What state posts the worst control cities? The best?

[JayhawkCO]

Seriously, what does college football have to with control cities? What if there's a basketball school instead, or god forbid, a school that actually focuses on academics? Or a retirement community, which wouldn't have a university at all?

Actually, major universities with large student populations usually are Division 1 Football schools. Your not naming the school itself but the city it is in. How many cities can you come up with that has a major university but not much (under 10k) population for the city? The reason for this is now you get to add cities like Tuscaloosa and South Bend that normally may get passed up as control cities.

I mean, by definition if you have a major university (say, over 10K students), the city's population is going to be over 10K people.

Census data for populations as far as I recall do not account for student population in the city population. I could be wrong.

Otherwise, you're looking at:
Vermillion, SD (University of South Dakota) - 13,921
Pullman, WA (Washington State) - 46,808
Oxford, MS (Ole Miss) - 52,921
Athens, OH (Ohio University) - 64,702
Starkville, MS (Mississippi State) - 49,403
Ames, IA (Iowa State) - 94,035

These are about it for FBS/FCS level schools in metro/micro areas less than 100,000 people, with Ames being the only one on an interstate. (Vermillion isn't too far away from I-29, but not on it.)

[hobsini2]

I still believe that their should be a hierarchy for control cities. This would be my criteria for primary control cities eligibility. There would be exceptions to the rules:

1. Largest City or Metro Area in the state.
2. Capital City
3. City over 100k that is more than 50 miles from the previous rules or is at the terminus of the interstate.
4. City over 50k that has a Division 1 Football University or College AND is more than 50 miles from the previous rules.
5. Tourist destinations that get over 500k visitors a year. that are 25 miles from a previous rule. So this would be places like Wisconsin Dells and Pigeon Forge.
6. City over 20k that is more than 150 miles from the previous rules or is at the terminus of the interstate.
7. City over 10k that is more than 200 miles from the previous rules or is at the terminus of the interstate.

Secondary Control Cities:
1. City over 50k
2. Suburban satellite cities that are 25 miles or more from the Downtown of a metro area. This would include places like Waukegan, Elgin, Aurora and Joliet for Chicago.
3. City over 25k that is more than 50 miles from previous rules or is at the terminus of the interstate.
4. City over 10k that is more than 100 miles from the previous rules or is at the terminus of the interstate.
5. City over 5k that is more than 200 miles from the previous rules or is at the terminus of the interstate.

So, just curious, are you signing:
Zion National Park west of Grand Junction?
Theodore Roosevelt National Park east of Billings?
Hays east out of Denver?

Like I said, there are exceptions to the rule. This was a starting point for the validity of a control city. Hays would be better than Limon. Personally I would use Salina over Hays. As for the National Parks, those are a tough call. Certainly Zion over using Green River, Richfield or Cove Fort. But then again, Zion is near St George and not that far from Las Vegas. Maybe I should slot "Tourist destination" down one.

[NWI_Irish96]

Seriously, what does college football have to with control cities? What if there's a basketball school instead, or god forbid, a school that actually focuses on academics? Or a retirement community, which wouldn't have a university at all?

Actually, major universities with large student populations usually are Division 1 Football schools. Your not naming the school itself but the city it is in. How many cities can you come up with that has a major university but not much (under 10k) population for the city? The reason for this is now you get to add cities like Tuscaloosa and South Bend that normally may get passed up as control cities.

I mean, by definition if you have a major university (say, over 10K students), the city's population is going to be over 10K people.

Census data for populations as far as I recall do not account for student population in the city population. I could be wrong.

The census counts people where they "live and sleep most of the time" as of April 1 of the census year. Since April 1 is right in the middle of the school year, college students would be counted in their on-campus dorm or off-campus apartment.

[JayhawkCO]

Like I said, there are exceptions to the rule. This was a starting point for the validity of a control city. Hays would be better than Limon. Personally I would use Salina over Hays. As for the National Parks, those are a tough call. Certainly Zion over using Green River, Richfield or Cove Fort. But then again, Zion is near St George and not that far from Las Vegas. Maybe I should slot "Tourist destination" down one.

I think Hays is better than Salina for the Limon-haters.
For the Utah example, I think Zion doesn't work as well as St. George.
For the Montana/North Dakota example, I think Miles City still works fine and then Dickinson myself.

[hobsini2]

So let's say we take Alabama as a state to use for example.

Montgomery is automatic. Huntsville is automatic. Birmingham is automatic. Mobile is automatic. Put a 50 mile radius around those cities.
Tuscaloosa and Auburn would be the next tier of cities.
Gadsden and Decatur, while important to the state, would be relegated as secondary control cities.

[hobsini2]

Like I said, there are exceptions to the rule. This was a starting point for the validity of a control city. Hays would be better than Limon. Personally I would use Salina over Hays. As for the National Parks, those are a tough call. Certainly Zion over using Green River, Richfield or Cove Fort. But then again, Zion is near St George and not that far from Las Vegas. Maybe I should slot "Tourist destination" down one.

I think Hays is better than Salina for the Limon-haters.
For the Utah example, I think Zion doesn't work as well as St. George.
For the Montana/North Dakota example, I think Miles City still works fine and then Dickinson myself.

Why Hays over Salina? Salina is bigger and has an important junction.

[JayhawkCO]

Like I said, there are exceptions to the rule. This was a starting point for the validity of a control city. Hays would be better than Limon. Personally I would use Salina over Hays. As for the National Parks, those are a tough call. Certainly Zion over using Green River, Richfield or Cove Fort. But then again, Zion is near St George and not that far from Las Vegas. Maybe I should slot "Tourist destination" down one.

I think Hays is better than Salina for the Limon-haters.
For the Utah example, I think Zion doesn't work as well as St. George.
For the Montana/North Dakota example, I think Miles City still works fine and then Dickinson myself.

Why Hays over Salina? Salina is bigger and has an important junction.

Hays is the largest city for a very, very large distance heading east from Denver (340 miles), and in return, the last place for a semblance of civilization heading west from Salina too.

[hobsini2]

Like I said, there are exceptions to the rule. This was a starting point for the validity of a control city. Hays would be better than Limon. Personally I would use Salina over Hays. As for the National Parks, those are a tough call. Certainly Zion over using Green River, Richfield or Cove Fort. But then again, Zion is near St George and not that far from Las Vegas. Maybe I should slot "Tourist destination" down one.

I think Hays is better than Salina for the Limon-haters.
For the Utah example, I think Zion doesn't work as well as St. George.
For the Montana/North Dakota example, I think Miles City still works fine and then Dickinson myself.

Why Hays over Salina? Salina is bigger and has an important junction.

Hays is the largest city for a very, very large distance heading east from Denver (340 miles), and in return, the last place for a semblance of civilization heading west from Salina too.

Fair enough.

[Scott5114]

Seriously, what does college football have to with control cities? What if there's a basketball school instead, or god forbid, a school that actually focuses on academics? Or a retirement community, which wouldn't have a university at all?

Actually, major universities with large student populations usually are Division 1 Football schools. Your not naming the school itself but the city it is in. How many cities can you come up with that has a major university but not much (under 10k) population for the city? The reason for this is now you get to add cities like Tuscaloosa and South Bend that normally may get passed up as control cities.

Absolutely not. You now have an external organization with no engineering background whatsoever influencing control city choice. And the NCAA and the football conferences are not a neutral body–they have financial interests guiding what constitutes "Division 1". Wrapping that up in control city selection is a recipe to get control cities that would make PennDOT blush.

[hobsini2]

Seriously, what does college football have to with control cities? What if there's a basketball school instead, or god forbid, a school that actually focuses on academics? Or a retirement community, which wouldn't have a university at all?

Actually, major universities with large student populations usually are Division 1 Football schools. Your not naming the school itself but the city it is in. How many cities can you come up with that has a major university but not much (under 10k) population for the city? The reason for this is now you get to add cities like Tuscaloosa and South Bend that normally may get passed up as control cities.

Absolutely not. You now have an external organization with no engineering background whatsoever influencing control city choice. And the NCAA and the football conferences are not a neutral body–they have financial interests guiding what constitutes "Division 1". Wrapping that up in control city selection is a recipe to get control cities that would make PennDOT blush.

Scott, so cities like Lafayette IN, Tuscaloosa, Gainesville, Waco and South Bend, all on interstates but are not considered major cities, should not be recognized as a major destination because of NCAA status? Those are big universities in cities of good size. THAT was the criteria I was trying to define. It's easier to define them as Division I football universities in small cities. My intention was not to have anything to do with the NCAA body itself. Maybe I wasn't clear enough.

[Scott5114]

Seriously, what does college football have to with control cities? What if there's a basketball school instead, or god forbid, a school that actually focuses on academics? Or a retirement community, which wouldn't have a university at all?

Actually, major universities with large student populations usually are Division 1 Football schools. Your not naming the school itself but the city it is in. How many cities can you come up with that has a major university but not much (under 10k) population for the city? The reason for this is now you get to add cities like Tuscaloosa and South Bend that normally may get passed up as control cities.

Absolutely not. You now have an external organization with no engineering background whatsoever influencing control city choice. And the NCAA and the football conferences are not a neutral body–they have financial interests guiding what constitutes "Division 1". Wrapping that up in control city selection is a recipe to get control cities that would make PennDOT blush.

Scott, so cities like Lafayette IN, Tuscaloosa, Gainesville, Waco and South Bend, all on interstates but are not considered major cities, should not be recognized as a major destination because of NCAA status? Those are big universities in cities of good size. THAT was the criteria I was trying to define. It's easier to define them as Division I football universities in small cities. My intention was not to have anything to do with the NCAA body itself. Maybe I wasn't clear enough.

No. None of those should be control cities. I'm not a football fan, so my association with them is, in order,

1) Where?
2) I have heard of this place but have no idea where in Alabama it is
3) The only reason this is a control city is because TxDOT is too much of a little bitch to sign Oklahoma City
4) The only reason this is a control city is because TxDOT is too much of a little bitch to sign Austin
5) Isn't that where the Secretary of Transportation is from?

[hotdogPi]

3) The only reason this is a control city is because TxDOT is too much of a little bitch to sign Oklahoma City

This isn't the state hobsini2 intended, which means it's even less important. (It's a legitimate control city for I-985, but that's not the state hobsini2 was referring to, either.)

[Scott5114]

3) The only reason this is a control city is because TxDOT is too much of a little bitch to sign Oklahoma City

This isn't the state hobsini2 intended, which means it's even less important.

If the first thing that springs to mind when you say the name of a city is another city of that name in a completely different state, it shouldn't be a control city.

(Yes, I am also calling out Las Vegas, New Mexico here.)

[SkyPesos]

If the first thing that springs to mind when you say the name of a city is another city of that name in a completely different state, it shouldn't be a control city.

*looks at all the Springfields out there...*
And this is one reason why I'm in favor of I-44 WB in St Louis using Tulsa as a control city.

[Scott5114]

At least there are enough prominent Springfields that it's generally well-known that it's a city name that exists in several states (to the extent that a popular television show makes a running gag out of it). Same goes with Portland OR/ME.

[hobsini2]

3) The only reason this is a control city is because TxDOT is too much of a little bitch to sign Oklahoma City

This isn't the state hobsini2 intended, which means it's even less important. (It's a legitimate control city for I-985, but that's not the state hobsini2 was referring to, either.)

I was talking about Gainesville FL not TX. Gainesville FL IS an important city in Florida.

[hobsini2]

Seriously, what does college football have to with control cities? What if there's a basketball school instead, or god forbid, a school that actually focuses on academics? Or a retirement community, which wouldn't have a university at all?

Actually, major universities with large student populations usually are Division 1 Football schools. Your not naming the school itself but the city it is in. How many cities can you come up with that has a major university but not much (under 10k) population for the city? The reason for this is now you get to add cities like Tuscaloosa and South Bend that normally may get passed up as control cities.

Absolutely not. You now have an external organization with no engineering background whatsoever influencing control city choice. And the NCAA and the football conferences are not a neutral body–they have financial interests guiding what constitutes "Division 1". Wrapping that up in control city selection is a recipe to get control cities that would make PennDOT blush.

Scott, so cities like Lafayette IN, Tuscaloosa, Gainesville, Waco and South Bend, all on interstates but are not considered major cities, should not be recognized as a major destination because of NCAA status? Those are big universities in cities of good size. THAT was the criteria I was trying to define. It's easier to define them as Division I football universities in small cities. My intention was not to have anything to do with the NCAA body itself. Maybe I wasn't clear enough.

No. None of those should be control cities. I'm not a football fan, so my association with them is, in order,

1) Where?
2) I have heard of this place but have no idea where in Alabama it is
3) The only reason this is a control city is because TxDOT is too much of a little bitch to sign Oklahoma City
4) The only reason this is a control city is because TxDOT is too much of a little bitch to sign Austin
5) Isn't that where the Secretary of Transportation is from?

Lafayette IN - Purdue Univ, about halfway between Indianapolis and Gary on I-65
Tuscaloosa AL - U of Alabama, halfway between Birmingham and Meridian on I-20/59
Gainesville FL - U of Florida, 2 hours north of Tampa on I-75
Waco TX - Baylor Univ, halfway between Dallas and Austin on I-35
South Bend IN - U of Notre Dame, 80 miles east of Chicago on I-80/90

[MattHanson939]

I start to have issues with that when they are freeways or expressways. Ohio have a lot of US route freeways or expressways that could afford maybe not using every county seat it passes by, and something more for longer-distance travelers. Like US 35 is a commonly used route to get between the Midwest and Southeast, and could be better off only using only Dayton, Chillicothe and Charleston WV as controls.

That would also depend on certain situations.   If a certain US route is a freeway-expressway for much of its length and does not downgrade to a surface street in any small town it passes through (or in the case it's a rural expressway, upgrades to a freeway in important towns — even bypassing them like interstates usually do), then yeah I would go ahead and sign the next big city.  US 101 in California is mostly a freeway and an expressway between Los Angeles and San Francisco.  Ventura is the first northbound control on US 101, and then changes to San Francisco.  But I would make the argument that San Jose should be signed because it's now bigger than San Francisco. 

But if a US route a limited-access highway for only 30 miles after leaving city/town A and upgrading from surface street to freeway/expressway and then downgrades to a surface street in city/town B, then in this case I'd use in-state control cities.  Upon splitting from I-25, US 84/285 in New Mexico heads north through Santa Fe as a surface street (St. Francis Drive), and then upgrades to a freeway for 13 miles as you leave the city limits.  It then downgrades to an expressway in Pojoaque (where there's a pretty important junction with NM 502 going west out of it to Los Alamos) and remains that way for about 9 miles until you reach Española where it downgrades to a surface street.  Going north from Santa Fe, Española is the control city on US 84/285. 

Similarly, US 70 is a freeway for 13 miles going east from Las Cruces before downgrading to a divided highway in the really small town of Organ on the rest of its way to Alamogordo, which is the eastbound control city on that stretch of US 70.  In Alamogordo, US 70 intersects US 54, and both run concurrently until Tularosa (the control city from Alamogordo) where the two roads split — 70 going east to Ruidoso and Roswell and 54 continuing north to Carrizozo (where it intersects US 380).  US 82 begins in Alamogordo at 54/70 and goes through Cloudcroft and through the mountains before reaching Artesia. 

I'm going to argue that Artesia should be the control city on US 82 because it's much bigger than Cloudcroft, and there's a junction with US 285 (north to go to Roswell and south to Carlsbad).  Carrizozo is fine on 54; but after the junction with 380, Santa Rosa should be the control city since Vaughn is almost a ghost town despite there being three US junctions.  And Santa Rosa is also where 54 intersects I-40.  285 from Clines Corners signs Santa Fe going north, but the southbound control should be Roswell since it's one of New Mexico's largest cities.  Conversely, Santa Fe should also be signed going north from Roswell, skipping over Vaughn.  70 east from Roswell could dual sign Portales and Clovis, and going west should be dual signed for Alamogordo and Las Cruces.

Another example worth mentioning is US 60 in Arizona.  Even though it's a freeway when it splits from I-10 in Tempe, the control cities are Mesa and Globe going east.  Upon leaving the Phoenix metro, 60 downgrades from freeway to divided highway and then intersects US 70 in Globe.  After Globe, Show Low becomes the eastbound control on 60. 

[ethanhopkin14]

I would like to add that one qualifier that should not be taken into consideration when choosing control cities is whether or not I (or the average knucklehead) has heard of the city.  What I don't know could fill a warehouse. 

[MattHanson939]

The other reason US highways tend to heavily use in-state control cities is because many (if not most) long-distance travelers use the interstates more often. 

[hbelkins]

If the first thing that springs to mind when you say the name of a city is another city of that name in a completely different state, it shouldn't be a control city.

*looks at all the Springfields out there...*
And this is one reason why I'm in favor of I-44 WB in St Louis using Tulsa as a control city.

Or you could do what some states do, and use a state abbreviation to dispel any confusion.

West Virginia tends to use state abbreviations on all of its out-of-state controls (no state on "Cumberland" on I-68 at Morgantown is a huge exception) so you have "Washington, Pa." to distinguish it from "Washington, DC" which would be logical to use for I-68.

Tennessee uses "Jackson, Miss" in Memphis on I-55 to distinguish it from Jackson, Tenn., the largest town between Nashville and Memphis on I-40.

So "Springfield, Mo." would work for I-44, although Springfield, Ill., is skipped on I-55 in favor of Chicago.

It's a bit shocking to see Tulsa listed on I-64 at I-255 east of St. Louis.

[SkyPesos]

^ Except "Springfield, MO"  is 15 characters long including the comma and space. "Tulsa"  is 5 characters long. Obvious choice here on which to use when one of them is the name of 2 cities in different states nearby.
But then again, I would like more consistency for control cities from MoDOT first. You only see Tulsa in the St Louis area before it switches to Rolla. Tulsa doesn't show up again until west of Joplin.

[SkyPesos]

The other reason US highways tend to heavily use in-state control cities is because many (if not most) long-distance travelers use the interstates more often.

Only if your state is like NC and goes slap happy with interstate shields that all the major US route freeways are future interstates. Otherwise, there's lots of examples of US or state route expressways/freeways used as part of long distance trips, like US 35 east of Dayton I mentioned earlier.

[hobsini2]

The other reason US highways tend to heavily use in-state control cities is because many (if not most) long-distance travelers use the interstates more often.

Only if your state is like NC and goes slap happy with interstate shields that all the major US route freeways are future interstates. Otherwise, there's lots of examples of US or state route expressways/freeways used as part of long distance trips, like US 35 east of Dayton I mentioned earlier.

US 218 in Iowa south of I-80 comes to mind.

[US 89]

The other reason US highways tend to heavily use in-state control cities is because many (if not most) long-distance travelers use the interstates more often.

Only if your state is like NC and goes slap happy with interstate shields that all the major US route freeways are future interstates. Otherwise, there's lots of examples of US or state route expressways/freeways used as part of long distance trips, like US 35 east of Dayton I mentioned earlier.

I mean, we don't really have US route freeways out west outside of cities