Limon should be a control city

[JayhawkCO]

Obviously this comes down more to what a "control city" should be, which here is around here a deep philosophical, moral, and ethical question but I generally don't think control cities should be unidirectional where that applies (terminus cities are an obvious exception).
I don't think being the "last option" really qualifies something as a control city in my mind. That would be better served by making it the 2nd tier on the millage signs (and actually, I would argue that the 2nd tier on mileage signs should have services, unless it is a junction). The blue "last services for X miles" traveler information sign would also convey this better than making it a control city.

For me, the "last option" refers to its relative prominence or importance in an area, which is what control cities should be from my perspective. The same reason places like Elko, Gallup, etc. I think are okay for control cities. I actually think Limon is better than Albert Lea. Albert Lea is certainly not the most important city in that general area of southern Minnesota.

[Roadgeekteen]

Obviously this comes down more to what a "control city" should be, which here is around here a deep philosophical, moral, and ethical question but I generally don't think control cities should be unidirectional where that applies (terminus cities are an obvious exception).
I don't think being the "last option" really qualifies something as a control city in my mind. That would be better served by making it the 2nd tier on the millage signs (and actually, I would argue that the 2nd tier on mileage signs should have services, unless it is a junction). The blue "last services for X miles" traveler information sign would also convey this better than making it a control city.

For me, the "last option" refers to its relative prominence or importance in an area, which is what control cities should be from my perspective. The same reason places like Elko, Gallup, etc. I think are okay for control cities. I actually think Limon is better than Albert Lea. Albert Lea is certainly not the most important city in that general area of southern Minnesota.

The frustrating thing about Albert Lea is that the interchange in the city isn't even all that useful, as there are better ways to do the major movements from that intersection.

[HighwayStar]

Obviously this comes down more to what a "control city" should be, which here is around here a deep philosophical, moral, and ethical question but I generally don't think control cities should be unidirectional where that applies (terminus cities are an obvious exception).
I don't think being the "last option" really qualifies something as a control city in my mind. That would be better served by making it the 2nd tier on the millage signs (and actually, I would argue that the 2nd tier on mileage signs should have services, unless it is a junction). The blue "last services for X miles" traveler information sign would also convey this better than making it a control city.

For me, the "last option" refers to its relative prominence or importance in an area, which is what control cities should be from my perspective. The same reason places like Elko, Gallup, etc. I think are okay for control cities. I actually think Limon is better than Albert Lea. Albert Lea is certainly not the most important city in that general area of southern Minnesota.

The only reason I would make Albert Lea a control city is because I think there should be one per state at minimum and Albert Lea is the most important one on I-90. But Limon is irrelevant compared to Denver.

[Roadgeekteen]

Obviously this comes down more to what a "control city" should be, which here is around here a deep philosophical, moral, and ethical question but I generally don't think control cities should be unidirectional where that applies (terminus cities are an obvious exception).
I don't think being the "last option" really qualifies something as a control city in my mind. That would be better served by making it the 2nd tier on the millage signs (and actually, I would argue that the 2nd tier on mileage signs should have services, unless it is a junction). The blue "last services for X miles" traveler information sign would also convey this better than making it a control city.

For me, the "last option" refers to its relative prominence or importance in an area, which is what control cities should be from my perspective. The same reason places like Elko, Gallup, etc. I think are okay for control cities. I actually think Limon is better than Albert Lea. Albert Lea is certainly not the most important city in that general area of southern Minnesota.

The only reason I would make Albert Lea a control city is because I think there should be one per state at minimum and Albert Lea is the most important one on I-90. But Limon is irrelevant compared to Denver.

They should use Rochester instead of Albert Lea.

[HighwayStar]

Obviously this comes down more to what a "control city" should be, which here is around here a deep philosophical, moral, and ethical question but I generally don't think control cities should be unidirectional where that applies (terminus cities are an obvious exception).
I don't think being the "last option" really qualifies something as a control city in my mind. That would be better served by making it the 2nd tier on the millage signs (and actually, I would argue that the 2nd tier on mileage signs should have services, unless it is a junction). The blue "last services for X miles" traveler information sign would also convey this better than making it a control city.

For me, the "last option" refers to its relative prominence or importance in an area, which is what control cities should be from my perspective. The same reason places like Elko, Gallup, etc. I think are okay for control cities. I actually think Limon is better than Albert Lea. Albert Lea is certainly not the most important city in that general area of southern Minnesota.

The only reason I would make Albert Lea a control city is because I think there should be one per state at minimum and Albert Lea is the most important one on I-90. But Limon is irrelevant compared to Denver.

They should use Rochester instead of Albert Lea.

Rochester is a kind of borderline case where its almost a destination on another route that intersects I-90 rather than being a destination on the route.

[Roadgeekteen]

Obviously this comes down more to what a "control city" should be, which here is around here a deep philosophical, moral, and ethical question but I generally don't think control cities should be unidirectional where that applies (terminus cities are an obvious exception).
I don't think being the "last option" really qualifies something as a control city in my mind. That would be better served by making it the 2nd tier on the millage signs (and actually, I would argue that the 2nd tier on mileage signs should have services, unless it is a junction). The blue "last services for X miles" traveler information sign would also convey this better than making it a control city.

For me, the "last option" refers to its relative prominence or importance in an area, which is what control cities should be from my perspective. The same reason places like Elko, Gallup, etc. I think are okay for control cities. I actually think Limon is better than Albert Lea. Albert Lea is certainly not the most important city in that general area of southern Minnesota.

The only reason I would make Albert Lea a control city is because I think there should be one per state at minimum and Albert Lea is the most important one on I-90. But Limon is irrelevant compared to Denver.

They should use Rochester instead of Albert Lea.

Rochester is a kind of borderline case where its almost a destination on another route that intersects I-90 rather than being a destination on the route.

I'd say it's close enough, especially since there aren't many other good options.

[SEWIGuy]

Obviously this comes down more to what a "control city" should be, which here is around here a deep philosophical, moral, and ethical question but I generally don't think control cities should be unidirectional where that applies (terminus cities are an obvious exception).
I don't think being the "last option" really qualifies something as a control city in my mind. That would be better served by making it the 2nd tier on the millage signs (and actually, I would argue that the 2nd tier on mileage signs should have services, unless it is a junction). The blue "last services for X miles" traveler information sign would also convey this better than making it a control city.

For me, the "last option" refers to its relative prominence or importance in an area, which is what control cities should be from my perspective. The same reason places like Elko, Gallup, etc. I think are okay for control cities. I actually think Limon is better than Albert Lea. Albert Lea is certainly not the most important city in that general area of southern Minnesota.

The only reason I would make Albert Lea a control city is because I think there should be one per state at minimum and Albert Lea is the most important one on I-90. But Limon is irrelevant compared to Denver.

They should use Rochester instead of Albert Lea.

Rochester is a kind of borderline case where its almost a destination on another route that intersects I-90 rather than being a destination on the route.

I'd say it's close enough, especially since there aren't many other good options.

My guess is that Albert Lea was chosen due to being the intersection of I-90 and I-35.  However, since the dawn of the interstate system, Rochester has more than tripled in size while Albert Lea is about the same size it was then. It really should be Rochester.

[HighwayStar]

Obviously this comes down more to what a "control city" should be, which here is around here a deep philosophical, moral, and ethical question but I generally don't think control cities should be unidirectional where that applies (terminus cities are an obvious exception).
I don't think being the "last option" really qualifies something as a control city in my mind. That would be better served by making it the 2nd tier on the millage signs (and actually, I would argue that the 2nd tier on mileage signs should have services, unless it is a junction). The blue "last services for X miles" traveler information sign would also convey this better than making it a control city.

For me, the "last option" refers to its relative prominence or importance in an area, which is what control cities should be from my perspective. The same reason places like Elko, Gallup, etc. I think are okay for control cities. I actually think Limon is better than Albert Lea. Albert Lea is certainly not the most important city in that general area of southern Minnesota.

The only reason I would make Albert Lea a control city is because I think there should be one per state at minimum and Albert Lea is the most important one on I-90. But Limon is irrelevant compared to Denver.

They should use Rochester instead of Albert Lea.

Rochester is a kind of borderline case where its almost a destination on another route that intersects I-90 rather than being a destination on the route.

I'd say it's close enough, especially since there aren't many other good options.

My guess is that Albert Lea was chosen due to being the intersection of I-90 and I-35.  However, since the dawn of the interstate system, Rochester has more than tripled in size while Albert Lea is about the same size it was then. It really should be Rochester.

If Rochester was on I-90 and Albert Lea was not an intersection it would be an obvious case to me.
But Albert Lea is a major freeway intersection, and Rochester is really some distance from I-90.
I'd keep Albert Lea as the primary control city.
As to Rochester, for handling cases like this it could be a 2nd tier on the mileage sign with something like JCT-US 63 To Rochester

[Roadgeekteen]

The city limits of Rochester almost hit I-90.

[HighwayStar]

The city limits of Rochester almost hit I-90.

City limits in the US are pretty random in terms of what they include or don't. The city limits of Dallas for example run through mostly established neighborhoods often 10 miles+ inside the edge of the greater urban area. Smaller towns often have city limits that extend into virtually nothing. For this reason, city limits are not a very good test for these purposes.

I consider the "grid test" a bit more telling. Take Rapid City, or Sioux Falls, or Albert Lea. All have at least one exit that goes to a city street which is part of the town grid. It also works for Austin MN. But for Rochester, the exits go to other US highways that eventually enter Rochester proper, none of the exits interface with Rochester streets.

[JayhawkCO]

So, the fact that I-70 has an exit for Cooks Lane, which serves the West Hills neighborhood of Baltimore.......

[wriddle082]

I-65 between Birmingham and Nashville once had each of those cities as the primary control cities for the entire distance between them.  Then throughout the 80's, Huntsville's population grew, it's city limits expanded to touch a portion of I-65, and I-565 was finally completed to I-65.  So they changed it so now Huntsville is the primary control city leaving Nashville heading south and leaving Birmingham heading north.  And now it makes even more sense because the city of Huntsville has now officially outgrown the city of Birmingham (though Birmingham's overall metro population remains larger).

So I see a very strong case for Rochester to be made the primary control city between Sioux Falls and LaCrosse on I-90.  It has grown considerably over the years, has decent connections to I-90 despite those connections not being full interstates, and is ECONOMICALLY more important than Albert Lea.  Just because a town is an intersection between an x0 and an x5 interstate, that doesn't mean it should automatically be the control city (looking at you, Benson, NC!).

[SEWIGuy]

I-65 between Birmingham and Nashville once had each of those cities as the primary control cities for the entire distance between them.  Then throughout the 80's, Huntsville's population grew, it's city limits expanded to touch a portion of I-65, and I-565 was finally completed to I-65.  So they changed it so now Huntsville is the primary control city leaving Nashville heading south and leaving Birmingham heading north.  And now it makes even more sense because the city of Huntsville has now officially outgrown the city of Birmingham (though Birmingham's overall metro population remains larger).

So I see a very strong case for Rochester to be made the primary control city between Sioux Falls and LaCrosse on I-90.  It has grown considerably over the years, has decent connections to I-90 despite those connections not being full interstates, and is ECONOMICALLY more important than Albert Lea.  Just because a town is an intersection between an x0 and an x5 interstate, that doesn't mean it should automatically be the control city (looking at you, Benson, NC!).

Furthermore, with the Mayo Clinic, Rochester sees a fair number of visitors to the city. No one goes to Albert Lea intentionally.

[US 41]

Looks like from Topeka to Denver it goes Salina, Hays, Denver.

From Denver to Topeka it looks like it goes Limon, 'nothing', Hays, Salina, and Topeka.

From Denver to I-15 it appears to go Grand JCT, Utah, Salina, Richfield, Las Vegas.

From I-15 to Denver it goes Richfield / Denver, Salina, Green River, 'nothing', Grand JCT, Denver.

[US 41]

I-65 between Birmingham and Nashville once had each of those cities as the primary control cities for the entire distance between them.  Then throughout the 80's, Huntsville's population grew, it's city limits expanded to touch a portion of I-65, and I-565 was finally completed to I-65.  So they changed it so now Huntsville is the primary control city leaving Nashville heading south and leaving Birmingham heading north.  And now it makes even more sense because the city of Huntsville has now officially outgrown the city of Birmingham (though Birmingham's overall metro population remains larger).

So I see a very strong case for Rochester to be made the primary control city between Sioux Falls and LaCrosse on I-90.  It has grown considerably over the years, has decent connections to I-90 despite those connections not being full interstates, and is ECONOMICALLY more important than Albert Lea.  Just because a town is an intersection between an x0 and an x5 interstate, that doesn't mean it should automatically be the control city (looking at you, Benson, NC!).

I had no idea that Huntsville was technically larger than Birmingham now. Interesting.

[formulanone]

I-65 between Birmingham and Nashville once had each of those cities as the primary control cities for the entire distance between them.  Then throughout the 80's, Huntsville's population grew, it's city limits expanded to touch a portion of I-65, and I-565 was finally completed to I-65.  So they changed it so now Huntsville is the primary control city leaving Nashville heading south and leaving Birmingham heading north.  And now it makes even more sense because the city of Huntsville has now officially outgrown the city of Birmingham (though Birmingham's overall metro population remains larger).

Though Huntsville is a control city on I-65 south of Nashville and north of Birmingham, most mileage signs to the next town/city point to Birmingham as the secondary choice - not Huntsville - if headed south of Nashville. Northbound from Birmingham, it points to Huntsville as the secondary (further) destination. That's probably just inertia on TNDOT's part; after all, it doesn't matter to them.

[sprjus4]

If Rochester was on I-90 and Albert Lea was not an intersection it would be an obvious case to me.
But Albert Lea is a major freeway intersection, and Rochester is really some distance from I-90.
I'd keep Albert Lea as the primary control city.
As to Rochester, for handling cases like this it could be a 2nd tier on the mileage sign with something like JCT-US 63 To Rochester

Anyone else getting Baltimore vibes here?

[Scott5114]

Looks like from Topeka to Denver it goes Salina, Hays, Denver.

From Denver to Topeka it looks like it goes Limon, 'nothing', Hays, Salina, and Topeka.

From Denver to I-15 it appears to go Grand JCT, Utah, Salina, Richfield, Las Vegas.

From I-15 to Denver it goes Richfield / Denver, Salina, Green River, 'nothing', Grand JCT, Denver.

Clearly the solution is to just have the control cities in Denver be "I-70 west: Salina", "I-70 east: Salina".

[kalvado]

Looks like from Topeka to Denver it goes Salina, Hays, Denver.

From Denver to Topeka it looks like it goes Limon, 'nothing', Hays, Salina, and Topeka.

From Denver to I-15 it appears to go Grand JCT, Utah, Salina, Richfield, Las Vegas.

From I-15 to Denver it goes Richfield / Denver, Salina, Green River, 'nothing', Grand JCT, Denver.

Clearly the solution is to just have the control cities in Denver be "I-70 west: Salina", "I-70 east: Salina".

All roads lead to Rome

[zachary_amaryllis]

Does Limon have a Buc-ees, a Cracker Barrel and a Waffle House?

It has a state prison, which is nearly as good.

Tangential question - what are the food and service options on those long haul highways? If Limon is indeed an important intersection, it could qualify for Pilot or something similar.

Between Salina and Denver, you basically have Russell, Hays, Colby, Goodland, Burlington, and Limon.

And there's a similarly great food establishment in Burlington, though this one is a privately-owned one.

[US 41]

Looks like from Topeka to Denver it goes Salina, Hays, Denver.

From Denver to Topeka it looks like it goes Limon, 'nothing', Hays, Salina, and Topeka.

From Denver to I-15 it appears to go Grand JCT, Utah, Salina, Richfield, Las Vegas.

From I-15 to Denver it goes Richfield / Denver, Salina, Green River, 'nothing', Grand JCT, Denver.

Clearly the solution is to just have the control cities in Denver be "I-70 west: Salina", "I-70 east: Salina".

When I was doing that research it actually threw me off at first when I saw the sign on GSV. I thought Google Maps had somehow taken me back to Kansas until I looked closer at the surrounding scenery.

[HighwayStar]

So, the fact that I-70 has an exit for Cooks Lane, which serves the West Hills neighborhood of Baltimore.......

Is not sufficient for a city of that size, as shown by the fact that the route as designed had service to much more of the city. With a town the size of Albert Lea or even Rapid City/Sioux Falls, that exit is still quite close to city center and meaningfully serves the city as a whole. That does not scale to a large city like Baltimore, DC, Dallas, etc.

[HighwayStar]

I-65 between Birmingham and Nashville once had each of those cities as the primary control cities for the entire distance between them.  Then throughout the 80's, Huntsville's population grew, it's city limits expanded to touch a portion of I-65, and I-565 was finally completed to I-65.  So they changed it so now Huntsville is the primary control city leaving Nashville heading south and leaving Birmingham heading north.  And now it makes even more sense because the city of Huntsville has now officially outgrown the city of Birmingham (though Birmingham's overall metro population remains larger).

So I see a very strong case for Rochester to be made the primary control city between Sioux Falls and LaCrosse on I-90.  It has grown considerably over the years, has decent connections to I-90 despite those connections not being full interstates, and is ECONOMICALLY more important than Albert Lea.  Just because a town is an intersection between an x0 and an x5 interstate, that doesn't mean it should automatically be the control city (looking at you, Benson, NC!).

Furthermore, with the Mayo Clinic, Rochester sees a fair number of visitors to the city. No one goes to Albert Lea intentionally.

I'm not disputing that Rochester is far more important than Albert Lea, but that is not really the only relevant criterion. New York City and London are both far more important than either of them, but neither is on I-90 so they can't be control cities. Likewise with Rochester, its not really on I-90, so it does not qualify.

[sprjus4]

New York City and London are both far more important than either of them, but neither is on I-90 so they can't be control cities. Likewise with Rochester, its not really on I-90, so it does not qualify.

This isn't even comparable... I-90 is over a hundred miles from NYC. The city limits of Rochester are only around a mile off of I-90...

[Scott5114]

So, the fact that I-70 has an exit for Cooks Lane, which serves the West Hills neighborhood of Baltimore.......

Is not sufficient for a city of that size, as shown by the fact that the route as designed had service to much more of the city. With a town the size of Albert Lea or even Rapid City/Sioux Falls, that exit is still quite close to city center and meaningfully serves the city as a whole. That does not scale to a large city like Baltimore, DC, Dallas, etc.

This shit again?