Changing Control Cities

[webny99]

The 'Remove Topic' button may be worth pressing at this point as we've been stuck on the Baltimore topic since page 2 of the thread. We're now on page 5, and I'm not sure if we'll move on from it.

Some people have tried to get back on topic, and we should. We just need Highwaystar to go away or for us to start ignoring him. Also, I don't like when topics are removed as it's interesting to read old AAroads posts that were drama-filled.

Generally, it's considered very bad form to resurrect a ten-year old thread anyway, especially if you haven't contributed anything substantially new. I'm not entirely sure where that convention comes from, as it doesn't seem to really hurt anything, but I am a bit surprised it hasn't yet been invoked as a reason to kill this one.

Actually, the bump had nothing to do with Baltimore. It was, in fact, one of the most random bumps I've ever seen.
It will never not be funny that, after 10 years of inactivity, this was the bump (reply #41), and now we're at reply #250 and counting:

https://goo.gl/maps/Tk4RvEETt8uNQq7m7
Why is Walt Whitman Bridge a pull through control on a route originating from where that particular bridge leads back to? Should be Williamstown- Atlantic City.

[sprjus4]

Another thing regarding Baltimore... it was never going to go to the "city center"  anyways. It was going to connect to I-95 at Exit 51, west of Downtown, where ramp stubs still exist and are visible today.

It would cut off a mere not even 2 miles from the present I-695 to I-95 routing.

[HighwayStar]

Another thing regarding Baltimore... it was never going to go to the "city center"  anyways. It was going to connect to I-95 at Exit 51, west of Downtown, where ramp stubs still exist and are visible today.

It would cut off a mere not even 2 miles from the present I-695 to I-95 routing.

But it would effectively double the current A to B capacity, which is a massive difference in traffic.

[SkyPesos]

Another thing regarding Baltimore... it was never going to go to the "city center"  anyways. It was going to connect to I-95 at Exit 51, west of Downtown, where ramp stubs still exist and are visible today.

It would cut off a mere not even 2 miles from the present I-695 to I-95 routing.

Had it all been completed in Baltimore, I-170 would enter Baltimore's city center. With HighwayStar's reason for control cities, Baltimore would be signed for I-170, and not at all on I-70, which would probably get 'To I-95' or something similar.

[kphoger]

HighwayStar:

↓   Repeated for emphasis  ↓

Then, it seems to me, control cities do not actually serve the purpose you imagine them to.

[jmacswimmer]

Another thing regarding Baltimore... it was never going to go to the "city center"  anyways. It was going to connect to I-95 at Exit 51, west of Downtown, where ramp stubs still exist and are visible today.

It would cut off a mere not even 2 miles from the present I-695 to I-95 routing.

Had it all been completed in Baltimore, I-170 would enter Baltimore's city center. With HighwayStar's reason for control cities, Baltimore would be signed for I-170, and not at all on I-70, which would probably get 'To I-95' or something similar.

And then we're right back to square one 

To your point, though: I imagine Downtown would indeed be signed for I-170 departing I-70, and based on the rough location of the I-70/I-170 interchange being (to my understanding) where Baltimore Street crosses Gwynn Falls, this is close enough to I-95 that an advance 1-or-2 mile sign could be used instead of a pull-thru "To I-95".

[HighwayStar]

Another thing regarding Baltimore... it was never going to go to the "city center"  anyways. It was going to connect to I-95 at Exit 51, west of Downtown, where ramp stubs still exist and are visible today.

It would cut off a mere not even 2 miles from the present I-695 to I-95 routing.

Had it all been completed in Baltimore, I-170 would enter Baltimore's city center. With HighwayStar's reason for control cities, Baltimore would be signed for I-170, and not at all on I-70, which would probably get 'To I-95' or something similar.

No, you are misrepresenting my standard, I-70 would have been sufficiently serving Baltimore for it to carry the designation, which cannot be said of its current terminus.

[Roadgeekteen]

Another thing regarding Baltimore... it was never going to go to the "city center"  anyways. It was going to connect to I-95 at Exit 51, west of Downtown, where ramp stubs still exist and are visible today.

It would cut off a mere not even 2 miles from the present I-695 to I-95 routing.

Had it all been completed in Baltimore, I-170 would enter Baltimore's city center. With HighwayStar's reason for control cities, Baltimore would be signed for I-170, and not at all on I-70, which would probably get 'To I-95' or something similar.

No, you are misrepresenting my standard, I-70 would have been sufficiently serving Baltimore for it to carry the designation, which cannot be said of its current terminus.

How does in not sufficiently serve Baltimore?

[sprjus4]

Another thing regarding Baltimore... it was never going to go to the "city center"  anyways. It was going to connect to I-95 at Exit 51, west of Downtown, where ramp stubs still exist and are visible today.

It would cut off a mere not even 2 miles from the present I-695 to I-95 routing.

Had it all been completed in Baltimore, I-170 would enter Baltimore's city center. With HighwayStar's reason for control cities, Baltimore would be signed for I-170, and not at all on I-70, which would probably get 'To I-95' or something similar.

No, you are misrepresenting my standard, I-70 would have been sufficiently serving Baltimore for it to carry the designation, which cannot be said of its current terminus.

How does I-70 not reaching I-95 not sufficiently serve? It would be no different than the present I-695 to I-95. You can access it via the interstate highway system, it's a relatively direct route, and doesn't involve arterial routes.

Also you continuously act like Downtown is the only place people are going. How about the suburbs of the whole Baltimore-Washington region, which I-70 provides connectivity to via other interstate highways and freeways and even passes through some directly.

[kphoger]

I-70 would have been sufficiently serving Baltimore for it to carry the designation, which cannot be said of its current terminus.

What does "serve" mean in that context?  Baltimore being on the sign helps drivers going to Baltimore get to Baltimore.

Then, it seems to me, control cities do not actually serve the purpose you imagine them to.

[Roadgeekteen]

Let's extend I-70 with a concurrency with I-695 and I-95 and replace I-395 with it, then I-70 would serve Baltimore! Problem solved!

[jmacswimmer]

Let's extend I-70 with a concurrency with I-695 and I-95 and replace I-395 with it, then I-70 would serve Baltimore! Problem solved!

But current I-395 ends at Orioles Park several blocks away from both Downtown & Inner Harbor, does that sufficiently serve Baltimore?

[Roadgeekteen]

Let's extend I-70 with a concurrency with I-695 and I-95 and replace I-395 with it, then I-70 would serve Baltimore! Problem solved!

But current I-395 ends at Orioles Park several blocks away from both Downtown & Inner Harbor, does that sufficiently serve Baltimore?

Guess we have to demolish the Baltimore Convention Center then so it can serve Baltimore!

[FrCorySticha]

Let's extend I-70 with a concurrency with I-695 and I-95 and replace I-395 with it, then I-70 would serve Baltimore! Problem solved!

Better yet: extend I-70 north on I-695, terminate I-83 at I-695, then run I-70 down I-83 into downtown. That really solves the problem!

[jmacswimmer]

Let's extend I-70 with a concurrency with I-695 and I-95 and replace I-395 with it, then I-70 would serve Baltimore! Problem solved!

Better yet: extend I-70 north on I-695, terminate I-83 at I-695, then run I-70 down I-83 into downtown. That really solves the problem!

Why not have it both ways? FrCorySticha's idea shall be I-70N, and Roadgeekteen's idea shall be I-70S. This way, downtown Baltimore is literally surrounded by I-70!

[Roadgeekteen]

Let's extend I-70 with a concurrency with I-695 and I-95 and replace I-395 with it, then I-70 would serve Baltimore! Problem solved!

Better yet: extend I-70 north on I-695, terminate I-83 at I-695, then run I-70 down I-83 into downtown. That really solves the problem!

Why not have it both ways? FrCorySticha’s idea shall be I-70N, and Roadgeekteen’s idea shall be I-70S. This way, downtown Baltimore is literally surrounded by I-70!

They should merge in Baltimore and form I-70L (I-70 loop).

[HighwayStar]

Let's extend I-70 with a concurrency with I-695 and I-95 and replace I-395 with it, then I-70 would serve Baltimore! Problem solved!

But current I-395 ends at Orioles Park several blocks away from both Downtown & Inner Harbor, does that sufficiently serve Baltimore?

Guess we have to demolish the Baltimore Convention Center then so it can serve Baltimore!

There are plenty of ways around total demolition, cut and cover, deep tunnel, etc.

[sprjus4]

Let's extend I-70 with a concurrency with I-695 and I-95 and replace I-395 with it, then I-70 would serve Baltimore! Problem solved!

But current I-395 ends at Orioles Park several blocks away from both Downtown & Inner Harbor, does that sufficiently serve Baltimore?

Guess we have to demolish the Baltimore Convention Center then so it can serve Baltimore!

There are plenty of ways around total demolition, cut and cover, deep tunnel, etc.

[roadman65]

Wow Baltimore is a popular city these days.  This is the second thread that the city is being argued on for control city status.  The other thread lacks Baltimore as the NJ Turnpike wants to use Wilmington over Baltimore.  This one has Baltimore, but should lack it.

So we have Baltimore being preserved and needed for both I-70 and the NJ Turnpike. 

Interesting and more so with one user in both discussions.

[Roadgeekteen]

Let's extend I-70 with a concurrency with I-695 and I-95 and replace I-395 with it, then I-70 would serve Baltimore! Problem solved!

But current I-395 ends at Orioles Park several blocks away from both Downtown & Inner Harbor, does that sufficiently serve Baltimore?

Guess we have to demolish the Baltimore Convention Center then so it can serve Baltimore!

There are plenty of ways around total demolition, cut and cover, deep tunnel, etc.

[hbelkins]

This thing has ceased being a dead horse being beaten, and is more like a cat on its fifth life.

No one else is going to agree with HighwayStar's contention. He's a chorus of one, swimming upstream against a forceful tide. I don't think he's going to change anyone's mind with his whackadoodle notion that I-70 doesn't serve Baltimore.

[Roadgeekteen]

This thing has ceased being a dead horse being beaten, and is more like a cat on its fifth life.

No one else is going to agree with HighwayStar's contention. He's a chorus of one, swimming upstream against a forceful tide. I don't think he's going to change anyone's mind with his whackadoodle notion that I-70 doesn't serve Baltimore.

We should move on.

[Occidental Tourist]

Couldn't we just annex Baltimore into Woodlawn and make Woodlawn the control city?

[empirestate]

Actually, the bump had nothing to do with Baltimore. It was, in fact, one of the most random bumps I've ever seen.

Right–as I say, not contributing anything new. (Or at least not anything that couldn't be covered by a more recent thread.) So I expected to see that used as a pretext to close things down once the Baltimore idea came up.

I will say, while I don't agree with HighwayStar any more than the rest of us do, I do know what it's like to have an idea in one's head that is firmly rooted there and not likely to be budged by outside persuasion. In my experience, this tends to be much more frustrating for the persuaders, and so far that seems to be the case here too. So I'd just recommend to the persuaders, assume that the persuasion will ultimately be unsuccessful, and judge from there whether you want to elevate the stakes of the discussion to the point where you become upset about it. If the outcome is critical, you may find it's worth it to do so, but for most people I'd wager the opposite is true.

[Roadgeekteen]

Couldn't we just annex Baltimore into Woodlawn and make Woodlawn the control city?

Baltimore should annex all of Maryland so I-70 would well serve Baltimore.