Indirect control cities

[JREwing78]

I-96 does traverse a section of Lansing's south side.

[WNYroadgeek]

One of I-390's control cities at it's southern terminus with I-86 is Buffalo, even though it doesn't go there. And there are quite a few signs for Rochester on I-86 even though it doesn't go there (although I do count it as a direct connection since you actually keep going straight in order to get on I-390).

I-490 in Rochester uses Buffalo and Victor as control cities.  It doesn't go to either.

I could've sworn it's eastern terminus with I-90 was in Victor...

[Interstate Trav]

I'm new to this forum so if i'm replying in to the wrong folder I apologize.

I'm replying to a couple of things,  one

"Other Desert Cities"

I was wondering , am I the only one that likes that sign.  I live very close to that interchange, and I have to say because of the population of the Coachella Valley, and the connection to the 86 to El Centro and 62 to 29 Palms, Joshua Tree, Amboy, Needles, that that particular signage, kinda fits.  I like that Blythe or Phoenix don't show up until Indio.

Also the 210 eastbound Control city,

I think it should be Indio and/or Palm Springs after the 215 jct.  True it is San Fernando on 210 west, but on other transtions like from the 118 and even the 2 I think it says Sacramento, not to mention the mileage signs list Sacramento as the Control city.  I think the same should be for eastbound, Indio should show up right around the 215 jct.  Just my opinion though. 

Also I'm a big freeway enthusiast myself and this is a cool forum, so hope to be getting to talk with everyone in the future.

[Alps]

I'm new to this forum so if i'm replying in to the wrong folder I apologize.

Have you read the Forum Guidelines in the Welcome forum yet? Take your time and look around, get settled, see what other people are doing. (For example, it's OK to bring back threads that haven't been active in months, but don't make too much of a habit of it.)
~One of your sometimes friendly mods

[hobsini2]

On I-90-94, Wisconsin Dells is used as a control city however the official sign for the city of Wis Dells on WI 13 is at the Wisconsin River (1 mile east). BUT, it still makes sense to use it.

I am also surprised no one mentioned I-88 going to Chicago.  88 stops short of the city by 6 miles.  You have to use I-290 East to get into the city limits.  BUT again this makes sense.

I-80 also goes near Cleveland but not in it.

I-80 also uses Moline-Rock Island as a secondary control city on the IL side but misses both by 3 miles.

[Henry]

I-85 used to go into Greensboro, but no longer does, thanks to the Urban Loop.

I-77 near its southern terminus is signed for Charleston, and you must continue onto I-26 to actually reach it.

I-70 is signed for Baltimore, but stops at a Park & Ride just short of the city line (or at I-695, depends on who you ask).

I-270 is signed for Washington, but ends at the Capital Beltway.

I-82 is signed for Seattle, and you must continue onto I-90 to actually reach it.

I-84 is signed for Boise, and I-184 spurs into it.

I-80 is signed for Cheyenne, and I-180 spurs into it.

[hbelkins]

Too lazy to go back and look, but I-24 west of Paducah (and at one time, in all of Kentucky) was signed for St. Louis, which actually requires driving on two other interstates (I-57 and I-64) to get there.

[ftballfan]

US 31 north of Muskegon is signed for Ludington, even though it didn't enter Ludington before the freeway was extended to US 10.

US 127 north of Mt. Pleasant is signed for Mackinac Bridge, even though the bridge is 90 miles north of US 127's merge onto I-75.

[roadman65]

St. Louis was once the control city for I-24 west of Nashville in the early 90's.  Its since been changed to Clarksville and previously you had to take I-24 to I-57 NB and then I-64 WB.

[roadman65]

How about Woodbury for Exit 3 on the NJ Turnpike?  There is no direct road between the interchange and it.  I-295 is close to it, but it opened long after the Turnpike did!

[roadman65]

Long ago Singac was used as a control city for NB I- 287 on  CR 511 in Parsippany, NJ.  That city is actually a hamlet in Little Falls, NJ not located anywhere near where I- 287 is now and no other road connects it directly from anywhere on I- 287.  This was before this interstate was continued past Montville to I-87 in New York and now NJ 23 does from its interchange in Riverdale, but its miles in the wrong direction where other NJ towns along the way would have been more suited.  Bottom line is Singac now or never had any interest, nor is at at any major route junction or stand larger than those other corporations around it! So a big mistake was made here, but now corrected since.  The last street view I saw of this showed no control cities for I-287 at this location.

[JustDrive]

Sorry to bring up an old thread, but on a visit to Sonoma Wine Country last weekend, I noticed that SB Arnold Road at CA 116 is signed eastbound for San Francisco.  To get to SF, one needs to go EB on 116, SB on 121, WB on 37, and SB on 101, for a total of four routes.

[GaryV]

Cities in MI were mentioned above, but ...

I-275 (Toledo and Flint) and I-696 (Lansing and Port Huron) around Detroit are signed with control cities far beyond their ends.  OK, on I-696 you can get to Lansing or Port Huron by simply merging onto I-96 or I-94, respectively.  And SB I-275 merges onto I-75 to get to Toledo.  But to get from NB I-275 to Flint requires first going west on I-96 - signed toward Lansing - and then NB on US-23.  Without knowing where you were going, you wouldn't be able to find Flint from the signage.

Granted, if I-275 had been continued to its originally intended endpoint with I-75 somewhere near Clarkston, Flint would make sense.

[iowahighways]

At the eastern interchange of I-80 and I-680 near Neola, IA, Sioux City is listed as one of the destinations for I-680 westbound. While I-680 goes nowhere near Sioux City, it connects I-80 to a highway that does go through there, I-29.

[bing101]

I-5 North in Grapevine gets San Francisco as a control city.

[bing101]

I 680, CA 170, I  405,  I 210,  get Sacramento even though these freeways don't go to that city.

[tidecat]

I saw Tulsa listed as a destination via US 50 on I-255 in Illinois, but US 50 does not go to Tulsa.

[doorknob60]

how about US-97 in Klamath Falls being signed (quite hilariously) for Weed and San Francisco.

Weed makes sense, as it is the terminus of US-97, and has been so since the beginning.  San Francisco?  Back in the day, you would have had to take US-99 to US-40 to get there (so three hops altogether, including US-97), and nowadays the quickest route is US-97 to I-5 to I-505 to I-80, which is four hops.

Redding probably would have made more sense as a second control city (ignoring insignificant towns like Dorris), but realistically, a significant portion of people travelling south on 97 there are heading to San Francisco or somewhere in the bay area.

EDIT: Just realized I replied to an almost 4 year old post. The thread was bumped though, so whatever.

EDIT2:

I-84 is signed for Boise, and I-184 spurs into it.

I-184 spurs into the city center, but I-84 is still well within the city limits (or, at the very least, right at the edge of the city limits), with 5 more Boise exits, as well as serving the airport.

I-5 and Eugene is a similar example, because Eugene is accessed from I-5 primarily via the Beltline (OR-569) and I-105, and you can throw in 30th Ave and OR-99 (northbound only) too. I-5 just straddles the line between Eugene and Springfield, and doesn't do much in the way of direct access, other than the Gateway mall area and the outer areas like Glenwood and Lane Community College. Obviously though, Eugene is a very logical control city for I-5, I'm not arguing against that, just pointing it out.

[DandyDan]

At the eastern interchange of I-80 and I-680 near Neola, IA, Sioux City is listed as one of the destinations for I-680 westbound. While I-680 goes nowhere near Sioux City, it connects I-80 to a highway that does go through there, I-29.

And going eastbound on I-680 from Omaha eastward has Des Moines as the control city even though at the end of I-680, you're at least 100 miles from Des Moines.  Of course, I could be an ass and say I-80 doesn't go to Des Moines, either (only I-235 goes there), but that's just pure technicality.  I suppose the same for that account holds for I-35 as well.

[TheStranger]

Cities in MI were mentioned above, but ...

I-275 (Toledo and Flint) and I-696 (Lansing and Port Huron) around Detroit are signed with control cities far beyond their ends.  OK, on I-696 you can get to Lansing or Port Huron by simply merging onto I-96 or I-94, respectively.  And SB I-275 merges onto I-75 to get to Toledo.  But to get from NB I-275 to Flint requires first going west on I-96 - signed toward Lansing - and then NB on US-23.  Without knowing where you were going, you wouldn't be able to find Flint from the signage.

As a comparison point:

Right now in Southern California, with the 710 gap between Pasadena and Alhambra not complete, while 710 north is primarily signed for "Pasadena", at the interchange with 10, the eastbound 10 ramp is then also signed for "Pasadena" to provide a continuation.  On 275 north, is the ramp for 96 west signed for Flint at all?

I-5 North in Grapevine gets San Francisco as a control city.

This is not as indirect as one would think: 580 west of Vernalis was either signed or proposed as I-5W in the 1960s, and the 5-580 route is shorter than 101.

[roadman]

I think MA means the state.  They do like to sign states as controls.  495 northbound (clockwise) has "N.H.-Maine" as its control city.

Plus, at the I-84 exit on the Mass Pike, they specifically spell out "New York City":

and yet I-84 never reaches NYC. You'd have a choice of routes: I-91 to the Merritt or I-95, One of the NY Parkways (Taconic, Saw Mill River, etc) into the Bronx, or the Thruway.

Of course, US 20 doesn't go to either Hartford or New York City.  That's the real error on these signs.

[PHLBOS]

I think MA means the state.  They do like to sign states as controls.  495 northbound (clockwise) has "N.H.-Maine" as its control city.

Plus, at the I-84 exit on the Mass Pike, they specifically spell out "New York City":

and yet I-84 never reaches NYC. You'd have a choice of routes: I-91 to the Merritt or I-95, One of the NY Parkways (Taconic, Saw Mill River, etc) into the Bronx, or the Thruway.

Of course, US 20 doesn't go to either Hartford or New York City.  That's the real error on these signs.

To be fair, if there wasn't a TO next to that US 20 shield; then you would be correct regarding that BGS would be in error with respect to both destinations for US 20. 

However, the I-90 interchange is with I-84 and not US 20 (which has an interchange w/I-84 just below the toll booths).  The only reason that US 20 shield is even on the main BGS panel dates back to when the previous-generation BGS' once had MA 15 shields (Roadman, I believe that you were the one that mentioned such).  The DPW decided in 1980(?) to drop the MA 15 designation and replace the MA 15 shields w/the current TO 20 reference.  The current BGS' simply matched the old ones in terms of content & information.

Nonetheless, in this particular case; it's a reasonable assumption that the listed destinations are directly & indirectly intended for I-84 westbounders.  Similar could be said for the TO 20 being a reference/destination for I-84 westbounders.

[GaryV]

Cities in MI were mentioned above, but ...

I-275 (Toledo and Flint) and I-696 (Lansing and Port Huron) around Detroit are signed with control cities far beyond their ends.  OK, on I-696 you can get to Lansing or Port Huron by simply merging onto I-96 or I-94, respectively.  And SB I-275 merges onto I-75 to get to Toledo.  But to get from NB I-275 to Flint requires first going west on I-96 - signed toward Lansing - and then NB on US-23.  Without knowing where you were going, you wouldn't be able to find Flint from the signage.

As a comparison point:

Right now in Southern California, with the 710 gap between Pasadena and Alhambra not complete, while 710 north is primarily signed for "Pasadena", at the interchange with 10, the eastbound 10 ramp is then also signed for "Pasadena" to provide a continuation.  On 275 north, is the ramp for 96 west signed for Flint at all?

Nope, just signed for Lansing.

[spooky]

I think MA means the state.  They do like to sign states as controls.  495 northbound (clockwise) has "N.H.-Maine" as its control city.

Plus, at the I-84 exit on the Mass Pike, they specifically spell out "New York City":

and yet I-84 never reaches NYC. You'd have a choice of routes: I-91 to the Merritt or I-95, One of the NY Parkways (Taconic, Saw Mill River, etc) into the Bronx, or the Thruway.

Of course, US 20 doesn't go to either Hartford or New York City.  That's the real error on these signs.

To be fair, if there wasn't a TO next to that US 20 shield; then you would be correct regarding that BGS would be in error with respect to both destinations for US 20. 

However, the I-90 interchange is with I-84 and not US 20 (which has an interchange w/I-84 just below the toll booths).  The only reason that US 20 shield is even on the main BGS panel dates back to when the previous-generation BGS' once had MA 15 shields (Roadman, I believe that you were the one that mentioned such).  The DPW decided in 1980(?) to drop the MA 15 designation and replace the MA 15 shields w/the current TO 20 reference.  The current BGS' simply matched the old ones in terms of content & information.

Nonetheless, in this particular case; it's a reasonable assumption that the listed destinations are directly & indirectly intended for I-84 westbounders.  Similar could be said for the TO 20 being a reference/destination for I-84 westbounders.

When signs are eventually replaced on the Mass Pike, I would guess that the BGS for Exit 9 will only show I-84 and likely retain those destinations, with "TO 20" banished to a supplemental sign with Sturbridge as a destination.

[PHLBOS]

When signs are eventually replaced on the Mass Pike, I would guess that the BGS for Exit 9 will only show I-84 and likely retain those destinations, with "TO 20" banished to a supplemental sign with Sturbridge as a destination.

Roadman would have to confirm such.  IMHO, the TO 20 references on the Exit 9 BGS' are fine and not misleading in any way, shape, or form even w/the fore-mentioned destinations. 

As previously stated, the I-84/US 20 interchange is located just southwest of the toll plaza and many motorists use the parallel US 20 as an alternate to the Pike when it gets hopelessly jammed at times between Exits 9 & 10.