Why do Minneapolis Freeway Signs Lack City Names?

[scatteredthunder]

Originally Posted by highlanderfil

Where in the U.S. are you seeing these???

https://www.aaroads.com/guides/i-080...des-moines-ia/

[jennifat]

I think another reason you see less of that here is simply due to the Twin Cities being out of the way for most interstate travellers crossing the country. Travelling East-West between Seattle and Boston, you would never need to pass through the Twin Cities at all. Likewise, the only city north of here is Duluth, which is a dead end for interstate traffic. No one from outside Minnesota, North Dakota, or Wisconsin would have any reason to take I-94 unless they're specifically going somewhere in those states.

Iowa is much more of a crossroads that's harder to avoid.

[RJ8089]

Originally Posted by scatteredthunder

We have interstate signs in Des Moines listing Minneapolis, Kansas City, Omaha, and Chicago. On those main signs, the only Iowa cities listed (that I recall) are Davenport and Council Bluffs. Maybe they need to be a certain size to be listed (so no Ames or Iowa City), and if you run into a big enough city, that’s what gets used.

I’ve seen the signs in Des Moines listing Minneapolis, but those signs listing Des Moines in Minneapolis are non existent. That’s what I’m talking about. The mileage isn’t a big thing, it should list the next major population center even if it is hundreds of miles away. Chicago has signs for Memphis which is hundreds of miles away, but that’s the major population center next on I-57.

[Teak]

Originally Posted by RJ8089

I’ve seen the signs in Des Moines listing Minneapolis, but those signs listing Des Moines in Minneapolis are non existent.

Well, that's because people in Des Moines WANT to go to Minneapolis someday, eventually. But people in Minneapolis don't really want or need to visit Des Moines, right?

[highlanderfil]

Originally Posted by scatteredthunder

https://www.aaroads.com/guides/i-080...des-moines-ia/

Cool. Is there an actual point to these signs or are they remnants of the times past when Google Maps weren't a thing?

[wamer27]

Originally Posted by jennifat

I think another reason you see less of that here is simply due to the Twin Cities being out of the way for most interstate travellers crossing the country. Travelling East-West between Seattle and Boston, you would never need to pass through the Twin Cities at all. Likewise, the only city north of here is Duluth, which is a dead end for interstate traffic. No one from outside Minnesota, North Dakota, or Wisconsin would have any reason to take I-94 unless they're specifically going somewhere in those states.

Iowa is much more of a crossroads that's harder to avoid.

It’s 116 miles closer and 2 hrs shorter going 94 out of Chicago thru us to get to Seattle. So whole East Coast would do that. I see it all the time on 694 with RV’s, travel trailers, semi’s…

It is weird that Des Moines isn’t listed where Albert Lea is. I know Madison is listed on 94/694 interchange near Woodbury. 494 and 35E/35W should have Des Moines not Albert Lea.

[jennifat]

Originally Posted by wamer27

It’s 116 miles closer and 2 hrs shorter going 94 out of Chicago thru us to get to Seattle. So whole East Coast would do that. I see it all the time on 694 with RV’s, travel trailers, semi’s…

According to Google Maps, it's 30 hours for both I-94 and I-90, but only 2,043 miles via I-90 from Chicago to Seattle vs. 2,063 miles if rerouted along I-94. I-94 is a longer route that takes the same amount of time.

[wamer27]

Originally Posted by jennifat

According to Google Maps, it's 30 hours for both I-94 and I-90, but only 2,043 miles via I-90 from Chicago to Seattle vs. 2,063 miles if rerouted along I-94. I-94 is a longer route that takes the same amount of time.

I see that, Apple Maps went I-80 to basically Salt Lake, then northwest…I used Pittsburgh as starting point. Follow Google Maps as you pointed out! Plus you get 80 mph speed limit across South Dakota and edge of Black Hills. Much better than MN and ND.