Control Cities

[Charles2]

I've never quite understood why ALDOT uses Gadsden as a control city on I-59 north of Birmingham, while both Tennessee and Georgia use Birmingham as the control city on WB I-24 and SB I-59.

Control cities on I-55 in Mississippi are especially maddening.  Just my 2 cents, but IMHO they should use New Orleans, Jackson and Memphis.  Instead, at Jackson, the control cities are McComb for SB I-55 and Grenada for NB I-55.  Never quite understood that one.

[cbeach40]

My other problem with control cities would just be 'vague' control cities. Here is one below:

Another example would be 'Bridge to U.S.A.' (or vise versa).

How is that vague? A single bridge is a lot more specific than a big city. 

In all seriousness, I can understand the logic of signing beyond the frontier, but for the average road user that style of signage makes more sense. If there's only one crossing in the vicinity, then it makes much more sense to sign the fact that it's an international border than to sign a destination beyond that border. Once people are over the bridge, destination signage on that other side will direct people.

[Pete from Boston]

My other problem with control cities would just be 'vague' control cities. Here is one below:

Another example would be 'Bridge to U.S.A.' (or vise versa).

How is that vague? A single bridge is a lot more specific than a big city. 

In all seriousness, I can understand the logic of signing beyond the frontier, but for the average road user that style of signage makes more sense. If there's only one crossing in the vicinity, then it makes much more sense to sign the fact that it's an international border than to sign a destination beyond that border. Once people are over the bridge, destination signage on that other side will direct people.

There are places around Montréal where signs say "New York" or "Vermont," and places where they say "U.S.A." 

The latter (and my lousy memory for them), at a point where two roads to the United States meet, have caused me to make more than one wrong turn.

[Pete from Boston]

My other problem with control cities would just be 'vague' control cities. Here is one below:

Another example would be 'Bridge to U.S.A.' (or vise versa).

How is that vague? A single bridge is a lot more specific than a big city. 

In all seriousness, I can understand the logic of signing beyond the frontier, but for the average road user that style of signage makes more sense. If there's only one crossing in the vicinity, then it makes much more sense to sign the fact that it's an international border than to sign a destination beyond that border. Once people are over the bridge, destination signage on that other side will direct people.

There are places around Montréal where signs say "New York" or "Vermont," and places where they say "U.S.A." 

The latter (and my lousy memory for them), at a point where two roads to the United States meet, have caused me to make more than one wrong turn.

[roadman65]

Port Jervis is a dinky town not worth mentioning.

So is Milford, but on I-84 east of Scranton (and on I-81) its that.  Newburgh should be used right from there.  Scranton should be used from NY 17 instead of Port Jervis as well ( on I-84 for WB NY 17 Binghamton is used)as even the new signs on the NYS Thruway use Scranton since the new Exit 17 congfiguration completed.

I hate that NYCDOT is going back to using "New Jersey" as a control city for the Outerbridge Crossing despite the MUTCD stating against using state names.  For a while Perth Amboy was being used and the same for the other end of NY 440 on Staten Island where they removed Bayonne Bridge for Jersey City and now went back to it.

As a former resident of New Jersey I always found it insulting that NY (both city and state) would use our entire state name for control city instead of respecting the fact we too, like everyone else, have cities within our borders. When I seen Perth Amboy on the West Shore Expressway it made me happy to see respect to our state for once, as outsiders seem to fail to realize that we are not a city, but a state full of cities, towns, etc!

[TravelingBethelite]

Port Jervis is a dinky town not worth mentioning.

So is Milford, but on I-84 east of Scranton (and on I-81) its that.  Newburgh should be used right from there.  Scranton should be used from NY 17 instead of Port Jervis as well ( on I-84 for WB NY 17 Binghamton is used)as even the new signs on the NYS Thruway use Scranton since the new Exit 17 congfiguration completed.

When looking at said sign, I noticed there is a "green" out (actually white out  ) of what I assume is [going to be] the I-86 shield: https://www.google.com/maps/@41.451012,-74.363793,3a,75y,238.13h,77.2t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sxKgfusbu9Tkoa0qYgYfJ-w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1

[akotchi]

Port Jervis is a dinky town not worth mentioning.

So is Milford, but on I-84 east of Scranton (and on I-81) its that.  Newburgh should be used right from there.  Scranton should be used from NY 17 instead of Port Jervis as well ( on I-84 for WB NY 17 Binghamton is used)as even the new signs on the NYS Thruway use Scranton since the new Exit 17 congfiguration completed.

I hate that NYCDOT is going back to using "New Jersey" as a control city for the Outerbridge Crossing despite the MUTCD stating against using state names.  For a while Perth Amboy was being used and the same for the other end of NY 440 on Staten Island where they removed Bayonne Bridge for Jersey City and now went back to it.

As a former resident of New Jersey I always found it insulting that NY (both city and state) would use our entire state name for control city instead of respecting the fact we too, like everyone else, have cities within our borders. When I seen Perth Amboy on the West Shore Expressway it made me happy to see respect to our state for once, as outsiders seem to fail to realize that we are not a city, but a state full of cities, towns, etc!

. . . and yet your state, with its cities and towns, still uses Pennsylvania in some places for destination signing for I-95 South and I-78 West leaving the state.

As a current resident of Pennsylvania . . . oh, never mind.   

[TravelingBethelite]

Port Jervis is a dinky town not worth mentioning.

And yet, here it is on a mileage sign west of NY 17/Future I-86:
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.4341716,-74.3848682,3a,75y,222.25h,83.56t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sjiLNe1f8pv3roLXjdOfTdQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1

[Rothman]

Port Jervis is a dinky town not worth mentioning.

And yet, here it is on a mileage sign west of NY 17/Future I-86:
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.4341716,-74.3848682,3a,75y,222.25h,83.56t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sjiLNe1f8pv3roLXjdOfTdQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1

Lots of little dinky towns end up on mileage signs. 

[hbelkins]

I've never quite understood why ALDOT uses Gadsden as a control city on I-59 north of Birmingham, while both Tennessee and Georgia use Birmingham as the control city on WB I-24 and SB I-59.

Control cities on I-55 in Mississippi are especially maddening.  Just my 2 cents, but IMHO they should use New Orleans, Jackson and Memphis.  Instead, at Jackson, the control cities are McComb for SB I-55 and Grenada for NB I-55.  Never quite understood that one.

I think some states tend to promote their own cities vs. cities in other states.

[roadman65]

Port Jervis is a dinky town not worth mentioning.

So is Milford, but on I-84 east of Scranton (and on I-81) its that.  Newburgh should be used right from there.  Scranton should be used from NY 17 instead of Port Jervis as well ( on I-84 for WB NY 17 Binghamton is used)as even the new signs on the NYS Thruway use Scranton since the new Exit 17 congfiguration completed.

I hate that NYCDOT is going back to using "New Jersey" as a control city for the Outerbridge Crossing despite the MUTCD stating against using state names.  For a while Perth Amboy was being used and the same for the other end of NY 440 on Staten Island where they removed Bayonne Bridge for Jersey City and now went back to it.

As a former resident of New Jersey I always found it insulting that NY (both city and state) would use our entire state name for control city instead of respecting the fact we too, like everyone else, have cities within our borders. When I seen Perth Amboy on the West Shore Expressway it made me happy to see respect to our state for once, as outsiders seem to fail to realize that we are not a city, but a state full of cities, towns, etc!

. . . and yet your state, with its cities and towns, still uses Pennsylvania in some places for destination signing for I-95 South and I-78 West leaving the state.

As a current resident of Pennsylvania . . . oh, never mind.   

I agree with you on that one like on I-95 in certain places in Mercer County, and even for US 322 on US 130 in Bridgeport. Chester is a big enough city even for NJ residents and Philly should be used both in NJ and MD.  The latter another story as MDSHA likes New York over Philadelphia.

  Oh yes and I-78 after Exit 3, although now Easton or Easton, PA made it on some new mileage signs on Exit 21A on I-287 replacing Clinton that was on that particular ramp for decades.    However, not as much as New Jersey appearing in New York State even the NYSTA uses the state name for the Garden State Parkway Exit 14A and also for I-287 in Suffern as the Exit 15 control city is "New Jersey."

[roadman65]

I've never quite understood why ALDOT uses Gadsden as a control city on I-59 north of Birmingham, while both Tennessee and Georgia use Birmingham as the control city on WB I-24 and SB I-59.

Control cities on I-55 in Mississippi are especially maddening.  Just my 2 cents, but IMHO they should use New Orleans, Jackson and Memphis.  Instead, at Jackson, the control cities are McComb for SB I-55 and Grenada for NB I-55.  Never quite understood that one.

I think some states tend to promote their own cities vs. cities in other states.

Like Ashland over Huntington in Kentucky for I-64 east of Lexington.

[jakeroot]

My other problem with control cities would just be 'vague' control cities. Here is one below:

I think they're okay if the terms themselves are common phrases. So in coastal regions, where the coast is often referred to as "the coast", using "the coast" would be acceptable. In the UK, "The North" and "The South" (et al) are common terms that are widely understood, albeit there is no legally defined "North" or "South" of England.

Now, granted, the UK doesn't use cardinal directions as widely as we do, so for a sign here in the US or Canada to read "the North" (or otherwise) would likely be redundant as routes are already signed with cardinal directions, but my point about vague control cities (or areas) remains.

[noelbotevera]

I-84 should be Hartford going EB - WB, use Wilkes-Barre.

[Pete from Boston]

I-84 should be Hartford going EB - WB, use Wilkes-Barre.

In Connecticut?  This is unlikely to be a significant enough destination for traffic there.  West of Newburgh I'd at least use Middletown first.  It's a big town and the major junction with Route 17 is there.

[Zeffy]

. . . and yet your state, with its cities and towns, still uses Pennsylvania in some places for destination signing for I-95 South and I-78 West leaving the state.

As a current resident of Pennsylvania . . . oh, never mind.   

I'm surprised they just sign "Penna" in lieu of Philadelphia, which is what the most logical control city would be, on I-95. That may change if there's a sign replacement project to whenever the Penn. Turnpike and I-95 interchange is complete, and I-95 is redesignated as I-295. 

[noelbotevera]

I-84 should be Hartford going EB - WB, use Wilkes-Barre.

In Connecticut?  This is unlikely to be a significant enough destination for traffic there.  West of Newburgh I'd at least use Middletown first.  It's a big town and the major junction with Route 17 is there.

Yup. Hartford CT. I mean it that far, and that's the one of the two major cities I-84 serves.

[Pete from Boston]

I-84 should be Hartford going EB - WB, use Wilkes-Barre.

In Connecticut?  This is unlikely to be a significant enough destination for traffic there.  West of Newburgh I'd at least use Middletown first.  It's a big town and the major junction with Route 17 is there.

Yup. Hartford CT. I mean it that far, and that's the one of the two major cities I-84 serves.

So, aside from the fact that even Waterbury and Danbury have twice the population of Wilkes-Barre, if it isn't serving the best needs of motorists on 84 East in Connecticut, it shouldn't be signed there.  This isn't Texas where a population center 200 miles away is a likely next destination for a great bulk of motorists.

[SignGeek101]

My other problem with control cities would just be 'vague' control cities. Here is one below:

Another example would be 'Bridge to U.S.A.' (or vise versa).

How is that vague? A single bridge is a lot more specific than a big city. 

In all seriousness, I can understand the logic of signing beyond the frontier, but for the average road user that style of signage makes more sense. If there's only one crossing in the vicinity, then it makes much more sense to sign the fact that it's an international border than to sign a destination beyond that border. Once people are over the bridge, destination signage on that other side will direct people.

I can't argue with that. Makes a lot of sense for sure. Provinces/states on both sides do the 'USA' or 'Canada' thing, and it works well.

I guess I just prefer to see cities, since many jurisdictions on both sides of the border use it. Washington State uses 'Vancouver B.C.', Montana uses 'Lethbridge' on I-15, North Dakota uses 'Winnipeg' on I-29, New Brunswick uses 'Houlton Me' on NB 95 and so on.

Like what was said above, maybe the state/provincial abbreviation would be better than just listing the city, like what Quebec does. Of course, I love seeing foreign shields on BGS's (ON 137 sign on ON 401), but that may actually make things confusing perhaps.

[The Nature Boy]

My favorite vague control city is on I-395 near Bangor, Maine. This is the best pic I could find.



Yes, that control city IS "All Points North and South" for I-95.

[Pete from Boston]

It's just too bad the other sign doesn't say "everywhere else."

[The Nature Boy]

It's just too bad the other sign doesn't say "everywhere else."

Well, every direction but east. But if you were going east, you'd turn around on I-395.

[TravelingBethelite]

I-84 should be Hartford going EB - WB, use Wilkes-Barre.

In Connecticut?  This is unlikely to be a significant enough destination for traffic there.  West of Newburgh I'd at least use Middletown first.  It's a big town and the major junction with Route 17 is there.

Yup. Hartford CT. I mean it that far, and that's the one of the two major cities I-84 serves.

So, aside from the fact that even Waterbury and Danbury have twice the population of Wilkes-Barre, if it isn't serving the best needs of motorists on 84 East in Connecticut, it shouldn't be signed there.  This isn't Texas where a population center 200 miles away is a likely next destination for a great bulk of motorists.

Danbury 80,893   
   Waterbury 110,366 (2010)
        Wilkes-Barre 41,108
Just to illustrate the point.

[jbnati27]

Third, I75 south's control city going south should either be Lima/Dayton or just Cincinnati. Why? Cause  Dayton isnt big enough to justify it being the control city over Cincinatti when its only like 30 minutes from it, idk maybe its ok, but if your gonna make it Dayton, at least include Lima or something thats a little closer

Well, Dayton is the sixth largest city in Ohio and there is a major junction with I-70 North of there. Going South from Toledo, Findlay is actually slightly bigger than Lima. Dayton has a population over 140,000 and Findlay and Lima are ~41,000 and ~38,000 respectively.

I70 east bothers the tar out of me, there are many reasons why it should not be Dayton with the main one being that it misses Dayton by like 10 miles, and Columbus is much bigger.

I see your point. This is actually a fairly recent change, and it made the news. Previously, the control city in Columbus for I-70 West was Indianapolis, and it was changed to be Dayton. Ironically, I-70 bisects the city of Dayton because Dayton annexed the Dayton International Airport. Downtown Dayton is 7 or 8 miles South of I-70 and the airport is North of I-70. At least I-70 does traverse the Northern portion of Montgomery County, where Dayton is the county seat, and goes through the Northern suburbs of Dayton.

[Brandon]

^^ At least Dayton is closer to I-70 than Chicago is to I-80.