Indirect control cities

[Flint1979]

And I will stop here because certain forum users are wrong but I would rather not get banned. Makes no sense to continuously see signs for X, then reach a point where you no longer see X on the sign, but have obviously not reached X yet.

We're not wrong though.

[Flint1979]

And I will stop here because certain forum users are wrong but I would rather not get banned. Makes no sense to continuously see signs for X, then reach a point where you no longer see X on the sign, but have obviously not reached X yet.

Weren't you the one arguing for cities not on the route, such as Albany GA for I-75? If that was signed as you want it, it is impossible to reach Albany before the control city changes.

I remember that.

[Flint1979]

And I will stop here because certain forum users are wrong but I would rather not get banned. Makes no sense to continuously see signs for X, then reach a point where you no longer see X on the sign, but have obviously not reached X yet.

Weren't you the one arguing for cities not on the route, such as Albany GA for I-75? If that was signed as you want it, it is impossible to reach Albany before the control city changes.

In that case you would see Albany on US 82, or GA 300. Duh.

---

My signature is now reflected to update, what need to be the 2 most important rules of control cities regardless:

"Control cities CAN be off the route!
Control cities make NO sense if signs end before the city is reached!"

But the signs are for I-75 traffic not US-82 or GA-300 traffic so using Albany would make no sense at all. Albany can be signed on US-82 and GA-300 but not I-75 because I-75 doesn't go to or through Albany. Albany is not that big of a city and is more than 30 miles away from I-75.

[Flint1979]

In any case, the forum users that disagree with me are hypocrites if they support the use of St Louis for I-24.

Who supports the use of St. Louis on I-24? Certainly not me. All that was mentioned was that Kentucky uses St. Louis and Illinois uses Interstate 57. Even in that case anyway more traffic is going to St. Louis and you are actually headed toward St. Louis.

[Flint1979]

Honestly if I had to make control cities I think I would use cities with a population of over 50,000. If a route doesn't have anymore cities with a population over 50,000 like I-75 north of Saginaw even though Saginaw's city population is now under 50,000 the urban population of Saginaw is about 125,000 and the metro population which consists of the county is 190,000. If it's a principal city in an area and it doesn't have 50,000 but the area does have over 50,000 I'd accept that.

[ran4sh]

I've already explained this in several other posts. The Interstate routes were designated more than 50 years ago. Population patterns, as well as travel patterns, have changed over that time. Cities that made sense back then, don't necessarily make sense to be control cities now. Cities that have grown, but never got an Interstate, may still receive a lot of traffic, so traffic should be directed to them, via being listed as a control city despite being off route.

Also the Interstates (and other major national routes) are a network, not isolated routes

[roadman65]

https://goo.gl/maps/cXnmkDJ2WeLMSBDF9
Hillside here is indirect. 

[SkyPesos]

Honestly for the one in Ohio that has NYC I would have just gone with Sharon.

Personally I think ODOT made the right choice signing NYC since there's nothing significant in PA. Sharon, Clarion, Bloomsburg, etc could be secondary control cities at minor interchanges if PA want to go provincial.

[Flint1979]

I've already explained this in several other posts. The Interstate routes were designated more than 50 years ago. Population patterns, as well as travel patterns, have changed over that time. Cities that made sense back then, don't necessarily make sense to be control cities now. Cities that have grown, but never got an Interstate, may still receive a lot of traffic, so traffic should be directed to them, via being listed as a control city despite being off route.

Also the Interstates (and other major national routes) are a network, not isolated routes

You are directed to Albany from I-75. Like I already said Albany is not that big of a city, certainly not big enough to warrant control city status on an Interstate highway that doesn't come within 30 miles of the city especially when there are better choices along that Interstate.

SB @ Exit 99
https://www.google.com/maps/@31.9385675,-83.7482528,3a,15y,182.07h,96.16t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sPRoENO7Lbwl3bFHPxvQE2A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

NB @ Exit 62
https://www.google.com/maps/@31.4453497,-83.5293417,3a,19y,352.6h,106.1t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1szTTWVL-gB9FWHYdz9zGENg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

[thenetwork]

Honestly for the one in Ohio that has NYC I would have just gone with Sharon.

Personally I think ODOT made the right choice signing NYC since there's nothing significant in PA. Sharon, Clarion, Bloomsburg, etc could be secondary control cities at minor interchanges if PA want to go provincial.

Plus the easiest routes to Sharon, PA are via exits in Ohio (SR-11 north to SR-82 east or US-62 from I-80), and Sharon is signed as a supplemental sign at the I-680/SR-11 interchange).  IMO, ODOT treats Sharon like a suburb of Youngstown which, for all intents and purposes, is.

[FrCorySticha]

In any case, the forum users that disagree with me are hypocrites if they support the use of St Louis for I-24.

Who supports the use of St. Louis on I-24? Certainly not me. All that was mentioned was that Kentucky uses St. Louis and Illinois uses Interstate 57. Even in that case anyway more traffic is going to St. Louis and you are actually headed toward St. Louis.

Simple solution: rebuild IL 13 as far as Freeburg, and IL 15 to the I-55/64 junction as Interstate standard, and extend I-24 along it. That would still have the I-70 in Baltimore issue, but at least it would reach the StL Metro East. </sarcasm>

I've made the I-24/I-57/I-64 drive from KY to StL a number of times. IMO, using StL as the control city on I-24 west of Paducah makes a lot of sense to me. Other than something like Chicago via I-57, Mt. Vernon is probably the only other option.

[ran4sh]

Using StL as the control city from Nashville makes the most sense to me

[FrCorySticha]

Using StL as the control city from Nashville makes the most sense to me

With the idea that control cities can have regional importance, I don't have too much problem with Clarksville, TN and Paducah, KY. Both are fairly well known within the region, and there really isn't another major city along that corridor until StL, which is 300 miles away.

[hobsini2]

There's a huge difference between using a city as a control that the highway heads towards and using a city as a control that you need to make 60 degree or more angle to get to it indirectly.
St Louis on 24 West of Nashville makes a ton of sense.  Atlanta on 16 West of Savannah makes sense. Albany on 75 South of Macon not so much because 75 is heading south-southeast. That would be like using Tallahassee. You "can" reach Tallahassee using US 319 from 75. But no one in their right mind would say 75 is the way to get to Tallahassee.

[ran4sh]

Again it depends on what level of "major" you think a city needs to be to be a control city. If Atlanta is appropriate for I-16 west from Savannah then I-75 south from Atlanta should be Tampa. (I.e. if you want about 30-40 cities to qualify for control city status.) Those who want a more precise level of control cities would want at least 150-200 cities that qualify for control city status, in which case I-16 west from Savannah should use Macon instead of skipping to Atlanta.

Everyone on here seems to have the idea that the highway comes first. I.e. a highway user decides to use the highway, *then* decides where to go. But in reality the opposite is true. A destination ("city", etc) is selected, then highways to get to that city are selected (often by GPS but sometimes without it). When you think of the highway system from that perspective, it makes sense to focus on having signage for major and regionally-major cities even when they are off the Interstate.

[US20IL64]

Control cities are 'regions' or Metro areas [which can be in millions of population] that route is heading. NW Indiana is part of the Chicago area market, and same with the 'Metro East' area of IL is in STL market.

I-57 heads to the Memphis region, and just take a turn at 55. 

[SGwithADD]

When US 220 west joins I-80 near Mackeyville, PA, its destination is signed as Milesburg, PA. However, 220 hasn't traveled to Milesburg since the section of I-99 north of State College opened in 2003 (at which point US 220 was rerouted along I-99).

[roadman65]

Control cities are 'regions' or Metro areas [which can be in millions of population] that route is heading. NW Indiana is part of the Chicago area market, and same with the 'Metro East' area of IL is in STL market.

I-57 heads to the Memphis region, and just take a turn at 55. 

Not according to Highwaystar.

He thinks Baltimore should not be used on I-70 east of Frederick, MD because it fails to enter the city limits.

[Flint1979]

Again it depends on what level of "major" you think a city needs to be to be a control city. If Atlanta is appropriate for I-16 west from Savannah then I-75 south from Atlanta should be Tampa. (I.e. if you want about 30-40 cities to qualify for control city status.) Those who want a more precise level of control cities would want at least 150-200 cities that qualify for control city status, in which case I-16 west from Savannah should use Macon instead of skipping to Atlanta.

Everyone on here seems to have the idea that the highway comes first. I.e. a highway user decides to use the highway, *then* decides where to go. But in reality the opposite is true. A destination ("city", etc) is selected, then highways to get to that city are selected (often by GPS but sometimes without it). When you think of the highway system from that perspective, it makes sense to focus on having signage for major and regionally-major cities even when they are off the Interstate.

Atlanta isn't the control city on I-16 west of Savannah, Macon is and Macon should be. And I-75 south from Atlanta should be Macon, Valdosta, Lake City, Gainesville, Ocala, then Tampa. The highway should come first, you're on that highway and the highway is heading toward a certain city why should a city that's 30 miles off the highway and not even that big of a city be a control city? You won't get to Albany if you are on I-75 so why should it be a control city? I-75 already goes through plenty of major cities that it can use the cities that it actually passes through as control cities and doesn't need no city 30 miles away from the highway as a control city, makes no sense at all.

[SkyPesos]

Control cities are 'regions' or Metro areas [which can be in millions of population] that route is heading. NW Indiana is part of the Chicago area market, and same with the 'Metro East' area of IL is in STL market.

I-57 heads to the Memphis region, and just take a turn at 55. 

Not according to Highwaystar.

He thinks Baltimore should not be used on I-70 east of Frederick, MD because it fails to enter the city limits.

More like his whole grudge is that I-70 wasn't complete in Baltimore like originally planned and doesn't end at I-95. He's fine with I-80 using NYC as a control city even though it doesn't enter NYC, as its intended eastern terminus is at I-95, where it ends today.

[Flint1979]

Control cities are 'regions' or Metro areas [which can be in millions of population] that route is heading. NW Indiana is part of the Chicago area market, and same with the 'Metro East' area of IL is in STL market.

I-57 heads to the Memphis region, and just take a turn at 55. 

Not according to Highwaystar.

He thinks Baltimore should not be used on I-70 east of Frederick, MD because it fails to enter the city limits.

More like his whole grudge is that I-70 wasn't complete in Baltimore like originally planned and doesn't end at I-95. He's fine with I-80 using NYC as a control city even though it doesn't enter NYC, as its intended eastern terminus is at I-95, where it ends today.

Baltimore should be the control city on I-70 no matter what Highwaystar says. I'm sure you're supporting the argument that it should be the control city too though.

[ran4sh]

I-70 should really swap with I-270 east of Frederick, since Washington is the more important destination

[ran4sh]

Again it depends on what level of "major" you think a city needs to be to be a control city. If Atlanta is appropriate for I-16 west from Savannah then I-75 south from Atlanta should be Tampa. (I.e. if you want about 30-40 cities to qualify for control city status.) Those who want a more precise level of control cities would want at least 150-200 cities that qualify for control city status, in which case I-16 west from Savannah should use Macon instead of skipping to Atlanta.

Everyone on here seems to have the idea that the highway comes first. I.e. a highway user decides to use the highway, *then* decides where to go. But in reality the opposite is true. A destination ("city", etc) is selected, then highways to get to that city are selected (often by GPS but sometimes without it). When you think of the highway system from that perspective, it makes sense to focus on having signage for major and regionally-major cities even when they are off the Interstate.

Atlanta isn't the control city on I-16 west of Savannah, Macon is and Macon should be. And I-75 south from Atlanta should be Macon, Valdosta, Lake City, Gainesville, Ocala, then Tampa. The highway should come first, you're on that highway and the highway is heading toward a certain city why should a city that's 30 miles off the highway and not even that big of a city be a control city? You won't get to Albany if you are on I-75 so why should it be a control city? I-75 already goes through plenty of major cities that it can use the cities that it actually passes through as control cities and doesn't need no city 30 miles away from the highway as a control city, makes no sense at all.

You should try quoting the full context next time

Also thank you for stating your position that highways come first before cities, despite highways only being invented because of cities. I have an opinion as to whether that position is sensible, but I don't think I need to keep saying it.

[roadman65]

Again it depends on what level of "major" you think a city needs to be to be a control city. If Atlanta is appropriate for I-16 west from Savannah then I-75 south from Atlanta should be Tampa. (I.e. if you want about 30-40 cities to qualify for control city status.) Those who want a more precise level of control cities would want at least 150-200 cities that qualify for control city status, in which case I-16 west from Savannah should use Macon instead of skipping to Atlanta.

Everyone on here seems to have the idea that the highway comes first. I.e. a highway user decides to use the highway, *then* decides where to go. But in reality the opposite is true. A destination ("city", etc) is selected, then highways to get to that city are selected (often by GPS but sometimes without it). When you think of the highway system from that perspective, it makes sense to focus on having signage for major and regionally-major cities even when they are off the Interstate.

Atlanta isn't the control city on I-16 west of Savannah, Macon is and Macon should be. And I-75 south from Atlanta should be Macon, Valdosta, Lake City, Gainesville, Ocala, then Tampa. The highway should come first, you're on that highway and the highway is heading toward a certain city why should a city that's 30 miles off the highway and not even that big of a city be a control city? You won't get to Albany if you are on I-75 so why should it be a control city? I-75 already goes through plenty of major cities that it can use the cities that it actually passes through as control cities and doesn't need no city 30 miles away from the highway as a control city, makes no sense at all.

Then Dayton should not be used on I-70 in IN and OH.

Huntsville shouldn't be used on I-65 in AL and TN.

Both cities only got applied in the 90s as the true next cities got used on both routes before those two.

[Flint1979]

Again it depends on what level of "major" you think a city needs to be to be a control city. If Atlanta is appropriate for I-16 west from Savannah then I-75 south from Atlanta should be Tampa. (I.e. if you want about 30-40 cities to qualify for control city status.) Those who want a more precise level of control cities would want at least 150-200 cities that qualify for control city status, in which case I-16 west from Savannah should use Macon instead of skipping to Atlanta.

Everyone on here seems to have the idea that the highway comes first. I.e. a highway user decides to use the highway, *then* decides where to go. But in reality the opposite is true. A destination ("city", etc) is selected, then highways to get to that city are selected (often by GPS but sometimes without it). When you think of the highway system from that perspective, it makes sense to focus on having signage for major and regionally-major cities even when they are off the Interstate.

Atlanta isn't the control city on I-16 west of Savannah, Macon is and Macon should be. And I-75 south from Atlanta should be Macon, Valdosta, Lake City, Gainesville, Ocala, then Tampa. The highway should come first, you're on that highway and the highway is heading toward a certain city why should a city that's 30 miles off the highway and not even that big of a city be a control city? You won't get to Albany if you are on I-75 so why should it be a control city? I-75 already goes through plenty of major cities that it can use the cities that it actually passes through as control cities and doesn't need no city 30 miles away from the highway as a control city, makes no sense at all.

Then Dayton should not be used on I-70 in IN and OH.

Huntsville shouldn't be used on I-65 in AL and TN.

Both cities only got applied in the 90s as the true next cities got used on both routes before those two.

Dayton isn't 30 miles off I-70, it actually enters Dayton's metro area and Dayton's airport is near the I-75 and I-70 interchange. It's 7 miles from downtown Dayton to I-70. Also I-70 just misses entering Dayton's city limits by less than a mile.