In Casa Grande, the signage for I-8 westbound all include San Diego as a control city, with no mention of Yuma at all. On a more recent trip to Rocky Point, Mexico heading west on I-8 towards Gila Bend, I did not see any signage that mentioned Yuma as a control city either; all signage had San Diego as their control city.
I was wondering, is there any particular reason why Yuma isn't a control city heading westbound on I-8 in Arizona? I do believe that Yuma is a control city when heading east on I-8 in California. After all, Yuma is the largest city in Arizona outside the Phoenix and Tucson metro areas. Yet the smaller Flagstaff is a control city (on both I-17 and I-40) but Yuma isn't? That doesn't make any sense at all.
My theory is that there's no interstate junction there and it's a smaller city. Flagstaff is a logical control point because it's the northern terminus of I-17, and then traffic on I-40 heading to Phoenix would pass through there and note Flagstaff. Nogales is the same sort of deal as the southern terminus of I-19 and a well known "navigation" city.
I-8 is San Diego/Phoenix/Tucson, I-10 is Los Angeles/Phoenix/Tucson/El Paso, I-40 is Los Angeles/Flagstaff/Albuquerque, I-19 is Nogales/Tucson, I-17 is Flagstaff/Tucson.
Yuma is probably big enough now, but when I-8 was constructed in the 60s, it was a pretty insignificantly sized city and San Diego would have been much more useful for through traffic.
Quote from: corco on August 24, 2014, 10:27:16 PM
My theory is that there's no interstate junction there and it's a smaller city. Flagstaff is a logical control point because it's the northern terminus of I-17, and then traffic on I-40 heading to Phoenix would pass through there and note Flagstaff. Nogales is the same sort of deal as the southern terminus of I-19 and a well known "navigation" city.
I-8 is San Diego/Phoenix/Tucson, I-10 is Los Angeles/Phoenix/Tucson/El Paso, I-40 is Los Angeles/Flagstaff/Albuquerque, I-19 is Nogales/Tucson, I-17 is Flagstaff/Tucson.
Note that in New Mexico, I do believe that Las Cruces (which now has a population over 100,000) is mentioned as a control city on I-10 eastbound (I know it is on I-25 heading south from Albuquerque). Also, in California, I-40's westbound control city is Barstow (where I-40's actual terminus is located) rather than Los Angeles.
Yeah, Arizona just likes to use "big" cities as their control cities. Flagstaff I think is an exception only because it has to be.
Arizona still uses El Paso as the eastbound control city for I-10 at Tucson, not Las Cruces. As noted above, it seems to be Arizona's policy to use a large city even if a reasonably sized smaller one is closer.
Note that in New Mexico, I do believe that Las Cruces (which now has a population over 100,000) is mentioned as a control city on I-10 eastbound (I know it is on I-25 heading south from Albuquerque). Also, in California, I-40's westbound control city is Barstow (where I-40's actual terminus is located) rather than Los Angeles.
[/quote]
las Cruces is probably actually nearing 110,000, if you counted everyone - the students, the farm workers, the transients, etc. El Paso, TX also is significantly undercounted. The tidal wave of demographics is most likely going to overwhelm the poorly planned infrastructure in the so called "borderland" area.
Quote from: corco on August 24, 2014, 10:27:16 PM
My theory is that there's no interstate junction there and it's a smaller city.
Small cities without other Interstate junctions can certainly be control cities, though.
I-80 EB in Reno and much of northwest Nevada uses Elko for the eastbound control city. This is despite a population of only about 50,000 (although it's the largest city in at least 100 miles in any direction) and the only major junctions located in the vicinity are a couple state highways. [However, I-80 WB in Utah does not reciprocate, using Reno for the westbound control city despite the AASHTO book suggesting the use of Elko.]
Quote from: roadfro on August 25, 2014, 10:11:46 PM
Quote from: corco on August 24, 2014, 10:27:16 PM
My theory is that there's no interstate junction there and it's a smaller city.
Small cities without other Interstate junctions can certainly be control cities, though.
I-80 EB in Reno and much of northwest Nevada uses Elko for the eastbound control city. This is despite a population of only about 50,000 (although it's the largest city in at least 100 miles in any direction) and the only major junctions located in the vicinity are a couple state highways. [However, I-80 WB in Utah does not reciprocate, using Reno for the westbound control city despite the AASHTO book suggesting the use of Elko.]
Well right, some states use small cities and some states use big cities unless they can't. Arizona is a "big city" state. Utah is a "big city" state. Nevada and Idaho and Wyoming aren't.
Quote from: The High Plains Traveler on August 25, 2014, 11:54:40 AM
Arizona still uses El Paso as the eastbound control city for I-10 at Tucson, not Las Cruces. As noted above, it seems to be Arizona's policy to use a large city even if a reasonably sized smaller one is closer.
Actually, there's not a hell of a lot between Tucson and El Paso, except for some small towns. El Paso is probably a lot more familiar name than Las Cruces.
As for Yuma, it's possible that some day, Arizona will place control signs along westbound I-8 that read, "Yuma--San Diego."
Something that's puzzled me for years--why are there no control signs for Phoenix on I-10 heading east from Los Angeles. Such a sign could read "San Bernardino--Phoenix." East of San Bernardino, the signs could read "Palm Springs--Phoenix." Once east of the California 111 exit, the signs could read "Phoenix" instead of "Other Desert Cities."
As said earlier, Arizona is a "big city" state. IMO, that's the way to go. If a state insists on a small city, then two control cities should be listed on BGSs: the small city and the next upcoming large city.
California's style is very much to prioritize small cities in California over large cities in another state. You have to go pretty close to the border before you see an Arizona or Oregon control city. CA is happy to use Blythe and Needles. CA is better about NV control cities, as there are signs for Las Vegas and Reno at least 100 miles away from the Nevada border.
I've always wondered why the eastbound control for I-8 is both Phoenix and Tucson. It would seem to me that since I-8 travels so much farther south of Phoenix, it would require significant backtracking to get to Phoenix from I-8. I would leave the control as Tucson only.
Quote from: hm insulators on August 26, 2014, 04:37:45 PM
Something that's puzzled me for years--why are there no control signs for Phoenix on I-10 heading east from Los Angeles. Such a sign could read "San Bernardino--Phoenix." East of San Bernardino, the signs could read "Palm Springs--Phoenix." Once east of the California 111 exit, the signs could read "Phoenix" instead of "Other Desert Cities."
To follow up on mrsman's post in response to this...
CalTrans very much emphasizes large local destinations first over everything - which might be a vestige of the fact much of the urban freeway systems began as local/regional-only connectors, THEN got extended further and further out to borders decades later.
For instance, here are the control cities at the East Los Angeles Interchange:
Sacramento (formerly Bakersfield) for I-5 north
San Bernardino for I-10 east
Santa Monica for I-10 west
Los Angeles Civic Center for US 101 north
Pomona for Route 60 east
Despite being the most important interchange in the metro area, three of the five destinations are within Los Angeles County AND one is less than 4 miles from that junction!
At the US 101/I-80 split, the listed destinations are:
Bay Bridge/Oakland for I-80 east
Golden Gate Bridge for US 101 north
San Jose for US 101 south
Two of the destinations on there (the bridges) are practically in city limits, and the third is approximately 45 minutes away.
In every single one of those cases though, the "obvious" long-distance destinations were not connected by an all-freeway (or in 101's case, an all-freeway-or-expressway route without stoplights) routing until at least the late 1960s. And once that occurred, CalTrans chose to continue to use the existing short/medium-distance controls. (Reno and Vegas, the obvious exceptions, are used because in the latter case, there are few major destinations other than Barstow along 15 north, and in the former case, post-1964 CalTrans chose to deprecate Roseville as a control city except along 160 north.)
Even thinking about newer routes...where 80 DID get signed for Reno from the 1950s onward in Sacramento...why wouldn't, say, 210 be signed for Phoenix or Indio? 210's situation is a lot like the other examples: the complete San Fernando-Redlands route didn't exist until very recently, and the original 210 routing that ended near San Dimas served as a simple bypass of downtown LA that led you to the Pomona area.
Quote from: mrsmanI've always wondered why the eastbound control for I-8 is both Phoenix and Tucson.
I think that's a vestige of when I-8 between San Diego and AZ 85 was US 80 (which then used today's AZ 85 plus a former east-west segment of 85 to reach Phoenix).
Quote from: mrsman on August 29, 2014, 09:18:45 AM
As said earlier, Arizona is a "big city" state. IMO, that's the way to go. If a state insists on a small city, then two control cities should be listed on BGSs: the small city and the next upcoming large city.
California's style is very much to prioritize small cities in California over large cities in another state. You have to go pretty close to the border before you see an Arizona or Oregon control city. CA is happy to use Blythe and Needles. CA is better about NV control cities, as there are signs for Las Vegas and Reno at least 100 miles away from the Nevada border.
I've always wondered why the eastbound control for I-8 is both Phoenix and Tucson. It would seem to me that since I-8 travels so much farther south of Phoenix, it would require significant backtracking to get to Phoenix from I-8. I would leave the control as Tucson only.
To be fair I-5 North Starts using Portland near Redding all the way up, and Portland is a long distance away.
In Sacramento I-80 East uses Reno
I-15 has signs mentioning Las Vegas as far south at Temecula, at the 15-215 split.
Needles Makes Sense for I-40 east because what's next After Needles? Flasgstaff? Kingman, and are they that much bigger then Needles, not to mention Kingman is on ost mileage sings from Just east of Barstow.
I think the reason San Diego is Signed on all of I-8 Westbound is it makes sense as it is a very large city and most long term traffic is headed there. I could see using Yuma as a secondary control city but not as primary for Westbound.
As far as Eastbound it does make a little sense, considering how far Tucson is past Yuma, and with Phoenix, that's an Indirect Control City. Plus both are mentioned on Mileage signs on the 8 east bound from El Centro on.
As far as I-10, Blythe and Phoenix alternate for Control Cities on Mielage signs, but Phoenix is listed from Indio onward. On the overhead signs on I-10.
I think part of the Reason Las Vegas is listed for I-15 is because of the LA-Las Vegas traffic. But it makes sense to list Barstow as well considering that's there I-40 east splits off and a lot of truck traffic on I-15 switches to I-40.
I've noticed in Los Angeles and San Francisco they do sign close cities as control points, and probably dating back to the original freeway construction. But I think the reason the 101 is signed for San Jose and for Ventura in there respective cities is to not encourage through traffic to use 101, but instead 580 -5. I always figured that.
Quote from: Interstate Trav on August 29, 2014, 12:25:42 PM
But I think the reason the 101 is signed for San Jose and for Ventura in there respective cities is to not encourage through traffic to use 101, but instead 580 -5. I always figured that.
Except that San Jose-only signage along US 101 in San Francisco dates back to the mid-1950s at the very least (I don't think I've seen it posted on this forum, but I have seen a photo of the Central Freeway north terminus with 101 South/San Jose signage from around 1958) - when the final alignment of Interstate 5 in the Central Valley had yet to be decided, and 5W (today's 580) in Oakland hadn't been built yet.
In any case, 35 miles south of SF is the first Los Angeles sign on 101 south (at 85/101 in Mountain View) and approximately 55 miles northwest of LA is the first San Francisco sign on 101 north (at Route 33). This still differs significantly from no Phoenix signage on 210 whatsoever and none on 10 east until at least Indio.
Quote from: TheStranger on August 29, 2014, 12:36:07 PM
Quote from: Interstate Trav on August 29, 2014, 12:25:42 PM
But I think the reason the 101 is signed for San Jose and for Ventura in there respective cities is to not encourage through traffic to use 101, but instead 580 -5. I always figured that.
Except that San Jose-only signage along US 101 in San Francisco dates back to the mid-1950s at the very least (I don't think I've seen it posted on this forum, but I have seen a photo of the Central Freeway north terminus with 101 South/San Jose signage from around 1958) - when the final alignment of Interstate 5 in the Central Valley had yet to be decided, and 5W (today's 580) in Oakland hadn't been built yet.
In any case, 35 miles south of SF is the first Los Angeles sign on 101 south (at 85/101 in Mountain View) and approximately 55 miles northwest of LA is the first San Francisco sign on 101 north (at Route 33). This still differs significantly from no Phoenix signage on 210 whatsoever and none on 10 east until at least Indio.
Back then was US 50 to US 99 the San Francisco Los Angeles Route, or was 101 considered the route to take? I'm really actually curiuos about that.
I just figure the reason they keep San Jose signed in SF and Ventura Signed in LA is because the 101 is the Ventura Fwy in parts of LA and to not have that as the through way for LA SF traffic. I didn't know though that those cities date back to before the Interstates.
210 doesn't sign anything east of Redlans actually. I think Indio should join 210 East atleast at the 215 jct, and maybe on a mileage sign too, but this might be because of when the freeway was built and it terminates in Redlands.
Personally given how many populated Cities are along 10 East from Los Angeles to Indio it doesn't bother me that Phoenix doesn't show up until Indio.
Plus when I-10 was being built I'm sure Phoenix was sigificantly smaller and not worth mentioning all the way in Los Angeles.
Quote from: Interstate Trav on August 29, 2014, 05:23:48 PM
Back then was US 50 to US 99 the San Francisco Los Angeles Route, or was 101 considered the route to take? I'm really actually curiuos about that.
I think US 50 to 99 would have been faster. A fair amount of 99 was already expressway with limited intersections, while 101 was almost all 2 lane country road outside the towns and ordinary streets in the towns.
Quote from: kkt on August 29, 2014, 05:37:19 PM
Quote from: Interstate Trav on August 29, 2014, 05:23:48 PM
Back then was US 50 to US 99 the San Francisco Los Angeles Route, or was 101 considered the route to take? I'm really actually curiuos about that.
I think US 50 to 99 would have been faster. A fair amount of 99 was already expressway with limited intersections, while 101 was almost all 2 lane country road outside the towns and ordinary streets in the towns.
99's last stoplight between northern Sacramento and Wheeler Ridge (in Livingston) lasted until 1997, while 101's last stoplight from SF-LA (Santa Barbara) remained until 1992.
There were plenty of non-expressway alignments of 99 that had to be completely bypassed in the 1960s. I'd need to do a Historic Aerials map query to figure out where those were.
New Mexico's use of control cities on I-10 is laughable Deming, I'm looking at you.
I was thrilled when NMDOT began using Tuscon on signage at the I-10WB/I-25NB split. However, excitement was short-lived; Tucson only appears on one sign and then they're back to directing WB drivers to Deming.
No worse or less useful, I suppose, than Gallup, Santa Rosa, or Raton.
Quote from: Interstate Trav on August 29, 2014, 05:23:48 PM
Quote from: TheStranger on August 29, 2014, 12:36:07 PM
Quote from: Interstate Trav on August 29, 2014, 12:25:42 PM
But I think the reason the 101 is signed for San Jose and for Ventura in there respective cities is to not encourage through traffic to use 101, but instead 580 -5. I always figured that.
Except that San Jose-only signage along US 101 in San Francisco dates back to the mid-1950s at the very least (I don't think I've seen it posted on this forum, but I have seen a photo of the Central Freeway north terminus with 101 South/San Jose signage from around 1958) - when the final alignment of Interstate 5 in the Central Valley had yet to be decided, and 5W (today's 580) in Oakland hadn't been built yet.
In any case, 35 miles south of SF is the first Los Angeles sign on 101 south (at 85/101 in Mountain View) and approximately 55 miles northwest of LA is the first San Francisco sign on 101 north (at Route 33). This still differs significantly from no Phoenix signage on 210 whatsoever and none on 10 east until at least Indio.
Back then was US 50 to US 99 the San Francisco Los Angeles Route, or was 101 considered the route to take? I'm really actually curiuos about that.
I just figure the reason they keep San Jose signed in SF and Ventura Signed in LA is because the 101 is the Ventura Fwy in parts of LA and to not have that as the through way for LA SF traffic. I didn't know though that those cities date back to before the Interstates.
210 doesn't sign anything east of Redlans actually. I think Indio should join 210 East atleast at the 215 jct, and maybe on a mileage sign too, but this might be because of when the freeway was built and it terminates in Redlands.
Personally given how many populated Cities are along 10 East from Los Angeles to Indio it doesn't bother me that Phoenix doesn't show up until Indio.
Plus when I-10 was being built I'm sure Phoenix was sigificantly smaller and not worth mentioning all the way in Los Angeles.
That's right. With 101 you basically have control cities of LA/Ventura, then LA/SF, then San Jose/SF. Essentially from both cities signed to get you to the major suburb not to the other end of the state. But Santa Barbara, SLO, Monterey do not get similar treatment and are only mentioned in tandem with LA or SF.
In the LA area, the local destinations (Ventura, San Bernardino, Pomona) are emphasized since those are also the names of the freeways. The Ventura Freeway will take you to Ventura. Yes, it also goes to SF, but the emphasis in the LA area is that it's the Ventura Freeway that bypasses Ventura Blvd and leads to Ventura in Ventura County. Once you pass Ventura, you've now left the LA sphere of influence and it's basically open road (except for a few minor stops like Santa Barbara and SLO) all the way to SF. Along the Central Coast you only see LA/SF, Ventura and San Jose are largely forgotten.
The really interesting thing about the 10 corridor isn't that they don't mention Phoenix from Downtown LA, it's that they barely mention Phoenix as a pull-through city at all until you are almost at the state line. If they followed the US 101 system then you should see LA/San Bernardino, LA/Phoenix, Goodyear/Phoenix, but instead AZ signs its control cities for large cities only and CA utilizes "Other Desert CIties".
Quote from: mwb1848 on August 30, 2014, 06:07:57 PM
New Mexico's use of control cities on I-10 is laughable Deming, I'm looking at you.
I was thrilled when NMDOT began using Tuscon on signage at the I-10WB/I-25NB split. However, excitement was short-lived; Tucson only appears on one sign and then they're back to directing WB drivers to Deming.
No worse or less useful, I suppose, than Gallup, Santa Rosa, or Raton.
That is correct, Tucson should appear on BOTH over heads as a driver nears the I-10 / I-25 split NB.
I have never seen the signage in Arizona but I'm surprised Yuma isn't a control city. It's a fairly sized city alright, and the only big stop right between the Phoenix/Tucson area and the San Diego area. In Atlanta, going northbound on I-75, Marietta appears as a control city, and it's a suburb of Atlanta, having between 50k-100k people.
I was under the impression that it's a relic of when old US 80 was signed in Arizona. I-10 WB at AZ 85 is signed for both Yuma and San Diego, and that was the route of old US 80.
Also, Yuma isn't signed on EB I-8 in California (aside from mileage signs) until El Centro, some 60 miles from the CA/AZ border.
Yuma is the control city on the mileage sign on I-8 at State 67... so it does get something closer to San Diego.
El Centro is the control city in San Diego County. Yuma is first mentioned on a mileage sign between El Cajon Boulevard and Main Street and again at the 2nd Street interchange. But Yuma itself isn't a control city until the Imperial Valley.
Quote from: JustDrive on September 16, 2014, 12:48:02 PM
El Centro is the control city in San Diego County. Yuma is first mentioned on a mileage sign between El Cajon Boulevard and Main Street and again at the 2nd Street interchange. But Yuma itself isn't a control city until the Imperial Valley.
I am quite aware. However, the point is that Yuma is on the bottom of the sign and therefore IS a control city at that point, not El Centro. That is why I was specific to the sign and location.
FWIW, San Diego makes the most sense, as most thru traffic will take I-8 there anyway. Pretty much like Los Angeles does for I-10 and I-40, even though the latter route does not go there at all (but you can still access it via I-15 and I-10!).
Quote
Well right, some states use small cities and some states use big cities unless they can't. Arizona is a "big city" state. Utah is a "big city" state. Nevada and Idaho and Wyoming aren't.
I thought Nevada was in a way a "big city" state because on I-15, the control cities from Las Vegas are Salt Lake City going northbound and Los Angeles going southbound.
That said, I wish New Mexico and Colorado would be "big city" states in my opinion, if not use the next notable town and the next major city as dual control cities; the next major city/interstate junction is most often more well known to out-of-state motorists than small towns or smaller cities along the route. From Albuquerque for instance, I think the northbound control city on I-25 ought to be Colorado Springs* (or dual Santa Fe / Colorado Springs), southbound control ought to be El Paso** (or dual Las Cruces / El Paso); and on I-40, the westbound control from Albuquerque should be Flagstaff, and eastbound control should be Amarillo (if not WB dual Gallup / Flagstaff and EB Santa Rosa / Amarillo).
From Las Cruces, I-25 SB is El Paso** and I-25 north is Albuquerque; I-10 east is El Paso, but I-10 west should be Tucson instead of Deming (or perhaps use dual Deming / Tucson).
*Colorado Springs is actually the next major city from Albuquerque on I-25 north, despite there being no major interstate junction there (I-25 is the sole freeway running through that city); its population is over 400,000 people, which is why I think it should be a control city, and not use Denver until you're in C. Springs heading north.
**Despite El Paso not being on I-25, it's a straight shot from Albuquerque nonetheless, and a lot of mileage signs on I-25 southbound mention El Paso (the first two being just north of Albuquerque). I-25 southbound defaults onto I-10 east (actually runs north-south between Las Cruces and El Paso) at the southern terminus, and El Paso is only a 45 minute to an hour drive from Las Cruces. This is why I think El Paso should be the southbound control city from Albuquerque on I-25.
Yuma isn't all that huge- I would use Yuma/San Diego on some signs though.
Quote from: MattHanson939 on March 22, 2021, 03:31:28 PM
That said, I wish New Mexico and Colorado would be "big city" states in my opinion, if not use the next notable town and the next major city as dual control cities; the next major city/interstate junction is most often more well known to out-of-state motorists than small towns or smaller cities along the route. From Albuquerque for instance, I think the northbound control city on I-25 ought to be Colorado Springs* (or dual Santa Fe / Colorado Springs), southbound control ought to be El Paso** (or dual Las Cruces / El Paso); and on I-40, the westbound control from Albuquerque should be Flagstaff, and eastbound control should be Amarillo (if not WB dual Gallup / Flagstaff and EB Santa Rosa / Amarillo).
From Las Cruces, I-25 SB is El Paso** and I-25 north is Albuquerque; I-10 east is El Paso, but I-10 west should be Tucson instead of Deming (or perhaps use dual Deming / Tucson).
*Colorado Springs is actually the next major city from Albuquerque on I-25 north, despite there being no major interstate junction there (I-25 is the sole freeway running through that city); its population is over 400,000 people, which is why I think it should be a control city, and not use Denver until you're in C. Springs heading north.
**Despite El Paso not being on I-25, it's a straight shot from Albuquerque nonetheless, and a lot of mileage signs on I-25 southbound mention El Paso (the first two being just north of Albuquerque). And I-25 southbound defaults onto I-10 east (actually runs north-south between Las Cruces and El Paso) at the southern terminus. And this is why I think El Paso should be the southbound control city from Albuquerque.
For Colorado, I'll mildly disagree. Pueblo isn't my favorite town, but it does have a population north of 100,000 people, which for out west, is pretty large. However, I wouldn't hate having Santa Fe or Albuquerque south of Pueblo (dismissing Walsenburg and Trinidad). Also, what would you propose for I-70 West out of Denver? If Pueblo is too small, Grand Junction is as well.
Chris
Quote from: jayhawkco on March 22, 2021, 03:40:11 PM
Quote from: MattHanson939 on March 22, 2021, 03:31:28 PM
That said, I wish New Mexico and Colorado would be "big city" states in my opinion, if not use the next notable town and the next major city as dual control cities; the next major city/interstate junction is most often more well known to out-of-state motorists than small towns or smaller cities along the route. From Albuquerque for instance, I think the northbound control city on I-25 ought to be Colorado Springs* (or dual Santa Fe / Colorado Springs), southbound control ought to be El Paso** (or dual Las Cruces / El Paso); and on I-40, the westbound control from Albuquerque should be Flagstaff, and eastbound control should be Amarillo (if not WB dual Gallup / Flagstaff and EB Santa Rosa / Amarillo).
From Las Cruces, I-25 SB is El Paso** and I-25 north is Albuquerque; I-10 east is El Paso, but I-10 west should be Tucson instead of Deming (or perhaps use dual Deming / Tucson).
*Colorado Springs is actually the next major city from Albuquerque on I-25 north, despite there being no major interstate junction there (I-25 is the sole freeway running through that city); its population is over 400,000 people, which is why I think it should be a control city, and not use Denver until you're in C. Springs heading north.
**Despite El Paso not being on I-25, it's a straight shot from Albuquerque nonetheless, and a lot of mileage signs on I-25 southbound mention El Paso (the first two being just north of Albuquerque). And I-25 southbound defaults onto I-10 east (actually runs north-south between Las Cruces and El Paso) at the southern terminus. And this is why I think El Paso should be the southbound control city from Albuquerque.
For Colorado, I'll mildly disagree. Pueblo isn't my favorite town, but it does have a population north of 100,000 people, which for out west, is pretty large. However, I wouldn't hate having Santa Fe or Albuquerque south of Pueblo (dismissing Walsenburg and Trinidad). Also, what would you propose for I-70 West out of Denver? If Pueblo is too small, Grand Junction is as well.
Chris
I think from Denver, I-25 SB being Colorado Springs and I-25 NB being Ft. Collins is fine; the next major interstate junction (I-25 @ I-80) is Cheyenne, but Ft. Collins is bigger, which is why I'm fine with it being the northbound control city from Denver. However, I-70 west could be Cove Fort (the routes western terminus) or simply Utah, I-70 east should be Topeka, and I-76 east should be Omaha. From Colorado Springs, I-25 SB should either be Albuquerque or dual Pueblo/Albuquerque. And from Pueblo, make Albuquerque the southbound control city. Continuing into New Mexico, keep Albuquerque as the southbound control city (dismissing Raton, Las Vegas, and Santa Fe).
Quote from: MattHanson939 on March 22, 2021, 07:24:40 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on March 22, 2021, 03:40:11 PM
Quote from: MattHanson939 on March 22, 2021, 03:31:28 PM
That said, I wish New Mexico and Colorado would be "big city" states in my opinion, if not use the next notable town and the next major city as dual control cities; the next major city/interstate junction is most often more well known to out-of-state motorists than small towns or smaller cities along the route. From Albuquerque for instance, I think the northbound control city on I-25 ought to be Colorado Springs* (or dual Santa Fe / Colorado Springs), southbound control ought to be El Paso** (or dual Las Cruces / El Paso); and on I-40, the westbound control from Albuquerque should be Flagstaff, and eastbound control should be Amarillo (if not WB dual Gallup / Flagstaff and EB Santa Rosa / Amarillo).
From Las Cruces, I-25 SB is El Paso** and I-25 north is Albuquerque; I-10 east is El Paso, but I-10 west should be Tucson instead of Deming (or perhaps use dual Deming / Tucson).
*Colorado Springs is actually the next major city from Albuquerque on I-25 north, despite there being no major interstate junction there (I-25 is the sole freeway running through that city); its population is over 400,000 people, which is why I think it should be a control city, and not use Denver until you're in C. Springs heading north.
**Despite El Paso not being on I-25, it's a straight shot from Albuquerque nonetheless, and a lot of mileage signs on I-25 southbound mention El Paso (the first two being just north of Albuquerque). And I-25 southbound defaults onto I-10 east (actually runs north-south between Las Cruces and El Paso) at the southern terminus. And this is why I think El Paso should be the southbound control city from Albuquerque.
For Colorado, I'll mildly disagree. Pueblo isn't my favorite town, but it does have a population north of 100,000 people, which for out west, is pretty large. However, I wouldn't hate having Santa Fe or Albuquerque south of Pueblo (dismissing Walsenburg and Trinidad). Also, what would you propose for I-70 West out of Denver? If Pueblo is too small, Grand Junction is as well.
Chris
I think from Denver, I-25 SB being Colorado Springs and I-25 NB being Ft. Collins is fine, considering that even though the next major interstate junction (I-25 @ I-80) is Cheyenne simply due to the fact that Ft. Collins is bigger than Cheyenne. However, I-70 west could be Cove Fort (the routes western terminus), I-70 east should be Topeka, and I-76 east should be Omaha. From Colorado Springs, I-25 SB should either be Albuquerque or dual Pueblo/Albuquerque. And from Pueblo, make Albuquerque the southbound control city. Continuing into New Mexico, keep Albuquerque as the southbound control city (dismissing Raton, Las Vegas, and Santa Fe).
Cove Fort? Just use Las Vegas.
This is where using a state as a control city is helpful. Signing it as Utah works for pretty much the whole state.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on March 22, 2021, 03:33:05 PM
Yuma isn't all that huge- I would use Yuma/San Diego on some signs though.
Yuma is a city of close to 100,000 people, with a metro area twice that. It's the 2nd largest city in Arizona outside of metro Phoenix (after Tucson).
Given how much Yuma has grown in recent years it deserves to be a control city. It's a halfway point of sorts for the entirety of I-8. I was a little kid when my dad was stationed at MCAS Yuma. It was one of my favorite places growing up as a Marine Corps brat. Yuma was a fraction of its size back then. All the development East of the Marine Corps base going up to the Fortuna Foothills wasn't there at all when I was a kid. It was pretty much all barren desert. A lot of the stuff on the current West and South sides of Yuma wasn't there either.
Yuma is also a pretty important destination in military terms. The Marine base is the biggest employer in the area. The Army's Yuma Proving Ground also has a lot of jobs.
QuoteCove Fort? Just use Las Vegas.
I-70 doesn't even run close to Las Vegas. In this case, make Utah the westbound control from Denver.
If you want to use a city not on an interstate as a control city, the most sensical way to do this is if that city is close by on an adjacent route and is a straight shot.
Good examples of this:
- I-8 in Arizona using Tucson as the eastbound control from Yuma
- On I-80 in New Jersey, New York City is the EB control as it defaults on to I-95 NB at the route's eastern terminus in Teaneck, and I-95 will take you straight into NYC via the George Washington Bridge
- CA-99 uses Los Angeles as the SB control city from Visalia and Bakersfield as traffic will default onto I-5 SB at the southern terminus
- El Paso is the SB control city on I-25 in New Mexico from Las Cruces (and it would also make sense to use El Paso as the SB control from Albuquerque)
Unusual instances of using a city not on a highway as a control city:
- I-40 in Arizona uses Los Angeles as the WB control city. Now this instance is unusual in that I-40 doesn't run close to LA, neither does I-15. However, I can think of two reasons behind this. 1) I-40 is a major trucking corridor, and the truck traffic using that highway goes to Los Angeles (via I-15 and I-10) or originates out of there. 2) This is very likely a holdover from the days when US 66 was signed; that highway did go to Los Angeles. But since US 66 was decommissioned over 30 years ago, I think it would make more sense to use San Bernardino as the westbound control city on I-40 from Flagstaff.
- I-8 from Yuma to Gila Bend uses Tucson and Phoenix as dual control cities going eastbound. Tucson makes sense, but Phoenix doesn't since I-8 does not even run close to that city. I think only Tucson should be the EB control on I-8, and there should not be a mention of Phoenix until the junction with Arizona state route 85 near Gila Bend.
After doing more research, I discovered that Grand Junction is indeed the most logical choice for the WB control city on I-70 from Denver because of its population of 67,000 habitants; and after Grand Junction there are no more sizable cities along I-70 west.
Plus, I figured that on I-25 south going from Denver, Colorado Springs is the perfect choice. But from C. Springs, I would dual sign Pueblo / Albuquerque. And from Pueblo to the NM border, only sign Albuquerque (dismiss Trinidad and Raton). Within New Mexico, keep Albuquerque as the primary control city on I-25 south but have Santa Fe as a secondary (dual sign Santa Fe / Albuquerque at some major interchanges with US routes), skip over Las Vegas and only mention it on distance signs as you get closer to that town. From Albuquerque, have El Paso become the primary control, with Las Cruces being a secondary (dual sign Las Cruces / El Paso on some overheads within ABQ).
Going north from ABQ on I-25, have Denver be the primary control but use Santa Fe as a secondary (e.g. dual signing Santa Fe / Denver on some overheads). From Santa Fe to the CO border, keep Denver as a control city.
I have seen older pics online of I-10 at the I-8 junction. At some point I-8 was signed "Yuma -- San Diego". That old signage has long since been replaced.