National Boards > General Highway Talk
Illogical control cities for the direction of long-distance travel
kirbykart:
The biggest shock to me here is that Rochester is larger than Erie. I never thought of Rochester as a particularly large city.
GaryV:
--- Quote from: jt4 on November 13, 2022, 01:17:41 PM ---
--- Quote from: hbelkins on November 12, 2022, 04:37:04 PM ---Since we've been talking about control cities recently, how about compiling a list of control cities that are used where the logical flow of long-distance traffic makes them ill-suited for posting?
--- End quote ---
This occurs when cities A, B, and C are all connected by interstates and are big enough to be control cities in their own right. Often the city would still be the logical choice for a control city even for long-distance traffic.
For the I-71/I-75 example, what should be the control city for I-75 south? I'd have a hard time arguing against Lexington. The next control city is Knoxville, and you still would have taken I-64 from Louisville. Chattanooga isn't big enough to be a control city from Northern Kentucky, and long distance traffic from Louisville would have taken I-64/I-75 or I-65/I-24.
--- End quote ---
--- Quote from: kirbykart on November 13, 2022, 01:51:15 PM ---^The idea is that a smaller, closer town would be used.
--- End quote ---
The problem is not with the destination, but with the origination point.
An easy example in Michigan is northbound US-127 to eastbound I-96. Yes, the control city is Detroit and yes, that is where I-96 goes. And certainly if you were coming from Jackson, you'd have taken I-94 instead and never come to US-127 and I-96. But if you were starting at some point between Jackson and Lansing - say somewhere around Mason - the valid routing to Detroit would be to first go north and then go east on I-96. So Detroit would be correct for that journey.
This would happen for any such triangular configuration. And often times, the bigger the triangle, the farther apart is the "tipping point" of which way to start the journey.
PurdueBill:
On I-76 WB in Akron, "Barberton" is used at the TOTSO western split of 76 and 77. There has always been trouble with the signs there (I drove through it semi-frequently for years before eventually living here) with 76 playing second fiddle to "TO 277" on the BGSs (not much westbound traffic will want to go back eastbound on 277!) and the Barberton control city (the next city over, destination of the 3rd exit away staying on I-76 through two TOTSOs) doesn't help either. Long-distance traffic on 76 largely is following it to I-71 to head toward Columbus. They use Columbus as a control city way up at I-90 and I-271 east of Cleveland for traffic going 90-271-71 (the onetime thru route of the "second" Ohio Turnpike proposal), and as a control city from the very beginning of I-71 in Cleveland, but no mention of it at all on 76. Using Columbus as a control city might help get people out of orbit sooner to get in the correct lane for the TOTSO.
It is no better once you get past Barberton; they use Lodi as a control city for 76 WB all the way to its end at I-71 where then you would take US 224 to Lodi. It is very North Carolia-esque to use small towns that happen to be at Interstate junctions as control cities vs. the destination of thru traffic.
ODOT knows better elsewhere, even on I-76...they use Youngstown as a control city eastbound from Akron eastward despite 76 bouncing onto the Turnpike and I-80 taking over the route to Youngstown. So it can't be a set rule that the route number itself must go to the control city, or else they couldn't use Youngstown for 76 EB (or Erie PA for I-271 which they do for its entire length along with Columbus. The control cities for 271 in both directions are cities way past the ends of 271 but serviced by other routes for long-distance traffic. Why not something similar for 76 WB in Akron? Hmm.
jt4:
--- Quote from: GaryV on November 13, 2022, 01:58:27 PM ---
--- Quote from: jt4 on November 13, 2022, 01:17:41 PM ---
--- Quote from: hbelkins on November 12, 2022, 04:37:04 PM ---Since we've been talking about control cities recently, how about compiling a list of control cities that are used where the logical flow of long-distance traffic makes them ill-suited for posting?
--- End quote ---
This occurs when cities A, B, and C are all connected by interstates and are big enough to be control cities in their own right. Often the city would still be the logical choice for a control city even for long-distance traffic.
For the I-71/I-75 example, what should be the control city for I-75 south? I'd have a hard time arguing against Lexington. The next control city is Knoxville, and you still would have taken I-64 from Louisville. Chattanooga isn't big enough to be a control city from Northern Kentucky, and long distance traffic from Louisville would have taken I-64/I-75 or I-65/I-24.
--- End quote ---
--- Quote from: kirbykart on November 13, 2022, 01:51:15 PM ---^The idea is that a smaller, closer town would be used.
--- End quote ---
The problem is not with the destination, but with the origination point.
An easy example in Michigan is northbound US-127 to eastbound I-96. Yes, the control city is Detroit and yes, that is where I-96 goes. And certainly if you were coming from Jackson, you'd have taken I-94 instead and never come to US-127 and I-96. But if you were starting at some point between Jackson and Lansing - say somewhere around Mason - the valid routing to Detroit would be to first go north and then go east on I-96. So Detroit would be correct for that journey.
This would happen for any such triangular configuration. And often times, the bigger the triangle, the farther apart is the "tipping point" of which way to start the journey.
--- End quote ---
For cities that are about 75-100 miles apart, there aren't many choices for a small town, that would be worth signing.
For the 71/75/64 triangle, the largest city, and presumably the best choice for long-term travelers, is Frankfort on 64 (good choice), Georgetown on 75 (not bad, but it's a suburb of Lexington) and ... Sparta on 71 (which is almost unheard of outside the area).
But then you run into the problem that long-distance traffic is more likely to go to larger cities than smaller ones. Choosing a control city to avoid the "triangle problem" will, IMO, more often than not result in an objectively worse choice.
Dirt Roads:
We've got a prime example here in Hillsborough, North Carolina:
I-40 westbound -to- I-85 northbound [eastward] has a control city of Durham. You just came from Durham. A better control city might be Hillsborough, but you literally just passed by the Hillsborough exit on I-40.
On the other hand, I-85 southbound [westward] -to- I-40 eastbound [southward] has a control city of Raleigh. Folks using I-85 from Virginia and the northern tier of North Carolina would have already exited I-85 to get to Raleigh, but it is possible that I-86 southbound traffic could use I-85 to access I-40 and actually head to Raleigh. (At certain times of the day, this would be the best route, but not always). In either case, adding Chapel Hill to the signage would still be appropriate.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version