Limon

[thspfc]

Like it or not, Limon is a crossroads for travelers both eastbound and westbound. It's not a big town, but it IS a major decision point for travelers in the area.

Doesn't mean that it has to be a control city, especially when Denver, a little bit (a lot) of a crossroads itself is nearby.

[mrsman]

I really think this boils down to what you expect a control city to do.

A control city can describe the major destination that the highway leads to, which may be near or far, which may or may not actually be on that particular route.

A control city can describe the best place within the next 200 miles to stop for fuel, food and lodging. This should be on the route, but may or may not be a "recognizable city."

I prefer having primary and secondary control cities when both of the above are not the same place. That provides the best information.

In this case, going east from Denver on I-70, I'd sign both Limon and Kansas City. Kansas City best describes where this route is going, and Limon best describes where I might want to stop next. Once you past Limon, that becomes Goodland, then Hays (perhaps), maybe Salina, then Topeka, and finally just Kansas City by itself.

I agree that the best approach for most control city issues is to have both a primary and secondary control city.  The signs are largely big enough in many cases to afford the ability of signing two cities.

Pull through signs on the main highway.

Signs leading to only one ramp, from both other freeways and from the streets.

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.0028384,-77.0772711,3a,75y,354.37h,84.14t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sAVfcbk_FcNaPDY_s0hF5Ag!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.0357319,-77.1446762,3a,75y,164.53h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1scewKVR8FxjHl1_oSC_Za1g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

The problem of picking and choosing one control city will occur on the signs that lead to cities in both directions.  This is for instance on a sign that says "I-70, Denver, Kansas City, 2 Miles".  It gives advanced warning for both directions, so only one city for each direction can be shown.

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.073376,-76.9300071,3a,75y,72.08h,87.26t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sXjcG_9LMFWkTOT1sHKiPzw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

So primary and secondary control cities should be signed, to the extent possible.  And only primary control cities, which are of national importance, where it is not practical to sign two control cities.

[J N Winkler]

A few further observations on how the Limon versus Denver choice has historically been handled in Kansas:

Kansas SHC project I-70-2(17)136 and I-70-3(17)143 (1965) (on a single plans set) called for the next one or two county seats on distance signs and did not include ramp signs of the type currently used in Kansas (with shield, cardinal direction word, destination, and arrow).  This project was far enough within Kansas that no Colorado destinations were mentioned on any of the signs.  (Generally speaking, if a number follows the parentheses in an Interstate project number similar to those cited here, then it is a nominal milepost.)

KDOT projects EHS-I-70-2(33)113 Parts I & II (1972) and I-70-1(22)40 (1975) provided for county seats (Colby, Oakley, WaKeeney, and Hays) on ramp signs (apparently recently introduced) and Denver ("Denver Colo") as the bottom line on distance signs in the westbound direction.

KDOT project 70-26 K-4440-01 (1994), apparently to build the diamond interchange for Commerce Parkway near Hays (present-day Exit 161) at the location of a former rest area, featured ramp signs with Limon ("Limon Colo").

[minneha]

Using Limon as a control city for westbound I-70 in western Kansas and eastern Colorado doesn't make any sense, when the much larger and more appropriate Denver is able to be used as the control city. When you get on Commerce Parkway in Hays, which is the easternmost Hays exit (and therefore the first exit in Kansas that would use either Limon or Denver as the control city for westbound traffic, since exits to the east of Commerce Parkway use Hays as the control city), the on-ramp signs say Denver. It feels appropriate. Denver is the first major city that you come to if you take I-70 west from Hays. Using Limon feels inappropriate when there is a much larger city just a few miles down the same highway.

The only justification people give for using Limon as the control city for westbound I-70 is the US-24 junction for travelers going to Colorado Springs. But in my mind, people who are taking I-70 intending to exit at US-24 to go to Colorado Springs don't need Limon signs everywhere to find their exit to Colorado Springs. They already know where they are going and what exit they need to take, and if they don't, once they get closer to Limon they'll see the exit signs for Colorado Springs. I don't see how having Limon signs everywhere helps them. Sure, Limon should be listed on distance signs so they know how far away the exit is. But Limon doesn't need to be a control city in order to be listed on distance signs.

Now when it comes to eastbound I-70 traffic and Limon's role, in my opinion it's a lot trickier. There is a lot of signage around the Denver metro using Limon as the control city for eastbound I-70. There are large overhead pull-through signs over I-70 saying Limon and large overhead exit signs on I-25, I-225, and E-470 saying Limon. They are pretty committed to using Limon. I think it could work to use Hays instead of Limon. But I don't know if Colorado would go for that.

[Flint1979]

Limon is more well known in this area that everyone is thinking it is. It's a hub city in eastern Colorado, I don't see what the big deal is.

[kphoger]

I'm not voting, because my position is more nuanced.  After several discussions on the forum recently, here's my take:

Limon is fine as a westbound control city.  Everyone in the area knows it, and it's a decision point.

Limon is less suitable as an eastbound control city–but mainly because I prefer control cities to be farther-away locations.  Burlington, Hays, or Salina would probably be better.

[minneha]

I honestly think the simplest thing to do would be to eliminate Limon entirely as a control city, both in eastbound and westbound directions, and just use Hays and Denver. Hays would be the control city for eastbound I-70 from Denver to Hays and Denver would be the control city for westbound I-70 from Hays to Denver. They already use Denver as the control city in many areas of western Kansas (there is a mixture of Limon and Denver signs, but most of the Limon signs are older and the Denver usage is more common in newer signs). And Colorado uses Hays as the control city east of Limon.

I totally disagree with adding any new control cities between Hays and Denver, such as Colby, Goodland, or Burlington. I think it's completely unnecessary and would just complicate things with the different signage that would need to be added.

[SkyPesos]

I like Control City Freak's suggestion of using "Kansas" as a control city for I-70 EB from Denver.

[kphoger]

I honestly think the simplest thing to do would be to eliminate Limon entirely as a control city, both in eastbound and westbound directions, and just use Hays and Denver. Hays would be the control city for eastbound I-70 from Denver to Hays and Denver would be the control city for westbound I-70 from Hays to Denver. They already use Denver as the control city in many areas of western Kansas (there is a mixture of Limon and Denver signs, but most of the Limon signs are older and the Denver usage is more common in newer signs). And Colorado uses Hays as the control city east of Limon.

I totally disagree with adding any new control cities between Hays and Denver, such as Colby, Goodland, or Burlington. I think it's completely unnecessary and would just complicate things with the different signage that would need to be added.

I've never lived in Denver, but my suspicion is that more people there know where Limon is than know where Hays is.

[JayhawkCO]

Ding ding ding.

[minneha]

I've never lived in Denver, but my suspicion is that more people there know where Limon is than know where Hays is.

They probably do. And having huge overhead signs with Limon plastered on them on I-70, I-25, I-225, and E-470 certainly helps.

I would potentially be in favor of using Topeka, if Hays is considered provincial or an unknown destination for Denver travelers. Topeka would be the next "large" city on I-70 east of Denver. It would skip over a few control cities to use Topeka, but there's precedent for that with places like Kansas City skipping over Columbia and Wentzville in favor of using St. Louis.

[JayhawkCO]

I've never lived in Denver, but my suspicion is that more people there know where Limon is than know where Hays is.

They probably do. And having huge overhead signs with Limon plastered on them on I-70, I-25, I-225, and E-470 certainly helps.

I would potentially be in favor of using Topeka, if Hays is considered provincial or an unknown destination for Denver travelers. Topeka would be the next "large" city on I-70 east of Denver. It would skip over a few control cities to use Topeka, but there's precedent for that with places like Kansas City skipping over Columbia and Wentzville in favor of using St. Louis.

No one in Denver can point to Topeka on a map either.

[Rothman]

I honestly think the simplest thing to do would be to eliminate Limon entirely as a control city, both in eastbound and westbound directions, and just use Hays and Denver. Hays would be the control city for eastbound I-70 from Denver to Hays and Denver would be the control city for westbound I-70 from Hays to Denver. They already use Denver as the control city in many areas of western Kansas (there is a mixture of Limon and Denver signs, but most of the Limon signs are older and the Denver usage is more common in newer signs). And Colorado uses Hays as the control city east of Limon.

I totally disagree with adding any new control cities between Hays and Denver, such as Colby, Goodland, or Burlington. I think it's completely unnecessary and would just complicate things with the different signage that would need to be added.

No, the simplest thing to do is leave it alone.  As long as the control city is in the proper direction and the road actually takes you there in some fashion, what's on the sign is good enough.

[zzcarp]

I honestly think the simplest thing to do would be to eliminate Limon entirely as a control city, both in eastbound and westbound directions, and just use Hays and Denver. Hays would be the control city for eastbound I-70 from Denver to Hays and Denver would be the control city for westbound I-70 from Hays to Denver. They already use Denver as the control city in many areas of western Kansas (there is a mixture of Limon and Denver signs, but most of the Limon signs are older and the Denver usage is more common in newer signs). And Colorado uses Hays as the control city east of Limon.

I totally disagree with adding any new control cities between Hays and Denver, such as Colby, Goodland, or Burlington. I think it's completely unnecessary and would just complicate things with the different signage that would need to be added.

No, the simplest thing to do is leave it alone.  As long as the control city is in the proper direction and the road actually takes you there in some fashion, what's on the sign is good enough.

Was just posting the same thing. It's in the proper direction. It's a major decision point in both directions (WB is US 24 for the Springs or I-70 for Denver, EB for US 287/40 which is the Ports-to-Plains corridor to OK/TX or I-70 to Hays and points east). And leaving it the way it is is literally the simplest thing to do.

[minneha]

You can see with the mixture of Limon and Denver on-ramp signs in western Kansas that not everyone agrees that Limon is an appropriate control city.

[J N Winkler]

Of course people in Denver know where Limon is--it is nearby, unlike any town of any size in Kansas.

If we're going to go with the status quo, then Limon would continue not to be signed in Kansas.  KDOT does not list it as an approved control city for I-70.

[kphoger]

If we're going to go with the status quo, then Limon would continue not to be signed in Kansas.  KDOT does not list it as an approved control city for I-70.

And yet...

https://goo.gl/maps/R6owa1ebYXHqDuJF9
https://goo.gl/maps/UFwDkW8XSwxjaUTR8
https://goo.gl/maps/eYJxQ1H6ocoyi8sh9
https://goo.gl/maps/rGe86MMCPwWpizLk7
https://goo.gl/maps/LpzaAczctLG5iRgX7

(sorry for the y in that last one)

[minneha]

And yet...

https://goo.gl/maps/R6owa1ebYXHqDuJF9
https://goo.gl/maps/UFwDkW8XSwxjaUTR8
https://goo.gl/maps/eYJxQ1H6ocoyi8sh9
https://goo.gl/maps/rGe86MMCPwWpizLk7
https://goo.gl/maps/LpzaAczctLG5iRgX7

(sorry for the y in that last one)

That first one is a mess. The small sign on the approach from the north says Salina and Limon, but the large on-ramp sign at the intersection says Denver. Then if you continue south, the on-ramp to eastbound I-70 says Salina, but the small sign on the approach from the south says Hays and Limon. I have to think that some of these Limon and Salina signs are just old signs that haven't been replaced yet. Hays became a control city in the 1990s, I believe. So there may be signs out there that still say Salina, when they should say Hays.

[Rothman]

You can see with the mixture of Limon and Denver on-ramp signs in western Kansas that not everyone agrees that Limon is an appropriate control city.

Heh.  Or, engineers just slap some city on there in the plans.

It just doesn't matter.

[kphoger]

And yet...

https://goo.gl/maps/R6owa1ebYXHqDuJF9
https://goo.gl/maps/UFwDkW8XSwxjaUTR8
https://goo.gl/maps/eYJxQ1H6ocoyi8sh9
https://goo.gl/maps/rGe86MMCPwWpizLk7
https://goo.gl/maps/LpzaAczctLG5iRgX7

(sorry for the y in that last one)

That first one is a mess. The small sign on the approach from the north says Salina and Limon, but the large on-ramp sign at the intersection says Denver. Then if you continue south, the on-ramp to eastbound I-70 says Salina, but the small sign on the approach from the south says Hays and Limon. I have to think that some of these Limon and Salina signs are just old signs that haven't been replaced yet. Hays became a control city in the 1990s, I believe. So there may be signs out there that still say Salina, when they should say Hays.

Quite possible.

Here's another one:  https://goo.gl/maps/gBwaigdLWibXKnHg8

And, at the K-211 interchange, the signage was indeed changed from Limon to Denver between 2018 and 2021.

[CoreySamson]

Honestly, my opinions on control cities have changed somewhat, which relates to this discussion of Limon.

If we're all being honest, the general American public does not care about geography, especially not what cities lie 200 miles away. Control cities were originally useful for travelers because they mentioned the major waypoints that travelers saw on their paper maps that showed them the way to their destination. But now, their usefulness is waning. Travelers don't use a paper map to show them where to go anymore. They have phones and GPS now that take all the thought out of planning a route. Autonomous cars will make that process even less unnecessary. I'm not saying that the general public is dumb for not caring about geography and control cities anymore. What I am saying is that the tools of the 21st century have made it so drivers don't have to care about these things so that they can focus more on the things that interest them.

Let's use Limon as an example. Does the average motorist know enough about geography to care that Denver is much bigger than Limon? Perhaps, but would the sign saying "Limon" instead of "Denver" confuse them at all, or make them question why it was on the mileage sign? I don't think it would. The average motorist isn't holding up a paper map and noting where the next big control city is to gain their bearings. Instead, they are just following the signs that Google, Siri, Waze, or their GPS is telling them to follow. They don't care about these minutiae that we care about. And since they don't care if a town is a control city or not, I've found that I don't really care either.

However, I do agree that control cities need to have some sort of standards. They must be on the route (or at least pretty close to it) they must be consistently posted (so that travelers aren't confused when it disappears from signs without passing it), and they must have the sort of services that travelers need (food, lodging, gas, EV chargers, etc.). Other than that, I don't think it really matters what constitutes a control city. And from those criteria, it seems to me that Limon is fine as a control city.

[kphoger]

Control cities were originally useful for travelers because they mentioned the major waypoints that travelers saw on their paper maps that showed them the way to their destination. But now, their usefulness is waning. Travelers don't use a paper map to show them where to go anymore. They have phones and GPS now that take all the thought out of planning a route.

Control cities are still quite useful, IMHO.  If my family is driving long-distance, and I get off the Interstate for lunch and a fill-up, and then my wife takes over the driving, but she's not sure about the ramp configuration at that particular interchange–then the control cities on the signs let her know which ramp to take.  Loop ramps and stacks make all sorts of interchanges less than intuitive.

[J N Winkler]

If we're going to go with the status quo, then Limon would continue not to be signed in Kansas.  KDOT does not list it as an approved control city for I-70.

And yet...

https://goo.gl/maps/R6owa1ebYXHqDuJF9
https://goo.gl/maps/UFwDkW8XSwxjaUTR8
https://goo.gl/maps/eYJxQ1H6ocoyi8sh9
https://goo.gl/maps/rGe86MMCPwWpizLk7
https://goo.gl/maps/LpzaAczctLG5iRgX7

(sorry for the y in that last one)

Indeed.  I suspect that they all date from the I-70 sign replacement in the late 1990's, when KDOT was still using Limon as a control city.  With the exception of the last, each sign faces north, meaning it will take much longer for the sheeting to deteriorate to a degree that justifies replacement.

Here's another one:  https://goo.gl/maps/gBwaigdLWibXKnHg8

This one does face south.  However, it uses demountable copy, which KDOT abandoned around the time it stopped using Limon as a control city.

Heh.  Or, engineers just slap some city on there in the plans.

Not in Kansas.  KDOT has been consistent about using Limon before 2007 and not using it after.

[Scott5114]

I've never lived in Denver, but my suspicion is that more people there know where Limon is than know where Hays is.

They probably do. And having huge overhead signs with Limon plastered on them on I-70, I-25, I-225, and E-470 certainly helps.

I would potentially be in favor of using Topeka, if Hays is considered provincial or an unknown destination for Denver travelers. Topeka would be the next "large" city on I-70 east of Denver. It would skip over a few control cities to use Topeka, but there's precedent for that with places like Kansas City skipping over Columbia and Wentzville in favor of using St. Louis.

No one in Denver can point to Topeka on a map either.

Maybe not, but they do teach the state capitals there, yeah? So at least they would know Topeka would be in the general direction of Kansas.

[JayhawkCO]

I've never lived in Denver, but my suspicion is that more people there know where Limon is than know where Hays is.

They probably do. And having huge overhead signs with Limon plastered on them on I-70, I-25, I-225, and E-470 certainly helps.

I would potentially be in favor of using Topeka, if Hays is considered provincial or an unknown destination for Denver travelers. Topeka would be the next "large" city on I-70 east of Denver. It would skip over a few control cities to use Topeka, but there's precedent for that with places like Kansas City skipping over Columbia and Wentzville in favor of using St. Louis.

No one in Denver can point to Topeka on a map either.

Maybe not, but they do teach the state capitals there, yeah? So at least they would know Topeka would be in the general direction of Kansas.

Sure, but so is Liberal and you don't take the same highways to get here, hence why I hate control states.