Large-enough cities passed over for control-city status

[hbelkins]

It's funny to see some of these towns like Yuma being passed over as control cities when some of these exist in Iowa:

US 218 and I-80- Mt. Pleasant, about 5,000 people, instead of St. Louis (which is technically not on 218 but is the quickest and most direct route from basically anywhere else in Iowa).

US 30 and I-35- Nevada (the town, not the state), about 4,000 people, instead of Marshalltown, nearly 30,000 or Cedar Rapids, about 130,000 people (and most of 30 is now 4 lanes between the two).

Chicago is mentioned in Des Moines on I-80 about as much as Davenport, despite being an entire state away.

Omaha is replacing Council Bluffs on a few signs in Des Moines as well, notably the 80/35 West Mixmaster. Also, I noticed in MO that 29 north of KC almost always mention St. Joe but 29 south of Council Bluffs in Iowa never do and mention KC instead.

For the most part, intersections between interstates and non-interstates are generally going to use local destinations as per MUTCD guidelines (nearest town or community on either side of the exit) as opposed to true control cities, which are intended to be major cities or the locations of interstate junctions (Wytheville, Va., anyone?) Often, a distant larger city will be posted as an auxiliary destination, but that's not always the case. The example I've used elsewhere is I-64 at US 23. It's signed for Louisa and Ashland, with Catlettsburg (the county seat of Boyd County) as an auxiliary. US 23 could reasonably be signed for several other distant towns/cities such as Chillicothe and Portsmouth to the north and Pikeville, Kingsport, Johnson City or even Asheville to the south. Yet the local towns are used.

[DTComposer]

Just as a reference, here are the 10 largest cities that are not on the AASHTO list of control cities:
1. San Jose (#10 - 1,026,908)
2. Fresno (#34 - 520,052)
3. Long Beach (#37 - 474,140)
4. Mesa (#38 - 471,825)
5. Virginia Beach (#41 - 452,745)
6. Oakland (#45 - 419,267)
7. Arlington (#50 - 388,125)
8. Bakersfield (#52 - 373,640)
9. Aurora (#54 - 359,407)
10. Anaheim (#56 - 350,742)

All of these make sense as they are either not on a 2di and/or are suburbs and/or are in the shadow of larger/better-known cities. A case could be made for Anaheim, since it is on I-5 and a significant tourist destination - but Santa Ana is the choice of AASHTO.

I also noted that the list, which has always included some of the longer 3dis, now has I-405 SB on the list with San Diego/Irvine. That combo is only signed just south of I-605 (relatively new signage), and the list doesn't include all the other cities that are used as controls (Sacramento, Santa Monica, LAX Airport, Long Beach).

http://scote.transportation.org/Pages/Interstate-Control-Cities.aspx

[Roadgeekteen]

Just as a reference, here are the 10 largest cities that are not on the AASHTO list of control cities:
1. San Jose (#10 - 1,026,908)
2. Fresno (#34 - 520,052)
3. Long Beach (#37 - 474,140)
4. Mesa (#38 - 471,825)
5. Virginia Beach (#41 - 452,745)
6. Oakland (#45 - 419,267)
7. Arlington (#50 - 388,125)
8. Bakersfield (#52 - 373,640)
9. Aurora (#54 - 359,407)
10. Anaheim (#56 - 350,742)

All of these make sense as they are either not on a 2di and/or are suburbs and/or are in the shadow of larger/better-known cities. A case could be made for Anaheim, since it is on I-5 and a significant tourist destination - but Santa Ana is the choice of AASHTO.

I also noted that the list, which has always included some of the longer 3dis, now has I-405 SB on the list with San Diego/Irvine. That combo is only signed just south of I-605 (relatively new signage), and the list doesn't include all the other cities that are used as controls (Sacramento, Santa Monica, LAX Airport, Long Beach).

http://scote.transportation.org/Pages/Interstate-Control-Cities.aspx

Manchester NH?

[hotdogPi]

Just as a reference, here are the 10 largest cities that are not on the AASHTO list of control cities:
1. San Jose (#10 - 1,026,908)
2. Fresno (#34 - 520,052)
3. Long Beach (#37 - 474,140)
4. Mesa (#38 - 471,825)
5. Virginia Beach (#41 - 452,745)
6. Oakland (#45 - 419,267)
7. Arlington (#50 - 388,125)
8. Bakersfield (#52 - 373,640)
9. Aurora (#54 - 359,407)
10. Anaheim (#56 - 350,742)

All of these make sense as they are either not on a 2di and/or are suburbs and/or are in the shadow of larger/better-known cities. A case could be made for Anaheim, since it is on I-5 and a significant tourist destination - but Santa Ana is the choice of AASHTO.

I also noted that the list, which has always included some of the longer 3dis, now has I-405 SB on the list with San Diego/Irvine. That combo is only signed just south of I-605 (relatively new signage), and the list doesn't include all the other cities that are used as controls (Sacramento, Santa Monica, LAX Airport, Long Beach).

http://scote.transportation.org/Pages/Interstate-Control-Cities.aspx

Manchester NH?

In Massachusetts, Manchester NH is skipped and shouldn't be, but it's only slightly above 100000 people, so it's not on the top 10 list.

[Roadgeekteen]

Just as a reference, here are the 10 largest cities that are not on the AASHTO list of control cities:
1. San Jose (#10 - 1,026,908)
2. Fresno (#34 - 520,052)
3. Long Beach (#37 - 474,140)
4. Mesa (#38 - 471,825)
5. Virginia Beach (#41 - 452,745)
6. Oakland (#45 - 419,267)
7. Arlington (#50 - 388,125)
8. Bakersfield (#52 - 373,640)
9. Aurora (#54 - 359,407)
10. Anaheim (#56 - 350,742)

All of these make sense as they are either not on a 2di and/or are suburbs and/or are in the shadow of larger/better-known cities. A case could be made for Anaheim, since it is on I-5 and a significant tourist destination - but Santa Ana is the choice of AASHTO.

I also noted that the list, which has always included some of the longer 3dis, now has I-405 SB on the list with San Diego/Irvine. That combo is only signed just south of I-605 (relatively new signage), and the list doesn't include all the other cities that are used as controls (Sacramento, Santa Monica, LAX Airport, Long Beach).

http://scote.transportation.org/Pages/Interstate-Control-Cities.aspx

Manchester NH?

In Massachusetts, Manchester NH is skipped and shouldn't be, but it's only slightly above 100000 people, so it's not on the top 10 list.

The size of those suburbs are a lot bigger than I thought.

[iowahighways]

It's funny to see some of these towns like Yuma being passed over as control cities when some of these exist in Iowa:

US 218 and I-80- Mt. Pleasant, about 5,000 people, instead of St. Louis (which is technically not on 218 but is the quickest and most direct route from basically anywhere else in Iowa).

US 30 and I-35- Nevada (the town, not the state), about 4,000 people, instead of Marshalltown, nearly 30,000 or Cedar Rapids, about 130,000 people (and most of 30 is now 4 lanes between the two).

Those control cities date back to when most of US 30 and US 218 were still two lanes. Another example is US 61 at I-80, which list Eldridge and De Witt (both of which have around 5,000 people apiece) instead of Dubuque, which is more than ten times larger -- but signage at that interchange dates back from when the four-lane ended at De Witt.

[JJBers]

I'm pretty sure that I-384 skips over a lot of control cities for Providence, which is nearly 60 miles away.

[Roadgeekteen]

I'm pretty sure that I-384 skips over a lot of control cities for Providence, which is nearly 60 miles away.

What city of importance is skipped over?

[JJBers]

I'm pretty sure that I-384 skips over a lot of control cities for Providence, which is nearly 60 miles away.

What city of importance is skipped over?

Not the largest cities, but it skims Willimantic, and cuts through Danielson. I was really calling out the fact that it uses a control city that the highway ends nowhere near.

[PHLBOS]

I'm pretty sure that I-384 skips over a lot of control cities for Providence, which is nearly 60 miles away.

What city of importance is skipped over?

Not the largest cities, but it skims Willimantic, and cuts through Danielson. I was really calling out the fact that it uses a control city that the highway ends nowhere near.

The listing of Providence for I-384 eastbound dates back to when I-84 was originally planned to use that corridor and extend to Providence (the current I-84 east of there was I-86). 

Even though the extension has long since canned; the continued usage of Providence is justified because I-384 to US 6 is the most direct route to between the two metropolitan areas.

[JJBers]

I'm pretty sure that I-384 skips over a lot of control cities for Providence, which is nearly 60 miles away.

What city of importance is skipped over?

Not the largest cities, but it skims Willimantic, and cuts through Danielson. I was really calling out the fact that it uses a control city that the highway ends nowhere near.

The listing of Providence for I-384 eastbound dates back to when I-84 was originally planned to use that corridor and extend to Providence (the current I-84 east of there was I-86). 

Even though the extension has long since canned; the continued usage of Providence is justified because I-384 to US 6 is the most direct route to between the two metropolitan areas.

The oddest thing; at the end, US 6 has the control cities of Willimantic and Providence, while US 44 has the control cites of Coventry and Mansfield. Those are used instead of Putnam, or any other major town.
It also uses UCONN in some signage.

[Roadgeekteen]

I'm pretty sure that I-384 skips over a lot of control cities for Providence, which is nearly 60 miles away.

What city of importance is skipped over?

Not the largest cities, but it skims Willimantic, and cuts through Danielson. I was really calling out the fact that it uses a control city that the highway ends nowhere near.

The listing of Providence for I-384 eastbound dates back to when I-84 was originally planned to use that corridor and extend to Providence (the current I-84 east of there was I-86). 

Even though the extension has long since canned; the continued usage of Providence is justified because I-384 to US 6 is the most direct route to between the two metropolitan areas.

I think I recall Ct 101 being quicker, but I might be wrong.

[PHLBOS]

Even though the extension has long since canned; the continued usage of Providence is justified because I-384 to US 6 is the most direct route to between the two metropolitan areas.

I think I recall Ct 101 being quicker, but I might be wrong.

One needs to use US 44 in order to get from I-384 to CT 101.

[JJBers]

Even though the extension has long since canned; the continued usage of Providence is justified because I-384 to US 6 is the most direct route to between the two metropolitan areas.

I think I recall Ct 101 being quicker, but I might be wrong.

One needs to use US 44 in order to get from I-384 to CT 101.

CT 101 is actually just slightly slower than US 6. At least without traffic.

[Roadgeekteen]

Even though the extension has long since canned; the continued usage of Providence is justified because I-384 to US 6 is the most direct route to between the two metropolitan areas.

I think I recall Ct 101 being quicker, but I might be wrong.

One needs to use US 44 in order to get from I-384 to CT 101.

CT 101 is actually just slightly slower than US 6. At least without traffic.

Google maps says one min faster to take Ct 101 when I found directions at 8-9ish am.

[GaryV]

I was really calling out the fact that it uses a control city that the highway ends nowhere near.

You mean like in Metro Detroit?

I-696 uses Port Huron and Lansing - you've got a good number of miles past the end of I-696 to get to either.

I-275 is even worse.  Toledo SB, OK, again there's a number of miles before you get there.  NB it uses Flint - not only is that a distance away from the end at Novi/Farmington, you have to take 2 other highways to get to Flint from there.

[JJBers]

Even though the extension has long since canned; the continued usage of Providence is justified because I-384 to US 6 is the most direct route to between the two metropolitan areas.

I think I recall Ct 101 being quicker, but I might be wrong.

One needs to use US 44 in order to get from I-384 to CT 101.

CT 101 is actually just slightly slower than US 6. At least without traffic.

Google maps says one min faster to take Ct 101 when I found directions at 8-9ish am.

Huh...I think it might be just a tiny difference then.

[briantroutman]

I-696 uses Port Huron and Lansing

I-275 is even worse.  Toledo SB, NB it uses Flint

Perhaps "Flint"  is a remnant of the original plan to connect I-275 with I-75 between Pontiac and Flint? If that link had been built, Flint would make sense.

Flint notwithstanding, this is the correct way to do it as far as I'm concerned. Ohio follows a similar practice: For example, I-675 around Dayton is signed Cincinnati southbound and Columbus northbound.

I'd rather see this practice used in my area. I-476 should be signed Wilmington southbound and Allentown northbound, not Plymouth Meeting and Chester.

[RobbieL2415]

I'm pretty sure that I-384 skips over a lot of control cities for Providence, which is nearly 60 miles away.

What city of importance is skipped over?

Not the largest cities, but it skims Willimantic, and cuts through Danielson. I was really calling out the fact that it uses a control city that the highway ends nowhere near.

The listing of Providence for I-384 eastbound dates back to when I-84 was originally planned to use that corridor and extend to Providence (the current I-84 east of there was I-86). 

Even though the extension has long since canned; the continued usage of Providence is justified because I-384 to US 6 is the most direct route to between the two metropolitan areas.

And Providence should still be the control city as that's the most direct route to take from that point on I-84.  Whether you take US 6 or US 44 to CT 101 I don't care. 

[Roadgeekteen]

I'm pretty sure that I-384 skips over a lot of control cities for Providence, which is nearly 60 miles away.

What city of importance is skipped over?

Not the largest cities, but it skims Willimantic, and cuts through Danielson. I was really calling out the fact that it uses a control city that the highway ends nowhere near.

The listing of Providence for I-384 eastbound dates back to when I-84 was originally planned to use that corridor and extend to Providence (the current I-84 east of there was I-86). 

Even though the extension has long since canned; the continued usage of Providence is justified because I-384 to US 6 is the most direct route to between the two metropolitan areas.

And Providence should still be the control city as that's the most direct route to take from that point on I-84.  Whether you take US 6 or US 44 to CT 101 I don't care.

Maybe say both ways go there.

[amroad17]

I-696 uses Port Huron and Lansing

I-275 is even worse.  Toledo SB, NB it uses Flint

Perhaps "Flint"  is a remnant of the original plan to connect I-275 with I-75 between Pontiac and Flint? If that link had been built, Flint would make sense.

Flint notwithstanding, this is the correct way to do it as far as I'm concerned. Ohio follows a similar practice: For example, I-675 around Dayton is signed Cincinnati southbound and Columbus northbound.

I'd rather see this practice used in my area. I-476 should be signed Wilmington southbound and Allentown northbound, not Plymouth Meeting and Chester.

I have always thought that I-476 should be signed for Allentown and Scranton northbound.  Allentown would be overlayed over Plymouth and Scranton overlayed over Meeting--or a new sign could be put up.  Southbound, Chester is OK, but at the I-76/I-476 interchange, Wilmington should be mentioned.

[US 89]

In SLC, the I-15 south control is Las Vegas. IMO, if you're going to use Ogden for 15 north, you should use Provo for 15 south. (In fact, Provo is used for the 215 west belt.) And past there, St George should be used since that metro area actually has a population of 156K.

[PHLBOS]

I'd rather see this practice used in my area. I-476 should be signed Wilmington southbound and Allentown northbound, not Plymouth Meeting and Chester.

I have always thought that I-476 should be signed for Allentown and Scranton northbound.  Allentown would be overlayed over Plymouth and Scranton overlayed over Meeting--or a new sign could be put up.  Southbound, Chester is OK, but at the I-76/I-476 interchange, Wilmington should be mentioned.

It's worth noting that prior to I-476 opening south of I-76; the original signage for northbound 476 at the I-76/PA 23 interchange either had or was planned to use Allentown for a control city (and this was long before the Northeast Extension of the Turnpike part of I-476).

Photo showing 476 NORTH Allentown pull-through BGS on the left (note: ironically, this BGS was removed when the highway fully opened in late 1991):


This old BGS, which is still there to this day (with replacement shields), was likely planned to have Allentown (in button-copy letters) added on once I-476 was extended to I-276 but never did.


This long-gone/replaced BGS originally had Allentown briefly listed but was years later replaced with the odd-looking Plymouth Mtg. non-button-copy letters.  If one looked very closely at this BGS out in the field, one could see ghostings of the former lettering.

[Roadgeekteen]

In SLC, the I-15 south control is Las Vegas. IMO, if you're going to use Ogden for 15 north, you should use Provo for 15 south. (In fact, Provo is used for the 215 west belt.) And past there, St George should be used since that metro area actually has a population of 156K.

However, Las Vegas is a much bigger city than everything in Idaho or Montana.

[hotdogPi]

In SLC, the I-15 south control is Las Vegas. IMO, if you're going to use Ogden for 15 north, you should use Provo for 15 south. (In fact, Provo is used for the 215 west belt.) And past there, St George should be used since that metro area actually has a population of 156K.

However, Las Vegas is a much bigger city than everything in Idaho or Montana.

These places are in Utah.