Worst control city on an interstate in your state

[GaryV]

I'm still confused as to why naming a specific Canadian city is sacrilege. More information is always helpful to a motorist. The two countries are separated by the Detroit River, handwaving Canadian control cities because it's a "different country" is provincial to the point of being unhelpful.
//snip//
Canadian and Mexican cities should be signed as control cities. Who cares if it's a "different country?" People still drive there.

Part of the problem is the woeful lack of geographical knowledge. Many people would not recognize Windsor, Sarnia or London as being cities in Ontario, Canada; maybe not even for Toronto. Giving Canada as the control, these people hopefully would be reminded that they are going toward another country. I'm not familiar enough with the Mexican border to know if that's the same situation there.

Another example: The Mackinac Bridge has a sign at the northern end, "Welcome to Michigan's Upper Peninsula". Surprisingly, a number of people didn't know they were staying in Michigan, and some even expected to have to go through customs.

[hbelkins]

The control city for southbound I-69 in Kentucky is Fulton. It's a small town whose claim to fame is being located on the state border and is formerly where US 45 split into its east and west branches until that split was relocated to south of the state line. Fulton gets used as far north as Henderson.

[kphoger]

The control city for southbound I-69 in Kentucky is Fulton. It's a small town whose claim to fame is being located on the state border and is formerly where US 45 split into its east and west branches until that split was relocated to south of the state line. Fulton gets used as far north as Henderson.

What should it be instead, do you think?

[pianocello]

The control city for southbound I-69 in Kentucky is Fulton. It's a small town whose claim to fame is being located on the state border and is formerly where US 45 split into its east and west branches until that split was relocated to south of the state line. Fulton gets used as far north as Henderson.

What should it be instead, do you think?

From Henderson, there's not a lot of good options.

Nashville? That's the closest major city and it's in the direction that many people are going, but you have to get on two other Interstates.

Memphis? It's a big enough city on the right route, but it's pretty far from Henderson, and the road isn't finished for the foreseeable future.

Paducah? Again, you have to get off of I-69 to get there (or more realistically, you have to not get off of I-24 at the interchange with I-69 south).

IMO, they've done the best they can, just using the network of small cities at junctions (Madisonville, Nortonville, etc.) until Tennessee builds it out to Memphis.

[The Nature Boy]

I'm still confused as to why naming a specific Canadian city is sacrilege. More information is always helpful to a motorist. The two countries are separated by the Detroit River, handwaving Canadian control cities because it's a "different country" is provincial to the point of being unhelpful.
//snip//
Canadian and Mexican cities should be signed as control cities. Who cares if it's a "different country?" People still drive there.

Part of the problem is the woeful lack of geographical knowledge. Many people would not recognize Windsor, Sarnia or London as being cities in Ontario, Canada; maybe not even for Toronto. Giving Canada as the control, these people hopefully would be reminded that they are going toward another country. I'm not familiar enough with the Mexican border to know if that's the same situation there.

Another example: The Mackinac Bridge has a sign at the northern end, "Welcome to Michigan's Upper Peninsula". Surprisingly, a number of people didn't know they were staying in Michigan, and some even expected to have to go through customs.

This is a problem in different states though, which I think is (well solved) by putting the state abbreviation at the end. I guess I can see people not knowing that "ON" stands for Ontario, which kind of makes me sad honestly.

My general rule on control cities is that they should be helpful to the long distance traveler, which is why I hate NCDOT's method of control city signage.

[kphoger]

Part of the problem is the woeful lack of geographical knowledge. Many people would not recognize Windsor, Sarnia or London as being cities in Ontario, Canada; maybe not even for Toronto. Giving Canada as the control, these people hopefully would be reminded that they are going toward another country. I'm not familiar enough with the Mexican border to know if that's the same situation there.

Another example: The Mackinac Bridge has a sign at the northern end, "Welcome to Michigan's Upper Peninsula". Surprisingly, a number of people didn't know they were staying in Michigan, and some even expected to have to go through customs.

This is a problem in different states though, which I think is (well solved) by putting the state abbreviation at the end. I guess I can see people not knowing that "ON" stands for Ontario, which kind of makes me sad honestly.

But if you put "Windsor CAN" or "Windsor, Can.", then I bet a lot more people would correctly understand that to be a city in Canada.

[mgk920]

Part of the problem is the woeful lack of geographical knowledge. Many people would not recognize Windsor, Sarnia or London as being cities in Ontario, Canada; maybe not even for Toronto. Giving Canada as the control, these people hopefully would be reminded that they are going toward another country. I'm not familiar enough with the Mexican border to know if that's the same situation there.

Another example: The Mackinac Bridge has a sign at the northern end, "Welcome to Michigan's Upper Peninsula". Surprisingly, a number of people didn't know they were staying in Michigan, and some even expected to have to go through customs.

This is a problem in different states though, which I think is (well solved) by putting the state abbreviation at the end. I guess I can see people not knowing that "ON" stands for Ontario, which kind of makes me sad honestly.

But if you put "Windsor CAN" or "Windsor, Can.", then I bet a lot more people would correctly understand that to be a city in Canada.

Or 'Windsor [CDN flag]'?

Mike

[kphoger]

'Windsor [CDN flag]'

Would that run afoul of any MUTCD prohibitions?  I'm not aware of any.

[hbelkins]

The control city for southbound I-69 in Kentucky is Fulton. It's a small town whose claim to fame is being located on the state border and is formerly where US 45 split into its east and west branches until that split was relocated to south of the state line. Fulton gets used as far north as Henderson.

What should it be instead, do you think?

From Henderson, there's not a lot of good options.

Nashville? That's the closest major city and it's in the direction that many people are going, but you have to get on two other Interstates.

Memphis? It's a big enough city on the right route, but it's pretty far from Henderson, and the road isn't finished for the foreseeable future.

Paducah? Again, you have to get off of I-69 to get there (or more realistically, you have to not get off of I-24 at the interchange with I-69 south).

IMO, they've done the best they can, just using the network of small cities at junctions (Madisonville, Nortonville, etc.) until Tennessee builds it out to Memphis.

Union City (biggest town along the route between the I-24 split and Dyersburg) or Dyersburg.

Actually, I'd prefer Memphis.  Memphis is a lot closer to Henderson than it is to Chicago.

[jt4]

'Windsor [CDN flag]'

Would that run afoul of any MUTCD prohibitions?  I'm not aware of any.

If they can do "🇨🇦 Bridge to Canada" I'm sure they can do "Windsor 🇨🇦" ... although I worry that some people won't recognize the flag.

[Flint1979]

Part of the problem is the woeful lack of geographical knowledge. Many people would not recognize Windsor, Sarnia or London as being cities in Ontario, Canada; maybe not even for Toronto. Giving Canada as the control, these people hopefully would be reminded that they are going toward another country. I'm not familiar enough with the Mexican border to know if that's the same situation there.

Another example: The Mackinac Bridge has a sign at the northern end, "Welcome to Michigan's Upper Peninsula". Surprisingly, a number of people didn't know they were staying in Michigan, and some even expected to have to go through customs.

This is a problem in different states though, which I think is (well solved) by putting the state abbreviation at the end. I guess I can see people not knowing that "ON" stands for Ontario, which kind of makes me sad honestly.

But if you put "Windsor CAN" or "Windsor, Can.", then I bet a lot more people would correctly understand that to be a city in Canada.

Or 'Windsor [CDN flag]'?

Mike

There already is a Canadian flag on the exit 192 sign.
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3250198,-83.0844345,3a,26.5y,172.76h,110.92t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1ssdqkKl7COS2I1Oevz6C26A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu

[hobsini2]

The control city for southbound I-69 in Kentucky is Fulton. It's a small town whose claim to fame is being located on the state border and is formerly where US 45 split into its east and west branches until that split was relocated to south of the state line. Fulton gets used as far north as Henderson.

What should it be instead, do you think?

From Henderson, there's not a lot of good options.

Nashville? That's the closest major city and it's in the direction that many people are going, but you have to get on two other Interstates.

Memphis? It's a big enough city on the right route, but it's pretty far from Henderson, and the road isn't finished for the foreseeable future.

Paducah? Again, you have to get off of I-69 to get there (or more realistically, you have to not get off of I-24 at the interchange with I-69 south).

IMO, they've done the best they can, just using the network of small cities at junctions (Madisonville, Nortonville, etc.) until Tennessee builds it out to Memphis.

Union City (biggest town along the route between the I-24 split and Dyersburg) or Dyersburg.

Actually, I'd prefer Memphis.  Memphis is a lot closer to Henderson than it is to Chicago.

I think this is a case where having 2 control cities does make sense. I would use Hopkinsville (31k) and Memphis from Henderson until the W Ky Pkwy. Then use Paducah (27k) and Memphis. Both are great secondary cities. When you get to the W Ky Pkwy, then use Hopkinsville and Nashville for the remainder of the Pennyrile Pkwy. Fulton should not be mentioned really until I-69 South splits off I-24.

[tmoore952]

Regarding Canada being used around Detroit:

There is a context thing here. Yes, Canada is one of the largest countries in the world etc.

But in the Detroit area it is also "the destination across the river", similar to what New Jersey is for New York City.
I don't ever remember "Newark" or "East Rutherford" or "Fort Lee" being used on signs in NYC.

[The Nature Boy]

Regarding Canada being used around Detroit:

There is a context thing here. Yes, Canada is one of the largest countries in the world etc.

But in the Detroit area it is also "the destination across the river", similar to what New Jersey is for New York City.
I don't ever remember "Newark" or "East Rutherford" or "Fort Lee" being used on signs in NYC.

I feel like I've seen Newark signed in NYC but my memory could be conflating with what is signed across the GW Bridge. It has been a while since I've driven to NYC. I do know there was movement away from signing "New England" as a control city in favor of "New Haven," though I think there's still one sign that has New England as a control city.

[Flint1979]

Regarding Canada being used around Detroit:

There is a context thing here. Yes, Canada is one of the largest countries in the world etc.

But in the Detroit area it is also "the destination across the river", similar to what New Jersey is for New York City.
I don't ever remember "Newark" or "East Rutherford" or "Fort Lee" being used on signs in NYC.

Canada is only used once in Detroit. It's used for Jeffries at the Ford interchange.

[mrsman]

I'm a little behind on reading this thread, so over the last few days, I absolutely got a lot of control city overload!

So my thoughts about control cities, generally, before responding to a lot of the discussion above.

I like my control cities to be cities. Not states, countries, or bridges.

I like my control cities for 2dis to be relatively well-known.  Generally, the top three cities of any state or a state capital.  Cities that are nationally known are best, if practical (and in many cases they are).

I also prefer that for 3dis that lead to 2dis also use the well-known cities, as opposed to suburbs where practical.  But obviously, there is a need to take a case by case approach for these.  US routes and state routes are likely to use more local cities, but depending on the location could also use the larger cities as well, especially if they are essntially in place of interstates for a corridor.

I know that many states want to use their own cities even if they do not fit with the above, so I am also in favor of signing two control cities where practical.  Obviously, there will be some signs where if every direction has two controls there would be some information overload, but I think generally the occasional pull-through with two controls would be good.

Control cities should be signed and not changed until you reach that control city.  If the control city is relatively small, you can begin signing the next control at the city limits, but for larger cites, you should guide people downtown before guiding people to the next control city.  [In many of our larger cities, especially those on rivers, downtown is right at the city limit coming from one direction, so this wouldn't apply in that direction.]

So how do I apply this to some of the recent discussions?

On I-94 the control cities for the I-75 exit should be Flint and DOWNTOWN. I-96 should be Lansing and Toledo. At the Lodge they should be DOWNTOWN and Southfield which is what they are.

Absolutely.  Detroit has been a big topic of discussion here, so I believe this is the right approach.  Flint traffic should be guided to use I-94 to I-96 to avoid going through Downtown.  I-75 SB (and any signs leading to it) should not have a Toledo control until the 75/375 interchange.  Appropriate guidance to the bridges and tunnels to Canada should be on supplemental signage. 

Michigan seems to be pretty good about its controls, so any comments here are just minor quibbles.  As 275 NB does not go all the way to I-75, Flint is not a good control.  I'd prefer Lansing/Fort Huron, since 275 does default onto 96 towards Lansing and Fort Huron would help cement the idea that the 275 and 696 combo is Detroit's beltway.

Canada alone should not be used, but a city is great.  So Sarnia, Can. and Windsor, Can. should be used instead.  For I-75, there is no city that it leads to other than Canada's Sault Sainte Marie, so I'd leave it alone as a Canada control within the SSM, Mich. city limits.

Mackinaw City, while small, is well-known as the place where the Mackinac Bridge is at.  Its a fine replacement for using a bridge.

Chicagoland and its state controls.  SIGH.  Any sign with Ohio or Indiana as the control should be replaced with South Bend or South Bend / Detroit as appropriate.  Iowa should be replaced with Des Moines.  Wisconsin should be replaced with Rockford/Milwaukee on 90/94 and with Milwaukee on 294.  Yes, South Bend is a big enough city to be an eastbound control for 80 and 90 and it is in Indiana.  i would say that Joliet can be used as a secondary control for I-80 in many places.

I-80 between Cleveland and NYC, let's get rid of most of those small towns.  One poster here had a very good discussion of what to do. 

EB:  Youngstown/NYC, State College/NYC, Williamsport/NYC, Hazleton/NYC, Stroudsburg/NYC, NYC
WB: Paterson/Cleveland, Scranton/Cleveland, Hazleton/Cleveland, State College/Cleveland, Youngstown/Cleveland, Cleveland

Maryland, please replace your "New York" control on I-95 with "Wilmington" or "Philadelphia."  Pretty please???

95's SB control beginning at the Bruckner interchange should be Newark instead of Trenton.  After crossing the GW bridge, the signage for Paterson and Hackensack is confusing that it only lists 80 controls before the 80/95 split, so Newark should be attached there as well.  Once on the NJTP, the controls should be:  Newark/Philadelphia (until US 1/9), Trenton/Philadelphia (until I-195), Philadelphia/Wilmington (until exit 6), and then Wilmington/Baltimore south of there.

[SEWIGuy]

Chicagoland and its state controls.  SIGH.  Any sign with Ohio or Indiana as the control should be replaced with South Bend or South Bend / Detroit as appropriate.  Iowa should be replaced with Des Moines.  Wisconsin should be replaced with Rockford/Milwaukee on 90/94 and with Milwaukee on 294.  Yes, South Bend is a big enough city to be an eastbound control for 80 and 90 and it is in Indiana.  i would say that Joliet can be used as a secondary control for I-80 in many places.

Absolutely not. The state controls make perfect sense regardless of how you "like your control cities."

[SkyPesos]

I like Chicago's state controls. 90 and 94 enter Indiana and Wisconsin at different points, so it's less clutter on the signs than signing two cities for each direction. Also one of the highways enter each state at a corner, so using it is the best way to basically all points in both states.

I don't like the Indiana Toll Road using "Ohio" eastbound though. Traffic going from Chicago to two of Ohio's 3 largest cities would've left the Toll Road somewhere in NWI (Cincinnati traffic at I-65, Columbus traffic at I-65 or IN 49 to US 30), so you only have Cleveland left of the 3 major cities to represent "Ohio" on the Turnpike. I would definitely go with either South Bend or Toledo there after I-90 enters Indiana.

Iowa is fine for I-80 WB I guess, All of the major cities in Iowa except Dubuque involve some portion of I-80 to get there. This is also where I would go with Control City Freak's suggestion to use "Kansas" instead of Limon on I-70 EB out of Denver.

[kphoger]

Chicagoland and its state controls.  SIGH.  Any sign with Ohio or Indiana as the control should be replaced with South Bend or South Bend / Detroit as appropriate.  Iowa should be replaced with Des Moines.  Wisconsin should be replaced with Rockford/Milwaukee on 90/94 and with Milwaukee on 294.  Yes, South Bend is a big enough city to be an eastbound control for 80 and 90 and it is in Indiana.  i would say that Joliet can be used as a secondary control for I-80 in many places.

Absolutely not. The state controls make perfect sense regardless of how you "like your control cities."

I could agree that state controls there make perfect sense, but I don't think they make more sense than using proper cities would.

[StogieGuy7]

I'm still confused as to why naming a specific Canadian city is sacrilege. More information is always helpful to a motorist. The two countries are separated by the Detroit River, handwaving Canadian control cities because it's a "different country" is provincial to the point of being unhelpful.
//snip//
Canadian and Mexican cities should be signed as control cities. Who cares if it's a "different country?" People still drive there.

Part of the problem is the woeful lack of geographical knowledge. Many people would not recognize Windsor, Sarnia or London as being cities in Ontario, Canada; maybe not even for Toronto. Giving Canada as the control, these people hopefully would be reminded that they are going toward another country. I'm not familiar enough with the Mexican border to know if that's the same situation there.

Another example: The Mackinac Bridge has a sign at the northern end, "Welcome to Michigan's Upper Peninsula". Surprisingly, a number of people didn't know they were staying in Michigan, and some even expected to have to go through customs.

There was a time when I'd scoff at this comment as being elitism.  After all, people can't possibly be that effing stupid can they? Well, yes they can...and are. One great example is everyone complaining about how it's getting dark so damn early "because of daylight savings time".  NO, it's standard time - idiots! I've even seen the media post this error.  Come on, we all knew this one in 1975.

As a culture and as a nation, we're growing dumber by the day.

[mgk920]

I'm still confused as to why naming a specific Canadian city is sacrilege. More information is always helpful to a motorist. The two countries are separated by the Detroit River, handwaving Canadian control cities because it's a "different country" is provincial to the point of being unhelpful.
//snip//
Canadian and Mexican cities should be signed as control cities. Who cares if it's a "different country?" People still drive there.

Part of the problem is the woeful lack of geographical knowledge. Many people would not recognize Windsor, Sarnia or London as being cities in Ontario, Canada; maybe not even for Toronto. Giving Canada as the control, these people hopefully would be reminded that they are going toward another country. I'm not familiar enough with the Mexican border to know if that's the same situation there.

Another example: The Mackinac Bridge has a sign at the northern end, "Welcome to Michigan's Upper Peninsula". Surprisingly, a number of people didn't know they were staying in Michigan, and some even expected to have to go through customs.

There was a time when I'd scoff at this comment as being elitism.  After all, people can't possibly be that effing stupid can they? Well, yes they can...and are. One great example is everyone complaining about how it's getting dark so damn early "because of daylight savings time".  NO, it's standard time - idiots! I've even seen the media post this error.  Come on, we all knew this one in 1975.
As a culture and as a nation, we're growing dumber by the day.

Ditto the highway guys and gals in New Mexico having to put 'USA' on their license plates to assure some people that that car IS registered in the USA.

Mike

[hobsini2]

I like my control cities to be cities. Not states, countries, or bridges.

I like my control cities for 2dis to be relatively well-known.  Generally, the top three cities of any state or a state capital.  Cities that are nationally known are best, if practical (and in many cases they are).

I also prefer that for 3dis that lead to 2dis also use the well-known cities, as opposed to suburbs where practical.  But obviously, there is a need to take a case by case approach for these.  US routes and state routes are likely to use more local cities, but depending on the location could also use the larger cities as well, especially if they are essntially in place of interstates for a corridor.

I know that many states want to use their own cities even if they do not fit with the above, so I am also in favor of signing two control cities where practical.  Obviously, there will be some signs where if every direction has two controls there would be some information overload, but I think generally the occasional pull-through with two controls would be good.

Control cities should be signed and not changed until you reach that control city.  If the control city is relatively small, you can begin signing the next control at the city limits, but for larger cites, you should guide people downtown before guiding people to the next control city.  [In many of our larger cities, especially those on rivers, downtown is right at the city limit coming from one direction, so this wouldn't apply in that direction.]

So how do I apply this to some of the recent discussions?

I think in general, using 3 cities and the state capital is a good start. However, I think that it would greatly depend on the state. For instance, there's no reason why Rhode Island needs another in state control but Providence vs a state like Montana should have Billings, Butte, Missoula, Helena and Great Falls used. Maybe Bozeman.  Maybe a good reference point would be something like the US map used at the beginning of the RMcN Atlas? Although no one in their right mind would use "Sunbury, PA" which is used but State College and Williamsport are not.

The status between primary and secondary would vary per highway. Also, when there are no real legitimately acceptable controls after the last city, use a major city in the next state. Maybe a tiered approach should be used.

[US20IL64]

In Chicago area, "Indiana" is perfect for points east. Also, most are not going to South Bend specifically. Once past IN border, then there are signs for I-65 to Indy and I-94 to Detroit, etc.

"...should be replaced with..." No need to spend valuable tax money for this, we are fine.

[Flint1979]

Most of the traffic heading south and east out of Chicago where Indiana is the control city is going to I-65 to head toward Indy and I-94 to head toward Detroit not even reaching South Bend.

[NWI_Irish96]

In Chicago area, "Indiana" is perfect for points east. Also, most are not going to South Bend specifically. Once past IN border, then there are signs for I-65 to Indy and I-94 to Detroit, etc.

"...should be replaced with..." No need to spend valuable tax money for this, we are fine.

Most of the traffic heading south and east out of Chicago where Indiana is the control city is going to I-65 to head toward Indy and I-94 to head toward Detroit not even reaching South Bend.

"Indiana" as a control destination has to be one of the most-discussed ones on this board. There's no perfect answer.

Gary would be the most accurate as that's where the traffic all goes before splitting off amongst I-65, I-94 and the Toll Road, but Gary has such a poor image nobody wants that on a sign.

Signing all of Detroit, South Bend and Indianapolis is probably the most helpful but would get very cluttered.

Indiana remains the least bad option. Yes it's vague, but everybody is going to or through Indiana so it gets you there and then once to you get to Gary the signs can get more specific.