Control Cities

[SkyPesos]

It's not the main control, but the Kansas Turnpike now has a supplemental sign for Denver on the northbound approach to the I-135 interchange.

Does KDOT have one in Salina at I-70 west from I-135 to follow up?

Don't see one via GSV

Why is Hays the 70 WB Control in Salina @I-135, anyway? Denver is roughly 400 miles away - plenty close enough to be the WB Control - just ask I-57 in Chicago about Memphis!

I rather have Champaign signed before Memphis on SB 57 from Chicago.

[Roadgeekteen]

It's not the main control, but the Kansas Turnpike now has a supplemental sign for Denver on the northbound approach to the I-135 interchange.

Does KDOT have one in Salina at I-70 west from I-135 to follow up?

Don't see one via GSV

Why is Hays the 70 WB Control in Salina @I-135, anyway? Denver is roughly 400 miles away - plenty close enough to be the WB Control - just ask I-57 in Chicago about Memphis!

I rather have Champaign signed before Memphis on SB 57 from Chicago.

I like far away cities but I agree, sign Memphis south of Champaign.

[HighwayStar]

Connecting to a highway that can take you someplace is not enough for control city status.

Your theory is contradicted by a whole lot of reality.

I-70 goes through Pittsburgh in the same sense that I-80 goes through Cleveland and Chicago.

What about I-40 going to Los Angeles? AZ signs I-40 west of Flagstaff as LA despite you having to use two other interstates to get there.

I-80 and New York City
I-65 and Chicago
I-57 and Memphis
I-24 and St Louis
I-88(IL) and Iowa
I-22 and Memphis
I-15 and LA
I-70 and Las Vegas

Its not like this is that rare a phenomenon

Its not a theory, a theory is a proposed explanation for a phenomenon. This is nothing of the sort, it is an opinion  on what a control city should be, and thus any existing counterexamples are simply cases where the control city should be re-assigned. It cannot be "wrong" though you may disagree with it as a definition.

[sprjus4]

, and thus any existing counterexamples are simply cases where the control city should be re-assigned.

Disagree.

Question. What should I-40's control city be south of Raleigh and I-95?

[Roadgeekteen]

, and thus any existing counterexamples are simply cases where the control city should be re-assigned.

Disagree.

Question. What should I-40's control city be south of Raleigh and I-95?

Wilmington.

[sprjus4]

, and thus any existing counterexamples are simply cases where the control city should be re-assigned.

Disagree.

Question. What should I-40's control city be south of Raleigh and I-95?

Wilmington.

The question was directed at HighwayStar.

[Roadgeekteen]

, and thus any existing counterexamples are simply cases where the control city should be re-assigned.

Disagree.

Question. What should I-40’s control city be south of Raleigh and I-95?

Wilmington.

The question was directed at HighwayStar.

K. I guess he would sign Burgaw.

[TXtoNJ]

All this talk about I-70's eastern terminus. How about its western end? What is an appropriate control city to post west of Grand Junction? Cove Fort is basically the same as Washington, Wytheville, Breezewood, etc. -- a major highway intersection in a town with no other significance.

And how about I-40? It goes nowhere near Los Angeles, yet that's posted. And I'm pretty sure that I-40 ends well short of actually entering Wilmington.

Las Vegas.

Any and all disputes about this are grounded in the a priori assumption that control cities are about something other than aiding navigation.

[hobsini2]

Disney World can be signed as an exit. It can't be a control city unless you're willing to make Universal Studios and Sea World control cities on other roads.

http://gph.is/XL8SdT

Just stop yourself.

[hobsini2]

A further requirement should be that the road actually serves the location in question.

Disagree. There are many instances where it would be logical to sign a control city on a route that doesn't officially serve that location, if it's a large population center and that route indirectly serves it. An example of this would be I-70 Baltimore.

Indirect service confuses the purpose of a control city. Control cities are not there for designating all the various destinations a route might take you to, they are to mark the route itself, and therefore must be meaningfully on the route. I-70 ends without serving Baltimore, so an appropriate designation might be "Baltimore Beltway" which has transportation and military significance.

I-70 does not end without serving Baltimore. It connects to the beltway around it which has several highways that take you into Baltimore, it also has an exit at Security Blvd. which connects to Baltimore. Just because I-70 doesn't go into the city doesn't mean it doesn't serve it. I-75 doesn't go into Tampa but it serves it, same with I-80 serving Chicago and Cleveland.

Connecting to a highway that can take you someplace is not enough for control city status. I-90 can take you to New York City, but since it does not serve it it is disqualified.
The examples you cite are not analogous, as those routes were completed as intended for the given level of service, which I-70 was not. (Also key is the fact that both of them pass by the cities in question, rather than dead ending to a parking lot on the edge of nothing.

http://gph.is/1s2j1m8

[hotdogPi]

Disney World can be signed as an exit. It can't be a control city unless you're willing to make Universal Studios and Sea World control cities on other roads.

http://gph.is/XL8SdT

Just stop yourself.

Do you have any actual argument? You haven't even explained your rationale.

[HighwayStar]

, and thus any existing counterexamples are simply cases where the control city should be re-assigned.

Disagree.

Question. What should I-40's control city be south of Raleigh and I-95?

Wilmington.

The question was directed at HighwayStar.

K. I guess he would sign Burgaw.

Not necessarily. I-40 reaches Wilmington substantially enough that it might qualify, particularly because it does not dead end and is far enough into the city to call that an acceptable level of service. It was built as designed as far as I am aware, which helps its case.

[hobsini2]

Disney World can be signed as an exit. It can't be a control city unless you're willing to make Universal Studios and Sea World control cities on other roads.

http://gph.is/XL8SdT

Just stop yourself.

Do you have any actual argument? You haven't even explained your rationale.

Control Cities are destinations. Are they not?  As much as you may not like "commercial destinations" the big ones, like Disney or any other tourist destination, do belong on signs as a control city if that is the direct way to them.  Think about the economic impact they bring to an area. Just because they are privately owned doesn't mean they are not important.

[sprjus4]

, and thus any existing counterexamples are simply cases where the control city should be re-assigned.

Disagree.

Question. What should I-40's control city be south of Raleigh and I-95?

Wilmington.

The question was directed at HighwayStar.

K. I guess he would sign Burgaw.

Not necessarily. I-40 reaches Wilmington substantially enough that it might qualify, particularly because it does not dead end and is far enough into the city to call that an acceptable level of service. It was built as designed as far as I am aware, which helps its case.

I-40 ends north of Wilmington city limits. You cannot follow I-40 into the city. You have to use US-117. 

[Roadgeekteen]

, and thus any existing counterexamples are simply cases where the control city should be re-assigned.

Disagree.

Question. What should I-40's control city be south of Raleigh and I-95?

Wilmington.

The question was directed at HighwayStar.

K. I guess he would sign Burgaw.

Not necessarily. I-40 reaches Wilmington substantially enough that it might qualify, particularly because it does not dead end and is far enough into the city to call that an acceptable level of service. It was built as designed as far as I am aware, which helps its case.

I-70 also reaches Baltimore substantially. It literally enters Baltimore City.

[Flint1979]

I-70 EAST
BALTIMORE
LEFT LANE

I-70 WEST
LAS VEGAS
RIGHT LANE

There it's settled.

[Occidental Tourist]

Speaking of I-70 . . . in Grand Junction, Colorado, almost all of the signs that have control cities for I-70 use "Utah"  as the westbound control city except for this one odd sign on the east end of town at the end of Business 70.




Green River should be two words, and I don't know who thought that a city with 1,000 residents would make a good control city.

[Roadgeekteen]

Speaking of I-70 . . . in Grand Junction, Colorado, almost all of the signs that have control cities for I-70 use "Utah"  as the westbound control city except for this one odd sign on the east end of town at the end of Business 70.




Green River should be two words, and I don't know who thought that a city with 1,000 residents would make a good control city.

952 people is a booming metropolis in that part of Utah.

[US 89]

Green River used to be the primary westbound control from Grand Junction before the more recent “Utah” signs went up. In fact, some of the references to Utah are actually patched over an original Green River control city, such as at the west end of BL-70.

Green River actually isn’t a terrible choice in my opinion, and it fits with Utah’s general practice of signing more local control cities on 70 (along with Richfield and Salina further west). GR is significant not because of its population but because it’s a major split point, where traffic heading up US 6 to SLC departs from I-70 westbound towards southwest Utah/Vegas/SoCal. Its isolation also makes it an important food and gas stop for travelers, since there are long intervals without motorist services in just about all directions from there. For a town as small as it is, it has a lot of name recognition.

[Flint1979]

Speaking of I-70 . . . in Grand Junction, Colorado, almost all of the signs that have control cities for I-70 use "Utah"  as the westbound control city except for this one odd sign on the east end of town at the end of Business 70.




Green River should be two words, and I don't know who thought that a city with 1,000 residents would make a good control city.

952 people is a booming metropolis in that part of Utah.

Not anymore it now has 935 residents as of a 2019 estimate.

[Roadgeekteen]

Speaking of I-70 . . . in Grand Junction, Colorado, almost all of the signs that have control cities for I-70 use "Utah"  as the westbound control city except for this one odd sign on the east end of town at the end of Business 70.




Green River should be two words, and I don't know who thought that a city with 1,000 residents would make a good control city.

952 people is a booming metropolis in that part of Utah.

Not anymore it now has 935 residents as of a 2019 estimate.

Dang where did the 17 people go?

[TheHighwayMan3561]

It's not Green River, it's "Greenriver" . 😂

[Roadgeekteen]

Salt Lake City could be mentioned on signs because of US 6.

[Flint1979]

Salina would make more sense than Green River, it's almost three times bigger than Green River.

[Roadgeekteen]

Salina would make more sense than Green River, it's almost three times bigger than Green River.

Salina is also further away.