Control Cities

[Zeffy]

An interesting one I just noticed is "Solebury PA" on US 202 south in Raritan. This is the only time you see Solebury mentioned, because after that, it's replaced with Trenton (presumably because of NJ 31's concurrency with US 202). IMO, I think that New Hope or Doylestown would've worked better here.

And then there is this interesting use of Philadelphia, for reasons I can't really think of (sure, NJ 179 goes to NJ 29 which leads to I-95, but NJ 31 also leads there as well...)

[noelbotevera]

An interesting one I just noticed is "Solebury PA" on US 202 south in Raritan. This is the only time you see Solebury mentioned, because after that, it's replaced with Trenton (presumably because of NJ 31's concurrency with US 202). IMO, I think that New Hope or Doylestown would've worked better here.

And then there is this interesting use of Philadelphia, for reasons I can't really think of (sure, NJ 179 goes to NJ 29 which leads to I-95, but NJ 31 also leads there as well...)

Solebury PA is pretty much the distance to the state line. Sure, they could've gone with Philadelphia...
Philadelphia being used on NJ 179 reflects it as being old NJ 29. The suitable reason I can think of here would be that NJ 29 is a better route to head towards Trenton and ultimately, Philadelphia, not NJ 31, and since NJ 29 ends at I-295/I-195, one can take I-295 to I-95 over the Scudder Falls Bridge a couple miles northeast of Philly.

[jeffandnicole]

I would think that the intended purpose of 'Philadelphia' is to direct motorists down 179 to 202, which is the first major junction shortly after this fork and would lead a motorist directly into PA, although as Zeffy hinted, one has to wonder how many motorists here are really looking for Philadelphia.

Looking at GSV, there's barely anything at that 179/202 junction, including route signs informing you of which lane to be in for 179 or 202, much less any control/destination cities present.

[mwb1848]

I truly love far-flung, large city control cities, e.g., Tampa on I-75 in Atlanta. I detest insignificant ones, e.g., Bay St. Louis on I-10 in Louisiana (Even Mississippi doesn't use it).

So I was thrilled within the last few years, when this Clearview signage went up along US 277 south of Del Rio. Seen here courtesy of Google Street View:



It uses El Paso as the control city for Loop 79 around Del Rio. However, as far as I can tell, it's the only mention of El Paso on the entire Loop 79 system. At intersections with US 277 and US 90 TxDOT uses Sonora and Comstock, respectively, as control cities. Meaning motorists have no clear follow-up on what TxDOT's preferred route is: Loop 79 to US 277 to I-10 or Loop 79 to US 90 to I-10. As far as I know, you don't encounter El Paso as a control city on US 90 until you get past Marfa.

[Zeffy]

These two have always piqued my interest:
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.2542056,-74.8535073,3a,30.9y,330.13h,102.5t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sJDbUkdU1pjUtajK9GJBXNQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

If you ask me, this is how control cities should work, pointing to the next important cities along the route's path and not skipping over any  in favor of bigger ones.

[The Nature Boy]

Speaking of skipping important cities, does anyone know why I-93 North's control city in the Boston area is Concord and not Manchester?

[noelbotevera]

Speaking of skipping important cities, does anyone know why I-93 North's control city in the Boston area is Concord and not Manchester?

My theory is that all NB and SB traffic is on I-93 between the Everett and I-89 junction. Concord is the meeting place, so if anyone wants to return to Boston via the Everett or head towards Burlington/White River Junction in Vermont, they do so in Concord. Also, a ton EB/WB US routes collide in Concord for connections to Portland, Maine, or the beaches in Portsmouth, and doubles as a connection to I-95 (via US 4).

These two have always piqued my interest:
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.2542056,-74.8535073,3a,30.9y,330.13h,102.5t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sJDbUkdU1pjUtajK9GJBXNQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

If you ask me, this is how control cities should work, pointing to the next important cities along the route's path and not skipping over any  in favor of bigger ones.

Most people that are out of staters would be confused by using Trenton, as Trenton is reached via US 1. New York works here because that's the next city in the Northeast Megalopolis and is the next city where I-95 ACTUALLY enters it, and is probably where people would go at this point.

[Zeffy]

Most people that are out of staters would be confused by using Trenton, as Trenton is reached via US 1. New York works here because that's the next city in the Northeast Megalopolis and is the next city where I-95 ACTUALLY enters it, and is probably where people would go at this point.

But I-95 (future I-295) provides access to both Ewing and Hamilton Townships, the two main suburbs of Trenton. Also, there are exits for NJ 29, NJ 31, US 206 and US 1, all of which go directly into Trenton. It also forms a 3/4 beltway (along with I-295) around Trenton, which is why Trenton is signed here. Plus, the next city in the Northeast Megalopolis is Newark (at least in my opinion, considering it has a population of 270K). 

[The Nature Boy]

Speaking of skipping important cities, does anyone know why I-93 North's control city in the Boston area is Concord and not Manchester?

My theory is that all NB and SB traffic is on I-93 between the Everett and I-89 junction. Concord is the meeting place, so if anyone wants to return to Boston via the Everett or head towards Burlington/White River Junction in Vermont, they do so in Concord. Also, a ton EB/WB US routes collide in Concord for connections to Portland, Maine, or the beaches in Portsmouth, and doubles as a connection to I-95 (via US 4).

But Concord only really works because of the I-89 junction. If I were going to Maine or the New Hampshire Seacoast, I'd just continue on I-95 north. That is a fair point though that Concord works because it is a junction for a lot of different routes to different parts of Northern New England.

I do wonder if there would be a logical way to sign that I-93 north is the best way to Vermont. Maybe a LGS would get that point across.

[noelbotevera]

Speaking of skipping important cities, does anyone know why I-93 North's control city in the Boston area is Concord and not Manchester?

My theory is that all NB and SB traffic is on I-93 between the Everett and I-89 junction. Concord is the meeting place, so if anyone wants to return to Boston via the Everett or head towards Burlington/White River Junction in Vermont, they do so in Concord. Also, a ton EB/WB US routes collide in Concord for connections to Portland, Maine, or the beaches in Portsmouth, and doubles as a connection to I-95 (via US 4).

But Concord only really works because of the I-89 junction. If I were going to Maine or the New Hampshire Seacoast, I'd just continue on I-95 north. That is a fair point though that Concord works because it is a junction for a lot of different routes to different parts of Northern New England.

I do wonder if there would be a logical way to sign that I-93 north is the best way to Vermont. Maybe a LGS would get that point across.

No, it seems signs favor I-89 as the control city is White River Junction. I-93 gets Littleton and Plymouth north of Concord.

[The Nature Boy]

Speaking of skipping important cities, does anyone know why I-93 North's control city in the Boston area is Concord and not Manchester?

My theory is that all NB and SB traffic is on I-93 between the Everett and I-89 junction. Concord is the meeting place, so if anyone wants to return to Boston via the Everett or head towards Burlington/White River Junction in Vermont, they do so in Concord. Also, a ton EB/WB US routes collide in Concord for connections to Portland, Maine, or the beaches in Portsmouth, and doubles as a connection to I-95 (via US 4).

But Concord only really works because of the I-89 junction. If I were going to Maine or the New Hampshire Seacoast, I'd just continue on I-95 north. That is a fair point though that Concord works because it is a junction for a lot of different routes to different parts of Northern New England.

I do wonder if there would be a logical way to sign that I-93 north is the best way to Vermont. Maybe a LGS would get that point across.

No, it seems signs favor I-89 as the control city is White River Junction. I-93 gets Littleton north of Concord.

I meant Concord, NH as the control city for I-93 north in the Boston area. Both of those control cities make sense for I-93 north of Concord. For those coming from Boston, I-93 north is the best way to get to Vermont since it leads to I-89.

[Pete from Boston]

Speaking of skipping important cities, does anyone know why I-93 North's control city in the Boston area is Concord and not Manchester?

My theory is that all NB and SB traffic is on I-93 between the Everett and I-89 junction. Concord is the meeting place, so if anyone wants to return to Boston via the Everett or head towards Burlington/White River Junction in Vermont, they do so in Concord. Also, a ton EB/WB US routes collide in Concord for connections to Portland, Maine, or the beaches in Portsmouth, and doubles as a connection to I-95 (via US 4).

Route 3 is also the primary route to Manchester for a lot of people.  There could be an issue of avoiding confusion there.  Of course, 3 is signed for Nashua.  Manchester can't catch a break.

But Concord only really works because of the I-89 junction. If I were going to Maine or the New Hampshire Seacoast, I'd just continue on I-95 north. That is a fair point though that Concord works because it is a junction for a lot of different routes to different parts of Northern New England.

I do wonder if there would be a logical way to sign that I-93 north is the best way to Vermont. Maybe a LGS would get that point across.

Best route to Vermont from where?  Vermont is not all way up north.  89 gets me to quite a bit of it better, as does 91.

[noelbotevera]

At least it isn't Reading. The Charlestown High Bridge used Reading on I-93. Really?

[The Nature Boy]

Speaking of skipping important cities, does anyone know why I-93 North's control city in the Boston area is Concord and not Manchester?

My theory is that all NB and SB traffic is on I-93 between the Everett and I-89 junction. Concord is the meeting place, so if anyone wants to return to Boston via the Everett or head towards Burlington/White River Junction in Vermont, they do so in Concord. Also, a ton EB/WB US routes collide in Concord for connections to Portland, Maine, or the beaches in Portsmouth, and doubles as a connection to I-95 (via US 4).

Route 3 is also the primary route to Manchester for a lot of people.  There could be an issue of avoiding confusion there.  Of course, 3 is signed for Nashua.  Manchester can't catch a break.

But Concord only really works because of the I-89 junction. If I were going to Maine or the New Hampshire Seacoast, I'd just continue on I-95 north. That is a fair point though that Concord works because it is a junction for a lot of different routes to different parts of Northern New England.

I do wonder if there would be a logical way to sign that I-93 north is the best way to Vermont. Maybe a LGS would get that point across.

Best route to Vermont from where?  Vermont is not all way up north.  89 gets me to quite a bit of it better, as does 91.

I'm not disputing that, but to get to I-89 from Boston, you still need to take I-93 out of Massachusetts. If you're going to WRJ, Montpelier or Burlington however, I-93 is the best route out of Eastern Massachusetts. I concede that if you're going to southern Vermont, you could avoid I-93 altogether. I'm not a huge fan of statewide control cities (see: my dislike of the usage of "NH-Maine" by MassDOT in other spots) so I'd probably just put "Best Route to White River Junction, VT" on a LGS somewhere.

And yeah, I don't understand why Manchester is ignored by MassDOT.

[Pete from Boston]

At least it isn't Reading. The Charlestown High Bridge used Reading on I-93. Really?

I-93 and Mass. 128/I-95 meet in Reading.  Using junction locations is not uncommon.

[noelbotevera]

At least it isn't Reading. The Charlestown High Bridge used Reading on I-93. Really?

I-93 and Mass. 128/I-95 meet in Reading.  Using junction locations is not uncommon.

Ah. I thought they only met near Dedham.

[PHLBOS]

At least it isn't Reading. The Charlestown High Bridge used Reading on I-93. Really?

IIRC, it was used in alongside a more distant control city... Concord, NH.

It's worth noting that prior to the 1990s; Salem, NH was used as a northbound I-93 destination on signs from Boston to the NH state line along with Lawrence.

[roadman65]

An interesting one I just noticed is "Solebury PA" on US 202 south in Raritan. This is the only time you see Solebury mentioned, because after that, it's replaced with Trenton (presumably because of NJ 31's concurrency with US 202). IMO, I think that New Hope or Doylestown would've worked better here.

And then there is this interesting use of Philadelphia, for reasons I can't really think of (sure, NJ 179 goes to NJ 29 which leads to I-95, but NJ 31 also leads there as well...)

Its the Old York Road, that Philadelphia is being used for in Ringoes.  NJ 179 (old US 202) to US 202, then PA 263 to PA 611.

At least it isn't Reading. The Charlestown High Bridge used Reading on I-93. Really?

I-93 and Mass. 128/I-95 meet in Reading.  Using junction locations is not uncommon.

Benson, NC and Hazleton, PA for example.  Both have two interstates intersect at each and both could use more prominent destinations along the routes that use those two places in their areas, but do not and use these two respectively.

[PHLBOS]

I-93 and Mass. 128/I-95 meet in Reading.  Using junction locations is not uncommon.

That interchange is just barely in Reading.  The westernmost interchange ramps actually cross into Woburn.

[roadman65]

I-93 and Mass. 128/I-95 meet in Reading.  Using junction locations is not uncommon.

That interchange is just barely in Reading.  The westernmost interchange ramps actually cross into Woburn.

I-80 is miles away from Hazleton, PA and is used.  Like all areas of PA, no unincorporated areas, so the I-80 freeway must pass through another city or township as well.

Then Ashland, KY is the best example of a city used as control city that the road does not go to, meaning I-64.  Huntington, WV is nearby and practically on the interstate, but does not get mention leaving Lexington, KY eastbound.

Also I noticed that NYCDOT removed both Jersey City and Perth Amboy from guide signs along NY 440 on Staten Island. Considering that they replaced "Perth Amboy" with " New Jersey" once again, and "Jersey City" once more with "Bayonne Bridge" to comply with the MUTCD standards, this is absurd.  The nearby NJT finally had to ditch the neat arrows and overhead signs for the standard signs, and here NYCDOT goes MUTCD and then later changes back to their own way of signing.

[rellimsukram]

I have been on Indiana/Ohio Turnpike/Toll Road twice the last week and I have noticed i do not agree with some of the control cities.
First, What is up with thru traffic on the turnpike, why is it that and not like Chicago, or Cleveland or Toledo or whatever
Second, why is the control city for going east in Indiana just Ohio, It should at least be Toledo if not Cleveland
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

There are some other control cities that bother me as well in this area

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.
If your going to make the toll road heading east in Indianas control city ohio, make i69 north past Fort Wayne be Michigan, Lansing being a control city 100 plus miles away, and Toledo not being on the toll road is a head scratcher.

That is about it, I could talk for days about control cities, but these are just a few

[SignGeek101]

One problem with control cities would be cities listed that you're already in. For example, saying {I-95} NORTH New York, when you're already in New York (this is an example and I'm not saying there is an example in New York for that).

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).

[roadman65]

Florida uses Jacksonville for some I-95 ramps that are located inside the Jacksonville City Limits.  That would be the best example for that one.

[TravelingBethelite]

Connecticut used to use 'N.Y. State' on BGS's around Danbury. I'm glad they changed it a few years back to Newburgh, the logical choice. Though west of Newburgh, NYSDOT should use Port Jervis and PADOT, use it east of Scranton Milford. But do they? Nooooo... 

[Rothman]

Port Jervis is a dinky town not worth mentioning.