayhawkCO]

Toledo is pretty small and far away.

2010 Census:
Toledo Population - 287,208
Madison Population - 233,209

Toledo Metro Area Population - 651,419
Madison Metro Area Population - 605,435

::shrug::

Chris

Madison is significantly closer than Toledo.

I mean, I understand that.  I just think there's a certain idea out there that Toledo is a small town.  It's not.  From Chicago, I personally would use South Bend.  Not as big as Toledo, but it's closer and the metro area is still 300K+ people.

Chris

[Revive 755]

I-44/55/64 interchange:
- Oklahoma (Tulsa, I-44 W)
- Tennessee (Memphis, I-55 S)
- Illinois (Chicago, I-55 N)
- Missouri (Kansas City, I-44 E to I-70 W)
- Indiana (Indianapolis, to I-70 E)
- Kentucky (Louisville, I-64 E)

In an ideal world, but I-64 E and I-70 E are both just signed as "Illinois" in Missouri.

Kingshighway at US 40
On the eastern double deck section of US 40
I-70 EB at I-44

Gary was used in Joliet for I-80 EB in 1987.  I thought Toledo was only on the signs at I-57 as Gary and Moline-Rock Island were the local ramps then.

I recall Des Moines and Toledo being used for I-80 on I-55.

Given the use of Rockford, I don't see why using South Bend would be an issue.

[JayhawkCO]

Given the use of Rockford, I don't see why using South Bend would be an issue.

Agreed. 

2010 Census:
Rockford Metro Area - 349,431
South Bend Metro Area - 319,224

Not that far off. 

If these cities are too small to be control cities, then from Denver, you get:
I-25 North - Does not exist
I-25 South - Colorado Springs
I-70 West - Does not exist
I-70 East - Kansas City
I-76 East - Does not exist

Chris

[ran4sh]

If these cities are too small to be control cities, then from Denver, you get:
I-25 North - Does not exist

Salt Lake City [via I-80], or Seattle [via I-90]

I-70 West - Does not exist

Las Vegas

I-76 East - Does not exist

Minneapolis or Chicago

[ran4sh]

For I-80/94 WB, I'd use Joliet, and I'd also probably thrown in a 'TO I=294'.

Maybe sign Joliet along with Chicago? A lot of drivers on I-65 heading to Chicago use I-80/94 WB as part of their route.

This. I-65 north from Indianapolis uses Chicago, so at the end of I-65 there should be a posted route to Chicago. Control cities are supposed to be used all the way to the indicated city.

[JayhawkCO]

If these cities are too small to be control cities, then from Denver, you get:
I-25 North - Does not exist

Salt Lake City [via I-80], or Seattle [via I-90]

I-70 West - Does not exist

Las Vegas

I-76 East - Does not exist

Minneapolis or Chicago

Verrrrry optimistic.  I mean, we debate the merits of Memphis from Chicago.  Denver to Seattle is 20 hours of driving.

Chris

[webny99]

In general, I am not a fan of using control cities beyond the end of the route. I-76 East from Denver might be an exception, though.

You could make a case for any of Ogallala, North Platte, Lincoln, or Omaha.

[webny99]

Gary is a dying pit of rubble that some might still consider a city.

That it may be, but the reason it would be used as a control city isn't because it's a destination: It's because it's the confluence of I-65, I-80, I-90, and I-94. One thing almost all traffic heading east out of Chicago has in common is that they're heading towards Gary. Then from there, they'll split in many directions, at which point different controls can be used. But between Chicago and Gary, I think Gary is as good as you're going to get. It's specific to the route you're on, it's close enough to be relevant, and it's applicable to almost everyone on the road.

Beyond Gary, I'd use Indy for I-65, Cleveland for I-80/I-90, and Detroit for I-94.

[Scott5114]

For example, I agree with IDOT signing "Indiana" in Chicago, because there aren't really any other real options. South Bend? Nobody cares, other than Notre Dame students the Secretary of Transportation.

FTFY

[jp the roadgeek]

In general, I am not a fan of using control cities beyond the end of the route. I-76 East from Denver might be an exception, though.

You could make a case for any of Ogallala, North Platte, Lincoln, or Omaha.

How about Boston from Hartford on I-84 or Providence for I-384?  The former doesn't come within 50 miles but is freeway connected (via the Mass Pike), while the latter doesn't come within 80 miles, is not freeway connected, and isn't even the best route. 

[3467]

OK back to Chicago area. I 355 once used Suburbs for control cities because it passes through so many they all would have demanded their name.
IDOT  must have thought the same and went with states. The tollway was first 88 mileage signs outside the built up area says Dekalb and Iowa.
And yes 80 was Des Moines and Toledo. Joliet was used inn the Quad Cities Now it's Chicago. I assume Rockford because both 90 and 94 and up in Wisconsin they highlight the Illinois destination. Then there is the whole Quad Cities naming and numbering mess.