AARoads Forum

National Boards => General Highway Talk => Topic started by: Laplace on February 08, 2019, 07:04:57 PM

Title: Mid-Sized Cities That Aren't Control Cities, But Maybe Should Be
Post by: Laplace on February 08, 2019, 07:04:57 PM
I've seen threads on here that name examples of small localities being control cities that probably could easily be passed over (usually in New Mexico and Pennsylvania), but what about mid-sized cities that are large enough that aren't control cities? Here are some mid-sized cities that, in my opinion, could potentially be given control-city status.

Yuma, AZ - I-8 West: From the beginning of I-8 in Casa Grande all the way to the coast, the control city on I-8 West in San Diego. I think Yuma would make a more logical control city for I-8 West until the California border. I know some people like far-off control cities, and I prefer them over a minor locality if a decent-sized city isn't nearby. However, Yuma has a metro population of ~200k people and is the largest city in Arizona outside the Phoenix and Tucson metro areas. Yuma is also approximately the halfway point between Casa Grande and San Diego, making it a logical control point. Plus, the smaller Flagstaff is a control city on both I-17 and I-40, but likely is only granted control city status because of its interstate junction, which Yuma doesn't have.

Bridgeport, CT - I-95 South: New Haven makes the most sense as the control city for I-95 North out of NYC, as it's an interstate junction and a fairly recognizable city. In fact, Bridgeport wouldn't even be on this list if it weren't for a couple of small factors. First off, Bridgeport is the largest city in the state, yet isn't a control city, which feels strange to me. Although it's not too much larger than New Haven or Hartford. More importantly, the control city at the I-95/I-91 junction is New London, which is significantly smaller than Bridgeport. If New London is big enough to be a control city, than Bridgeport definitely is too. In this case, Providence or Boston would make more sense for I-95 North out of New Haven.

Manchester, NH - I-93 North: Out of Massachusetts, the control city for I-93 north is Concord, rather than the larger and closer Manchester. Similarly to Bridgeport, Manchester is the largest city in its state and is not a control city. I think the idea here is that people are more likely to be familiar with Concord, since it's the state capital. Still seems awkward for the largest city in the state to be passed up as a control city though.

Provo, - UT I-15 South: I can understand why Provo isn't used for I-15 North in Vegas, since Salt Lake City is much more well-known. However, Ogden is used for I-15 North. I think if they are going to use Ogden for I-15 North, they should use Provo for I-15 South. The only reasons I could see Ogden being used and not Provo is that Ogden is the largest city on I-15 north of Salt Lake City and there's a junction with I-84 in nearby Riverdale. Still, it feels a little odd seeing Provo being left out, as it's larger than Ogden. It should at least be co-signed with Las Vegas.

Bellingham, WA - I-5 North: The control city on I-5 north of Seattle is Vancouver, BC. While signing an international border is important, the border itself is still over 100 miles away. Like Yuma, Bellingham also has a metro population of ~200k and could certainly be used as a control city without a problem.

Title: Re: Mid-Sized Cities That Aren't Control Cities, But Maybe Should Be
Post by: Ben114 on February 08, 2019, 07:28:21 PM
Worcester, MA - I-84 East: Currently, I-84 east of Hartford, CT is signed with a control city of Boston, MA. Worcester is a decent sized city, and is currently a control city on I-90, I-495, I-290, I-395, I-190, and MA 146. Worcester is located about 1 hour west of Boston, and has a population around 190,000 in the city.
Title: Re: Mid-Sized Cities That Aren't Control Cities, But Maybe Should Be
Post by: Roadgeekteen on February 09, 2019, 10:42:03 AM
Rochester and Syracuse on the Thruway

Philadelphia on I-95 in Maryland... oh wait
Title: Re: Mid-Sized Cities That Aren't Control Cities, But Maybe Should Be
Post by: jeffandnicole on February 09, 2019, 11:03:03 AM
Philadelphia on I-95 in Maryland... oh wait

Not applicable in the spirit of the thread, because you still have Newark and Wilmington in Delaware first.
Title: Re: Mid-Sized Cities That Aren't Control Cities, But Maybe Should Be
Post by: RobbieL2415 on February 09, 2019, 03:50:00 PM
I second Worcester being added on I-84 E.

Other suggestions:
I-384 E, Manchester, then Windham. After Windham, Providence
I-91 S after Hartford:Meriden
MA 25 S, begin: Falmouth, Hyannis (supplentary signs for the Islands), at MA 28/Bourne Bridge: Falmouth, Martha's Vineyard
US 6 E (MA), from the Bourne Rotary to Exit 6: Hyannis, Orleans, Exit 6 to the Orleans Rotary: Orleans, Provincetown
Title: Re: Mid-Sized Cities That Aren't Control Cities, But Maybe Should Be
Post by: Ben114 on February 09, 2019, 04:05:33 PM
MA 25 S, begin: Falmouth, Hyannis (supplentary signs for the Islands), at MA 28/Bourne Bridge: Falmouth, Martha's Vineyard
US 6 E (MA), from the Bourne Rotary to Exit 6: Hyannis, Orleans, Exit 6 to the Orleans Rotary: Orleans, Provincetown
Hyannis should be replaced with Barnstable until the Exit 6 advances.
Title: Re: Mid-Sized Cities That Aren't Control Cities, But Maybe Should Be
Post by: RobbieL2415 on February 09, 2019, 10:20:26 PM
MA 25 S, begin: Falmouth, Hyannis (supplentary signs for the Islands), at MA 28/Bourne Bridge: Falmouth, Martha's Vineyard
US 6 E (MA), from the Bourne Rotary to Exit 6: Hyannis, Orleans, Exit 6 to the Orleans Rotary: Orleans, Provincetown
Hyannis should be replaced with Barnstable until the Exit 6 advances.
I'm going to respectfully disagree with that. Most vacationers on a budget flock to the Hyannis section of Barnstable.  Im putting this in the perspective of the tourist. Most print and digital travel guides refer to Hyannis exclusively.  However to be fair, Barnstable is the county seat.
Title: Re: Mid-Sized Cities That Aren't Control Cities, But Maybe Should Be
Post by: 1 on February 09, 2019, 10:30:05 PM
MA 25 S, begin: Falmouth, Hyannis (supplentary signs for the Islands), at MA 28/Bourne Bridge: Falmouth, Martha's Vineyard
US 6 E (MA), from the Bourne Rotary to Exit 6: Hyannis, Orleans, Exit 6 to the Orleans Rotary: Orleans, Provincetown
Hyannis should be replaced with Barnstable until the Exit 6 advances.
I'm going to respectfully disagree with that. Most vacationers on a budget flock to the Hyannis section of Barnstable.  Im putting this in the perspective of the tourist. Most print and digital travel guides refer to Hyannis exclusively.  However to be fair, Barnstable is the county seat.

Hyannis isn't even a town.
Title: Re: Mid-Sized Cities That Aren't Control Cities, But Maybe Should Be
Post by: Revive 755 on February 09, 2019, 10:39:57 PM
I think we've had a similar thread before ,but anyway . . .

LaSalle - Peru is big enough that it should be a secondary control city on I-80 in Illinois, however it is skipped over for secondary control cities of Joliet EB and Moline-Rock Island WB.  It also gets skipped over on side roads at NB I-39 in favor of the primary control city of Rockford.
Title: Re: Mid-Sized Cities That Aren't Control Cities, But Maybe Should Be
Post by: RobbieL2415 on February 09, 2019, 10:42:43 PM
MA 25 S, begin: Falmouth, Hyannis (supplentary signs for the Islands), at MA 28/Bourne Bridge: Falmouth, Martha's Vineyard
US 6 E (MA), from the Bourne Rotary to Exit 6: Hyannis, Orleans, Exit 6 to the Orleans Rotary: Orleans, Provincetown
Hyannis should be replaced with Barnstable until the Exit 6 advances.
I'm going to respectfully disagree with that. Most vacationers on a budget flock to the Hyannis section of Barnstable.  Im putting this in the perspective of the tourist. Most print and digital travel guides refer to Hyannis exclusively.  However to be fair, Barnstable is the county seat.
I know it's a CDP but I believe it would be a better control city given the above reasons.

Hyannis isn't even a town.
Title: Re: Mid-Sized Cities That Aren't Control Cities, But Maybe Should Be
Post by: Roadgeekteen on February 09, 2019, 10:59:27 PM
MA 25 S, begin: Falmouth, Hyannis (supplentary signs for the Islands), at MA 28/Bourne Bridge: Falmouth, Martha's Vineyard
US 6 E (MA), from the Bourne Rotary to Exit 6: Hyannis, Orleans, Exit 6 to the Orleans Rotary: Orleans, Provincetown
Hyannis should be replaced with Barnstable until the Exit 6 advances.
I'm going to respectfully disagree with that. Most vacationers on a budget flock to the Hyannis section of Barnstable.  Im putting this in the perspective of the tourist. Most print and digital travel guides refer to Hyannis exclusively.  However to be fair, Barnstable is the county seat.

Hyannis isn't even a town.
But it's more well known.
Title: Re: Mid-Sized Cities That Aren't Control Cities, But Maybe Should Be
Post by: Brandon on February 10, 2019, 07:18:43 AM
I think we've had a similar thread before ,but anyway . . .

LaSalle - Peru is big enough that it should be a secondary control city on I-80 in Illinois, however it is skipped over for secondary control cities of Joliet EB and Moline-Rock Island WB.  It also gets skipped over on side roads at NB I-39 in favor of the primary control city of Rockford.

Northbound only though.  Southbound, the secondary control for I-39 is LaSalle-Peru.
Title: Re: Mid-Sized Cities That Aren't Control Cities, But Maybe Should Be
Post by: ftballfan on February 12, 2019, 10:15:15 AM
Kalamazoo on I-94 in Michigan
Title: Re: Mid-Sized Cities That Aren't Control Cities, But Maybe Should Be
Post by: US 89 on February 12, 2019, 11:45:20 AM
Provo, - UT I-15 South: I can understand why Provo isn't used for I-15 North in Vegas, since Salt Lake City is much more well-known. However, Ogden is used for I-15 North. I think if they are going to use Ogden for I-15 North, they should use Provo for I-15 South. The only reasons I could see Ogden being used and not Provo is that Ogden is the largest city on I-15 north of Salt Lake City and there's a junction with I-84 in nearby Riverdale. Still, it feels a little odd seeing Provo being left out, as it's larger than Ogden. It should at least be co-signed with Las Vegas.

Couldn't agree more. There are a few signs at entrance ramps listing Provo as the southbound control, but I'd think that should be extended to the freeway mainlines as well.

Here's the thing about Ogden, though. I'd assume Pocatello would be used instead of Ogden, but there's an even split of 15/84 traffic at Tremonton, which might call for a Twin Falls or Boise dual-control with Pocatello. Also, Idaho Falls is bigger than Pocatello and might be used instead. It gets a little bit messy, which may factor into why Ogden is the northbound control from SLC.

Another city that's getting large enough for control status: St. George, Utah. Sounds silly at first, but it has a population of 84,000 (about the same size as Ogden, and much larger than Pocatello) and a metro population of 165,000.
Title: Re: Mid-Sized Cities That Aren't Control Cities, But Maybe Should Be
Post by: GaryV on February 12, 2019, 07:41:29 PM
Kalamazoo on I-94 in Michigan

Good idea, but so many people in Detroit would be lost.  Their knowledge of West Michigan is woefully inadequate.

I remember at lunch one day, someone was talking about going to Grand Rapids for the weekend.  Another one at the table told her to remember not to drink the water.  "That's Flint!" And the ignorant one replied, "Same difference."  I wanted to go over to her and tell her that where she was sitting (in Dearborn) she was closer to Flint than her friend would be in Grand Rapids.
Title: Re: Mid-Sized Cities That Aren't Control Cities, But Maybe Should Be
Post by: inkyatari on February 15, 2019, 02:52:21 PM
I think we've had a similar thread before ,but anyway . . .

LaSalle - Peru is big enough that it should be a secondary control city on I-80 in Illinois, however it is skipped over for secondary control cities of Joliet EB and Moline-Rock Island WB.  It also gets skipped over on side roads at NB I-39 in favor of the primary control city of Rockford.

Totally agree with LaSalle / Peru
Title: Re: Mid-Sized Cities That Aren't Control Cities, But Maybe Should Be
Post by: jp the roadgeek on February 16, 2019, 10:42:57 AM

I-384 E, Manchester, then Windham. After Windham, Providence


I wouldn't use Manchester, since you're pretty much in Manchester already when you exit from I-84 East, and you are in Manchester when you exit from I-84 West (need to get rid of Spencer St/Silver Lane as control "cities").  I would actually use the more familiar "Willimantic" than Windham.  Eastbound I would use: I-384 EAST// Wiillimantic/Providence.  Westbound it would be I-384 EAST/// Bolton/Willimantic with either a supplemental sign for Spencer St/Silver Lane, or add it to the bottom of the sign a la the CT 9 SB Exit 25 sign that adds TO CT 71 on the bottom of the sign.

I could also see Stamford being used as a control city along with NYC on I-95 for exit signage from CT 8/25 South in Bridgeport, US 7 South to I-95 South in Norwalk, and on pull thru signage at their junctions on I-95 itself.  Northbound, I could also see it being used along with New Haven on signage from I-287 East to I-95 North in Rye (no more Conn Turnpike, since it hasn't officially existed for 30+ years anyway), and on pull thru signage on I-95 between the Westchester line and I-287. 
Title: Re: Mid-Sized Cities That Aren't Control Cities, But Maybe Should Be
Post by: mgk920 on February 17, 2019, 12:46:05 PM
'Appleton' instead of either 'Oshkosh' or 'Fond du Lac' for NB I-41 in metro Milwaukee, WI.  Of the three, Appleton is the most populous and distant.  Also, even though Green Bay is on I-41, it's already covered by NB I-43.

Mike
Title: Re: Mid-Sized Cities That Aren't Control Cities, But Maybe Should Be
Post by: Road Hog on February 17, 2019, 06:26:28 PM
The decision was made a decade ago to make McKinney a control city on northbound US 75 out of Dallas, even though Plano was and is a bigger city by far.
Title: Re: Mid-Sized Cities That Aren't Control Cities, But Maybe Should Be
Post by: Roadgeekteen on February 17, 2019, 09:26:07 PM
The decision was made a decade ago to make McKinney a control city on northbound US 75 out of Dallas, even though Plano was and is a bigger city by far.
Is Plano a suburb? That might be why.
Title: Re: Mid-Sized Cities That Aren't Control Cities, But Maybe Should Be
Post by: 1 on February 17, 2019, 09:36:24 PM
The decision was made a decade ago to make McKinney a control city on northbound US 75 out of Dallas, even though Plano was and is a bigger city by far.
Is Plano a suburb? That might be why.

Plano is definitely a suburb. McKinney is also probably one, but it's no different than signing Worcester from Boston.

Side note: I never realized until now that there are medium-sized cities in Texas named Allen and McAllen, in completely different parts of the state. It's like Belmar and Bellmawr, NJ, but larger.
Title: Re: Mid-Sized Cities That Aren't Control Cities, But Maybe Should Be
Post by: Charles2 on February 17, 2019, 09:54:21 PM
I-65 north of Nashville or south of Louisville: Bowling Green
Title: Re: Mid-Sized Cities That Aren't Control Cities, But Maybe Should Be
Post by: ftballfan on February 19, 2019, 04:37:26 PM
The decision was made a decade ago to make McKinney a control city on northbound US 75 out of Dallas, even though Plano was and is a bigger city by far.
Is Plano a suburb? That might be why.
I think McKinney is the county seat of Collin County
Title: Re: Mid-Sized Cities That Aren't Control Cities, But Maybe Should Be
Post by: 1 on February 19, 2019, 04:38:49 PM
The decision was made a decade ago to make McKinney a control city on northbound US 75 out of Dallas, even though Plano was and is a bigger city by far.
Is Plano a suburb? That might be why.
I think McKinney is the county seat of Collin County

I've never understood why it matters whether something is a county seat or not, and I still don't.
Title: Re: Mid-Sized Cities That Aren't Control Cities, But Maybe Should Be
Post by: doorknob60 on February 19, 2019, 05:29:55 PM
Provo, - UT I-15 South: I can understand why Provo isn't used for I-15 North in Vegas, since Salt Lake City is much more well-known. However, Ogden is used for I-15 North. I think if they are going to use Ogden for I-15 North, they should use Provo for I-15 South. The only reasons I could see Ogden being used and not Provo is that Ogden is the largest city on I-15 north of Salt Lake City and there's a junction with I-84 in nearby Riverdale. Still, it feels a little odd seeing Provo being left out, as it's larger than Ogden. It should at least be co-signed with Las Vegas.

Couldn't agree more. There are a few signs at entrance ramps listing Provo as the southbound control, but I'd think that should be extended to the freeway mainlines as well.

Here's the thing about Ogden, though. I'd assume Pocatello would be used instead of Ogden, but there's an even split of 15/84 traffic at Tremonton, which might call for a Twin Falls or Boise dual-control with Pocatello. Also, Idaho Falls is bigger than Pocatello and might be used instead. It gets a little bit messy, which may factor into why Ogden is the northbound control from SLC.

Plus the fact that Ogden is bigger than all of those (besides Boise, which is definitely a stretch for an I-15 control city N of SLC in my opinion). As opposed to Las Vegas, which is far larger than anything else south of Salt Lake, and there's no major highway diversions south of there to the extent of the I-15/I-84 split. Sure, some people split off to US-6 to head towards Green River and Colorado, but that's a relatively small percentage. That said, Provo still should be signed within the metro area, IMO.

I'm always a proponent of using 2 control cities, one for more local/regional mid-sized cities, and then one far off major city. So south from Salt Lake would be "Provo/Las Vegas", then south of Provo "St George/Las Vegas", for example. And north could be "Ogden/Boise" maybe, then North of Ogden "Pocatello/Boise" or "Twin Falls/Boise" (a bit tough to choose due to the multiplex). Though this does not seem to be a common practice.
Title: Re: Mid-Sized Cities That Aren't Control Cities, But Maybe Should Be
Post by: debragga on February 19, 2019, 05:34:45 PM
I-20 east from Dallas is signed to Shreveport, Tyler or Longview could be signed there instead
Title: Re: Mid-Sized Cities That Aren't Control Cities, But Maybe Should Be
Post by: US 89 on February 19, 2019, 09:50:53 PM
Provo, - UT I-15 South: I can understand why Provo isn't used for I-15 North in Vegas, since Salt Lake City is much more well-known. However, Ogden is used for I-15 North. I think if they are going to use Ogden for I-15 North, they should use Provo for I-15 South. The only reasons I could see Ogden being used and not Provo is that Ogden is the largest city on I-15 north of Salt Lake City and there's a junction with I-84 in nearby Riverdale. Still, it feels a little odd seeing Provo being left out, as it's larger than Ogden. It should at least be co-signed with Las Vegas.

Couldn't agree more. There are a few signs at entrance ramps listing Provo as the southbound control, but I'd think that should be extended to the freeway mainlines as well.

Here's the thing about Ogden, though. I'd assume Pocatello would be used instead of Ogden, but there's an even split of 15/84 traffic at Tremonton, which might call for a Twin Falls or Boise dual-control with Pocatello. Also, Idaho Falls is bigger than Pocatello and might be used instead. It gets a little bit messy, which may factor into why Ogden is the northbound control from SLC.

Plus the fact that Ogden is bigger than all of those (besides Boise, which is definitely a stretch for an I-15 control city N of SLC in my opinion). As opposed to Las Vegas, which is far larger than anything else south of Salt Lake, and there's no major highway diversions south of there to the extent of the I-15/I-84 split. Sure, some people split off to US-6 to head towards Green River and Colorado, but that's a relatively small percentage. That said, Provo still should be signed within the metro area, IMO.

I'm always a proponent of using 2 control cities, one for more local/regional mid-sized cities, and then one far off major city. So south from Salt Lake would be "Provo/Las Vegas", then south of Provo "St George/Las Vegas", for example. And north could be "Ogden/Boise" maybe, then North of Ogden "Pocatello/Boise" or "Twin Falls/Boise" (a bit tough to choose due to the multiplex). Though this does not seem to be a common practice.

The control cities in that area are actually quite interesting. At the 86/84 split, the I-84 eastbound control is a dual Ogden/Salt Lake, probably because SLC itself isn't on I-84. From Pocatello, the I-15 south control is Salt Lake, with no mention at all of Ogden. But at the 15/84 merge in Tremonton, the S/E control from both 15 and 84 is a dual Ogden/Salt Lake. And at the US 91 southern terminus, there's no mention of Salt Lake at all -- just Ogden.

It's also worth noting that the signage at the south end of US 91 lists Twin Falls as the I-84 westbound control -- at the 15/84 split, that control is Boise instead.
Title: Re: Mid-Sized Cities That Aren't Control Cities, But Maybe Should Be
Post by: mrsman on February 20, 2019, 08:43:16 AM
The decision was made a decade ago to make McKinney a control city on northbound US 75 out of Dallas, even though Plano was and is a bigger city by far.
Is Plano a suburb? That might be why.
I think McKinney is the county seat of Collin County

I've never understood why it matters whether something is a county seat or not, and I still don't.

IMO it's a factor (but not necessarily the main factor) because a county seat is likely to be more of a destination than another city within the county.  The seat will have at least a small civic center with courthouse and county administration buildings and the like.

In Orange County, CA I-5's control city is Santa Ana (county seat) and not Anaheim, even though Anaheim is larger.  Even odder, there are now more attractions in Anaheim than Santa Ana, such that Anaheim would likely be more of a destination than Santa Ana (such as Disneyland, stadium, arena, convention center) yet the control city hasn't been changed.

Title: Re: Mid-Sized Cities That Aren't Control Cities, But Maybe Should Be
Post by: TheHighwayMan394 on February 20, 2019, 12:34:58 PM
The decision was made a decade ago to make McKinney a control city on northbound US 75 out of Dallas, even though Plano was and is a bigger city by far.
Is Plano a suburb? That might be why.
I think McKinney is the county seat of Collin County

I've never understood why it matters whether something is a county seat or not, and I still don't.

I think it boils down to how county administrations outside the Northeast tend to have a much bigger say in daily life at the local level.
Title: Re: Mid-Sized Cities That Aren't Control Cities, But Maybe Should Be
Post by: thspfc on March 30, 2019, 02:34:03 PM
Stevens Point could easily be the control city for I-39 NB at the split near Portage, but it's secondary to Wausau.
Title: Re: Mid-Sized Cities That Aren't Control Cities, But Maybe Should Be
Post by: roadman65 on March 30, 2019, 10:09:24 PM
In New Jersey you have on I-80 the Delaware Water Gap used west of Paterson, but Dover is overlooked but some signs use Netcong which is not a big city (I think NJ classifies it as a borough).

Florida you have Lake City NB on I-75 from Ocala yet Gainesville is a fairly decent size city to be used and is overlooked.

Also in Florida you have then Naples on I-75 south from Tampa that overlooks Fort Myers. Then Daytona is used on I-95 north from West Palm Beach but once in Brevard County it switches to Jacksonville long before you arrive in Daytona.  However, some of the newer interchanges in Brevard County are using Daytona Beach now, so some improvement there.

Missouri and Tulsa being used in St. Louis as you do have Springfield and Joplin both that could be used there.  However someone on here said once outside St. Louis Metro Rolla is used and then Springfield, before  Joplin and Tulsa is then again seen in Joplin.

Then I always hated that New York is used over Newark in New Jersey, but understand why being NYC being our nation's largest city.  Many roads head through Newark first before you enter New York.
Title: Re: Mid-Sized Cities That Aren't Control Cities, But Maybe Should Be
Post by: Verlanka on March 31, 2019, 07:12:09 AM
Florida you have Lake City NB on I-75 from Ocala yet Gainesville is a fairly decent size city to be used and is overlooked.

Also in Florida you have then Naples on I-75 south from Tampa that overlooks Fort Myers. Then Daytona is used on I-95 north from West Palm Beach but once in Brevard County it switches to Jacksonville long before you arrive in Daytona.  However, some of the newer interchanges in Brevard County are using Daytona Beach now, so some improvement there.

I understand Lake City being used since this is where I-10 and I-75 meet. However, I think I-75 south in Tampa should use Sarasota or Bradenton, followed by Fort Myers and Naples.
Title: Re: Mid-Sized Cities That Aren't Control Cities, But Maybe Should Be
Post by: nexus73 on March 31, 2019, 10:15:06 AM
Proceeding east of I-5 in Springfield (SR 126), Albany (US 20) and Salem (SR 22), the control city mentioned on any I-5 signage relating to those highways should be Bend, which is about 100K for population.  ODOT does not do well with designating control cities for highways/freeways coming off of I-5.  Little or no mention is made of Astoria, Seaside, Tillamook, Lincoln City, Newport, Coos Bay/North Bend, Coquille, Bandon or any place in Curry County. 

This combines with not doing well for signing major out of state cities to make one feel like they are in a bubble when driving in Oregon.  WA, CA, ID and NV all let you know more about the Really Important Farther Off Places than Oregon does.

Rick
Title: Re: Mid-Sized Cities That Aren't Control Cities, But Maybe Should Be
Post by: Jmiles32 on March 31, 2019, 11:06:26 AM
Definitely Harrisonburg for I-81 in Virginia.

To a lesser degree, I wouldn't mind seeing Charlottesville being used on I-64 coming from I-81 and Fredricksburg used more along I-95.

 
Title: Re: Mid-Sized Cities That Aren't Control Cities, But Maybe Should Be
Post by: pdx-wanderer on April 05, 2019, 05:58:02 AM
Provo, - UT I-15 South: I can understand why Provo isn't used for I-15 North in Vegas, since Salt Lake City is much more well-known. However, Ogden is used for I-15 North. I think if they are going to use Ogden for I-15 North, they should use Provo for I-15 South. The only reasons I could see Ogden being used and not Provo is that Ogden is the largest city on I-15 north of Salt Lake City and there's a junction with I-84 in nearby Riverdale. Still, it feels a little odd seeing Provo being left out, as it's larger than Ogden. It should at least be co-signed with Las Vegas.

Couldn't agree more. There are a few signs at entrance ramps listing Provo as the southbound control, but I'd think that should be extended to the freeway mainlines as well.

Here's the thing about Ogden, though. I'd assume Pocatello would be used instead of Ogden, but there's an even split of 15/84 traffic at Tremonton, which might call for a Twin Falls or Boise dual-control with Pocatello. Also, Idaho Falls is bigger than Pocatello and might be used instead. It gets a little bit messy, which may factor into why Ogden is the northbound control from SLC.

Plus the fact that Ogden is bigger than all of those (besides Boise, which is definitely a stretch for an I-15 control city N of SLC in my opinion). As opposed to Las Vegas, which is far larger than anything else south of Salt Lake, and there's no major highway diversions south of there to the extent of the I-15/I-84 split. Sure, some people split off to US-6 to head towards Green River and Colorado, but that's a relatively small percentage. That said, Provo still should be signed within the metro area, IMO.

I'm always a proponent of using 2 control cities, one for more local/regional mid-sized cities, and then one far off major city. So south from Salt Lake would be "Provo/Las Vegas", then south of Provo "St George/Las Vegas", for example. And north could be "Ogden/Boise" maybe, then North of Ogden "Pocatello/Boise" or "Twin Falls/Boise" (a bit tough to choose due to the multiplex). Though this does not seem to be a common practice.

The control cities in that area are actually quite interesting. At the 86/84 split, the I-84 eastbound control is a dual Ogden/Salt Lake, probably because SLC itself isn't on I-84. From Pocatello, the I-15 south control is Salt Lake, with no mention at all of Ogden. But at the 15/84 merge in Tremonton, the S/E control from both 15 and 84 is a dual Ogden/Salt Lake. And at the US 91 southern terminus, there's no mention of Salt Lake at all -- just Ogden.

It's also worth noting that the signage at the south end of US 91 lists Twin Falls as the I-84 westbound control -- at the 15/84 split, that control is Boise instead.

Then, once crossing into Idaho on 84, Twin Falls takes over as the control city and Boise doesnít re appear until after the 86 junction.

Boise, despite not being on I-15, I think would fit well with Las Vegas, Reno and Cheyenne, as itís a fast growing capital and is much larger than Ogden, Pocatello or Idaho falls.  Boise not being on I-15 doesnít seem like that big of a deal to me - heck in Vegas Salt Lake is the only long distance control city thatís actually on its route! Ogden would go better as a control with Provo, Park city, and Wendover.
Title: Re: Mid-Sized Cities That Aren't Control Cities, But Maybe Should Be
Post by: US 89 on April 05, 2019, 04:57:07 PM
Boise, despite not being on I-15, I think would fit well with Las Vegas, Reno and Cheyenne, as itís a fast growing capital and is much larger than Ogden, Pocatello or Idaho falls.  Boise not being on I-15 doesnít seem like that big of a deal to me - heck in Vegas Salt Lake is the only long distance control city thatís actually on its route! Ogden would go better as a control with Provo, Park city, and Wendover.

Here's the thing though. As it turns out, the traffic split at Tremonton is almost 50/50 for I-15 and I-84, with a very slight edge to I-15. Even with the Vegas controls that aren't actually on the routes involved, they are at least where most of the traffic on those routes is going. Half of I-15's northbound load isn't going anywhere near Boise.

To my knowledge, Boise has never been used as an I-15 control city from Salt Lake. On the other hand, Pocatello has been used as a dual control with Ogden. (https://www.flickr.com/photos/countylemonade/5508231874/in/album-72157626095069355/) The corresponding southbound control at that time was a dual Provo/Las Vegas, with even a couple instances of Los Angeles!

I really like the idea of a dual control, now that you mention that, but I just don't see Utah suddenly jumping on that idea. The only place I'm aware of UDOT doing such a thing is the 80/215/Foothill interchange, where the I-80 eastbound control is Park City/Cheyenne, as well as on some old signage at the I-15/70 interchange.
Title: Re: Mid-Sized Cities That Aren't Control Cities, But Maybe Should Be
Post by: pdx-wanderer on April 05, 2019, 06:27:15 PM
Quote
To my knowledge, Boise has never been used as an I-15 control city from Salt Lake. On the other hand, Pocatello has been used as a dual control with Ogden. The corresponding southbound control at that time was a dual Provo/Las Vegas, with even a couple instances of Los Angeles!

Wow, that account has some great old Utah pictures! I remember seeing an old picture of Echo junction, where I-84 used to have a control of Portland, and I-80 had San Francisco! Fitting with the Los Angeles control. Today there are still some mileage signs for Reno up there but no sign of San Francisco (not to mention Sacramento).

I figured Salt Lake - Boise would be a more popular route than it is. Perhaps that's because it's always been the way I have gone.  :) At the state line, I-15 has quite a bit more traffic than I-84. On another note, i see that I-15  actually exits onto itself   (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.7018115,-112.1865445,3a,48.8y,317.42h,92.51t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s9VoYG6KINYx38vDOWCvO4w!2e0!5s20180401T000000!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en) at Tremonton. If you ignore route designations, maybe Boise would be the better control!

Using Ogden does avoid the problem of using a dual control, but it's always struck me a odd to use a more regional control with three long distance ones that are 400+ miles away.
Title: Re: Mid-Sized Cities That Aren't Control Cities, But Maybe Should Be
Post by: Flint1979 on April 05, 2019, 07:57:47 PM
Kalamazoo on I-94 in Michigan

Good idea, but so many people in Detroit would be lost.  Their knowledge of West Michigan is woefully inadequate.

I remember at lunch one day, someone was talking about going to Grand Rapids for the weekend.  Another one at the table told her to remember not to drink the water.  "That's Flint!" And the ignorant one replied, "Same difference."  I wanted to go over to her and tell her that where she was sitting (in Dearborn) she was closer to Flint than her friend would be in Grand Rapids.
In Detroit the westbound control city should be Ann Arbor.
Title: Re: Mid-Sized Cities That Aren't Control Cities, But Maybe Should Be
Post by: Flint1979 on April 05, 2019, 08:02:11 PM
The decision was made a decade ago to make McKinney a control city on northbound US 75 out of Dallas, even though Plano was and is a bigger city by far.
Is Plano a suburb? That might be why.
I think McKinney is the county seat of Collin County

I've never understood why it matters whether something is a county seat or not, and I still don't.

IMO it's a factor (but not necessarily the main factor) because a county seat is likely to be more of a destination than another city within the county.  The seat will have at least a small civic center with courthouse and county administration buildings and the like.

In Orange County, CA I-5's control city is Santa Ana (county seat) and not Anaheim, even though Anaheim is larger.  Even odder, there are now more attractions in Anaheim than Santa Ana, such that Anaheim would likely be more of a destination than Santa Ana (such as Disneyland, stadium, arena, convention center) yet the control city hasn't been changed.
Ingham County, MI has Mason as the county seat over Lansing (the state capital).
Title: Re: Mid-Sized Cities That Aren't Control Cities, But Maybe Should Be
Post by: Flint1979 on April 05, 2019, 08:04:08 PM
The decision was made a decade ago to make McKinney a control city on northbound US 75 out of Dallas, even though Plano was and is a bigger city by far.
Is Plano a suburb? That might be why.
I think McKinney is the county seat of Collin County

I've never understood why it matters whether something is a county seat or not, and I still don't.
I think it's because the county seat is like the capital of the county most of the time the most important city in the county since it's where the courthouse, jail and the rest of the county offices are located.
Title: Re: Mid-Sized Cities That Aren't Control Cities, But Maybe Should Be
Post by: 1995hoo on April 08, 2019, 08:16:05 AM
Definitely Harrisonburg for I-81 in Virginia.

To a lesser degree, I wouldn't mind seeing Charlottesville being used on I-64 coming from I-81 and Fredricksburg used more along I-95.

 

Harrisonburg is an excellent example of a place that has grown significantly since control cities were originally designated and now merits a more prominent role on highway signs.

Iíd suggest Fort Myers in Florida for I-75, but itís so close to Naples (the current control city) that it might not work. On the other hand, Newark and Wilmington, noted further up the thread, are very close to each other as well...
Title: Re: Mid-Sized Cities That Aren't Control Cities, But Maybe Should Be
Post by: golden eagle on May 05, 2019, 05:13:31 PM
-CA 99 southbound from Sacramento should be signed as Stockton
-I-75 at Lake City, FL should be signed as Gainesville. Northbound is signed for Valdosta, which is much smaller than Gainesville
-I-57 southbound from Chicago ought to be Champaign
-I-44 westbound from St. Louis should be Springfield, MO
-I-85 southbound near Petersburg, VA is signed Durham/Atlanta. What about Charlotte?
-I-95 in North Carolina is signed for Miami, though other cities like Fayetteville, Savannah and Jacksonville are also available.
Title: Re: Mid-Sized Cities That Aren't Control Cities, But Maybe Should Be
Post by: hobsini2 on May 05, 2019, 07:36:37 PM
I've seen threads on here that name examples of small localities being control cities that probably could easily be passed over (usually in New Mexico and Pennsylvania), but what about mid-sized cities that are large enough that aren't control cities? Here are some mid-sized cities that, in my opinion, could potentially be given control-city status.

Yuma, AZ - I-8 West: From the beginning of I-8 in Casa Grande all the way to the coast, the control city on I-8 West in San Diego. I think Yuma would make a more logical control city for I-8 West until the California border. I know some people like far-off control cities, and I prefer them over a minor locality if a decent-sized city isn't nearby. However, Yuma has a metro population of ~200k people and is the largest city in Arizona outside the Phoenix and Tucson metro areas. Yuma is also approximately the halfway point between Casa Grande and San Diego, making it a logical control point. Plus, the smaller Flagstaff is a control city on both I-17 and I-40, but likely is only granted control city status because of its interstate junction, which Yuma doesn't have.

Bridgeport, CT - I-95 South: New Haven makes the most sense as the control city for I-95 North out of NYC, as it's an interstate junction and a fairly recognizable city. In fact, Bridgeport wouldn't even be on this list if it weren't for a couple of small factors. First off, Bridgeport is the largest city in the state, yet isn't a control city, which feels strange to me. Although it's not too much larger than New Haven or Hartford. More importantly, the control city at the I-95/I-91 junction is New London, which is significantly smaller than Bridgeport. If New London is big enough to be a control city, than Bridgeport definitely is too. In this case, Providence or Boston would make more sense for I-95 North out of New Haven.

Manchester, NH - I-93 North: Out of Massachusetts, the control city for I-93 north is Concord, rather than the larger and closer Manchester. Similarly to Bridgeport, Manchester is the largest city in its state and is not a control city. I think the idea here is that people are more likely to be familiar with Concord, since it's the state capital. Still seems awkward for the largest city in the state to be passed up as a control city though.

Provo, - UT I-15 South: I can understand why Provo isn't used for I-15 North in Vegas, since Salt Lake City is much more well-known. However, Ogden is used for I-15 North. I think if they are going to use Ogden for I-15 North, they should use Provo for I-15 South. The only reasons I could see Ogden being used and not Provo is that Ogden is the largest city on I-15 north of Salt Lake City and there's a junction with I-84 in nearby Riverdale. Still, it feels a little odd seeing Provo being left out, as it's larger than Ogden. It should at least be co-signed with Las Vegas.

Bellingham, WA - I-5 North: The control city on I-5 north of Seattle is Vancouver, BC. While signing an international border is important, the border itself is still over 100 miles away. Like Yuma, Bellingham also has a metro population of ~200k and could certainly be used as a control city without a problem.


On I-8, why not both Yuma and San Diego from the I-10 JCT?
Title: Re: Mid-Sized Cities That Aren't Control Cities, But Maybe Should Be
Post by: hobsini2 on May 05, 2019, 07:37:53 PM
'Appleton' instead of either 'Oshkosh' or 'Fond du Lac' for NB I-41 in metro Milwaukee, WI.  Of the three, Appleton is the most populous and distant.  Also, even though Green Bay is on I-41, it's already covered by NB I-43.

Mike
Appleton, Oshkosh and Fond du Lac are all worthy of being control cities. Not just Appleton. I might have to start calling you a homer Mike. lol
Title: Re: Mid-Sized Cities That Aren't Control Cities, But Maybe Should Be
Post by: hobsini2 on May 05, 2019, 07:39:27 PM
I-20 east from Dallas is signed to Shreveport, Tyler or Longview could be signed there instead

Tyler as a secondary city makes sense. And speaking of Dallas-Ft Worth, I-30 West should be signed as Abilene instead of Weatherford. Weatherford is quite small.
Title: Re: Mid-Sized Cities That Aren't Control Cities, But Maybe Should Be
Post by: skluth on May 05, 2019, 11:56:36 PM
'Appleton' instead of either 'Oshkosh' or 'Fond du Lac' for NB I-41 in metro Milwaukee, WI.  Of the three, Appleton is the most populous and distant.  Also, even though Green Bay is on I-41, it's already covered by NB I-43.

Mike
Appleton, Oshkosh and Fond du Lac are all worthy of being control cities. Not just Appleton. I might have to start calling you a homer Mike. lol

I've always been partial to the generic Fox Cities.
Title: Re: Mid-Sized Cities That Aren't Control Cities, But Maybe Should Be
Post by: roadman65 on May 09, 2019, 11:06:58 PM
Lumberton in NC is overlooked.  Instead going NB from Florence, SC signs use Fayetteville and south from Fayetteville, NC uses Florence.

Being I-95 goes through Lumberton's city limits and it is now where I-74 meets that highway, it should be considered or at least have it as a secondary control city.  Heck Benson is used and that is way smaller than Lumberton, but now that I-40 intersects there it is used just like on I-40 it is also used to denote I-95.

I never understood why Tifton in GA is not used on I-75.  From the Florida border north Macon is used and from Macon the city of Valdosta is used.  Tifton is a mid size city and its where the South Georgia Parkway (a major corridor in the state) interchanges with the freeway.
Title: Re: Mid-Sized Cities That Aren't Control Cities, But Maybe Should Be
Post by: debragga on May 10, 2019, 10:29:10 PM
I-20 east from Dallas is signed to Shreveport, Tyler or Longview could be signed there instead

Tyler as a secondary city makes sense. And speaking of Dallas-Ft Worth, I-30 West should be signed as Abilene instead of Weatherford. Weatherford is quite small.

But I-30 dead-ends into I-20 well before Abilene, but not too far from Weatherford
Title: Re: Mid-Sized Cities That Aren't Control Cities, But Maybe Should Be
Post by: Henry on May 10, 2019, 10:41:18 PM
I-55 from Chicago to St. Louis often ignores the cities in between (Springfield, Bloomington, etc.) until it's well within spitting distance of them.
Title: Re: Mid-Sized Cities That Aren't Control Cities, But Maybe Should Be
Post by: ilpt4u on May 10, 2019, 10:49:54 PM
I-55 from Chicago to St. Louis often ignores the cities in between (Springfield, Bloomington, etc.) until it's well within spitting distance of them.
Not really - It follows the Downstate IDOT control city standard of Major City aka Chicago and St Louis at Interstates, and the smaller city/local control at others - including East St Louis, Springfield, Bloomington, and Joliet
Title: Re: Mid-Sized Cities That Aren't Control Cities, But Maybe Should Be
Post by: roadman65 on May 10, 2019, 10:55:35 PM
Skipping over Syracuse for Buffalo or Albany always amazed me for the NYS Thruway.

One thing I can say about Pennsylvania is they never skip over cities in between hence Hazleton over Wilkes-Barre from Harrisburg or Hazleton from Wilkes- Barre from over Harrisburg.  Do not know why Milford, though, is used for I-84 E Bound from Scranton over Middletown or Newburgh.  Even Port Jervis is a better place as Milford a one traffic light borough and has a small population  and is not a point of interest for motorists heading eastbound into New England.
Title: Re: Mid-Sized Cities That Aren't Control Cities, But Maybe Should Be
Post by: RoadMaster09 on May 15, 2019, 10:49:34 PM
The lack of consistency in control cities is always puzzling to me. Sometimes, they will place even a tiny town as one, while other times they will skip over fairly large cities.

For example, I'd do these for I-95 from south to north:

Miami
West Palm Beach
Daytona Beach
Jacksonville
Savannah
Florence
Fayetteville
Richmond
Washington
Baltimore
Wilmington
Philadelphia
Trenton
New York
New Haven
Providence
Boston
Portland
Augusta
Bangor
Houlton (or Presque Isle?)
Fredericton
Title: Re: Mid-Sized Cities That Aren't Control Cities, But Maybe Should Be
Post by: hobsini2 on May 19, 2019, 11:15:59 AM
I-20 east from Dallas is signed to Shreveport, Tyler or Longview could be signed there instead

Tyler as a secondary city makes sense. And speaking of Dallas-Ft Worth, I-30 West should be signed as Abilene instead of Weatherford. Weatherford is quite small.

But I-30 dead-ends into I-20 well before Abilene, but not too far from Weatherford
But I-30 traffic west of Ft Worth would be more likely to want to go toward Abilene or even Midland. Weatherford is too small for control city on a primary interstate IMO.
Title: Re: Mid-Sized Cities That Aren't Control Cities, But Maybe Should Be
Post by: ilpt4u on June 03, 2019, 02:27:45 PM
IDOT not using Marion, IL on either I-57 or I-24 is a bit inconsistent, or possibly even Marion-Carbondale (especially from Mt Vernon coming south)

Pretty much all the other Interstate Junction cities along I-57 (other than South Suburban Chicago @ I-80 and I-294; D1 is a little different on their Control City application anyway) get Secondary/Local Control status, in addition to Cairo

Heck, I-24 West (North) has a signed Control of Interstate 57 in IL (with a slight acknowledgement of the St Louis Control right before termination @ I-57)

Is it because Marion is mostly just north of the interchange, whereas Champaign, Effingham, and Mt Vernon are right at the Interchanges? Marion does have some land area around Lake of Egypt, which is very close to the 57/24 interchange

If Cairo (and East St Louis on 55, 64, and 70) warrant Secondary Control status, so should Marion IMHO
Title: Re: Mid-Sized Cities That Aren't Control Cities, But Maybe Should Be
Post by: PHLBOS on June 03, 2019, 05:40:21 PM
The lack of consistency in control cities is always puzzling to me. Sometimes, they will place even a tiny town as one, while other times they will skip over fairly large cities.

For example, I'd do these for I-95 from south to north:

Miami
West Palm Beach
Daytona Beach
Jacksonville
Savannah
Florence
Fayetteville
Richmond
Washington
Baltimore
Wilmington
Philadelphia
Trenton
New York
New Haven
Providence
Boston
Portland
Augusta
Bangor
Houlton (or Presque Isle?)
Fredericton Woodstock
I-95 goes through Houlton and continues as NB 95 into New Brunswick.
I would use Woodstock, since NB 95 ends there at TC 2; which heads towards either Fredericton or Edmundston depending on which direction one goes along TC 2.  Not sure what percentage of traffic along NB 95 is heading towards Fredericton vs. the percentage heading towards Edmundston. 

Is there a reason why you skipped over Portsmouth, NH?
Title: Re: Mid-Sized Cities That Aren't Control Cities, But Maybe Should Be
Post by: thspfc on June 03, 2019, 06:07:31 PM
Here's my I-95 (keep in mind I've never been to the east coast north of Florida)

Miami
WPB
Jacksonville - I don't think Daytona is big enough for I-95
Savannah
Florence
Fayetteville
Richmond (with DC secondary along this part)
DC
Baltimore
Philadelphia (NYC secondary)
NYC - no way I would use Trenton, pop. 90k, over NYC, pop. 8.6M
Connecticut - since, per my inference, most long-distance traffic on 95 north out of the city isn't going specifically to any destination, it's a wide spread. Similar to how "Wisconsin" and "Indiana" are signed in Chicago.
Once in CT, Bridgeport - larger than New Haven
New Haven
Providence
Boston
Portland - much bigger than Portsmouth NH
Augusta
Bangor
Canada - again, most traffic north of Bangor is going to miscellaneous destinations, so I would use the next (country) over.

Title: Re: Mid-Sized Cities That Aren't Control Cities, But Maybe Should Be
Post by: wriddle082 on June 03, 2019, 06:42:52 PM
Here's my I-95 (keep in mind I've never been to the east coast north of Florida)

Miami
WPB
Jacksonville - I don't think Daytona is big enough for I-95
Savannah
Florence
Fayetteville
Richmond (with DC secondary along this part)
DC
Baltimore
Philadelphia (NYC secondary)
NYC - no way I would use Trenton, pop. 90k, over NYC, pop. 8.6M
Connecticut - since, per my inference, most long-distance traffic on 95 north out of the city isn't going specifically to any destination, it's a wide spread. Similar to how "Wisconsin" and "Indiana" are signed in Chicago.
Once in CT, Bridgeport - larger than New Haven
New Haven
Providence
Boston
Portland - much bigger than Portsmouth NH
Augusta
Bangor
Canada - again, most traffic north of Bangor is going to miscellaneous destinations, so I would use the next (country) over.



* Daytona may not have a large population relative to other FL cities, but it is a destination for many.  And a major interstate junction.
* Rocky Mount should be included b/w Fayetteville and Richmond as it is now, since it will also one day have a major interstate junction once US 64 is successfully converted to I-87.  But Benson should continue to be left out.  Also consider listing mileage to Raleigh starting north of Fayetteville.
* Wilmington should be the primary control north of Baltimore, with Philly and NYC as secondary until past that point.
* New London, CT should be included b/w New Haven and Providence.
* Instead of just Canada once past Bangor, it should be Houlton.  Bangor is too far away from any one particular crossing, so I-95 should be signed for the one it specifically goes directly to.

Title: Re: Mid-Sized Cities That Aren't Control Cities, But Maybe Should Be
Post by: Ben114 on June 05, 2019, 04:35:41 PM
Since everyone has different ideas for I-95, I'll put one in (for north of New York). State abbreviations included for out of state destination usage

New York (NY)
New Haven (CT)
New London (CT)
Providence (RI)
Boston (MA)
Portsmouth (NH) (+ Nashua NH as secondary)
Portland (ME)
Bangor
Houlton
Title: Re: Mid-Sized Cities That Aren't Control Cities, But Maybe Should Be
Post by: 1 on June 05, 2019, 05:02:17 PM
Nashua is out of the way.
Title: Re: Mid-Sized Cities That Aren't Control Cities, But Maybe Should Be
Post by: Ben114 on June 05, 2019, 05:49:00 PM
Nashua is out of the way.
through US 3
Title: Re: Mid-Sized Cities That Aren't Control Cities, But Maybe Should Be
Post by: Flint1979 on June 05, 2019, 06:34:55 PM
Since everyone has different ideas for I-95, I'll put one in (for north of New York). State abbreviations included for out of state destination usage

New York (NY)
New Haven (CT)
New London (CT)
Providence (RI)
Boston (MA)
Portsmouth (NH) (+ Nashua NH as secondary)
Portland (ME)
Bangor
Houlton
Portsmouth, NH would probably be fine but Nashua isn't on I-95.
Title: Re: Mid-Sized Cities That Aren't Control Cities, But Maybe Should Be
Post by: Flint1979 on June 05, 2019, 06:39:32 PM
The lack of consistency in control cities is always puzzling to me. Sometimes, they will place even a tiny town as one, while other times they will skip over fairly large cities.

For example, I'd do these for I-95 from south to north:

Miami
West Palm Beach
Daytona Beach
Jacksonville
Savannah
Florence
Fayetteville
Richmond
Washington
Baltimore
Wilmington
Philadelphia
Trenton
New York
New Haven
Providence
Boston
Portland
Augusta
Bangor
Houlton (or Presque Isle?)
Fredericton Woodstock
I-95 goes through Houlton and continues as NB 95 into New Brunswick.
I would use Woodstock, since NB 95 ends there at TC 2; which heads towards either Fredericton or Edmundston depending on which direction one goes along TC 2.  Not sure what percentage of traffic along NB 95 is heading towards Fredericton vs. the percentage heading towards Edmundston. 

Is there a reason why you skipped over Portsmouth, NH?
I think I would have skipped Portsmouth too. It's only a city of about 20,000 and I-95 is in New Hampshire for a short time with Portland being the largest city in Maine. I do realize though that Portsmouth is a historic seaport and popular summer destination though. But I-95 is only in the state for 16 miles.
Title: Re: Mid-Sized Cities That Aren't Control Cities, But Maybe Should Be
Post by: WNYroadgeek on June 06, 2019, 12:20:24 AM
Rochester and Syracuse on the Thruway

Rochester actually is signed as a control city on the Thruway, albeit very minimally: https://goo.gl/maps/H6f57Vubyyy7ae4V8
Title: Re: Mid-Sized Cities That Aren't Control Cities, But Maybe Should Be
Post by: Scott5114 on June 06, 2019, 03:02:43 AM
-I-44 westbound from St. Louis should be Springfield, MO

My guess as for why it's Tulsa is to eliminate confusion between Springfield MO and Springfield IL. Springfield is used as a control city once you get west of Rolla or east of Joplin.

Likewise, Springfield IL is skipped in favor of Chicago, and Springfield IL is a state capital, even.
Title: Re: Mid-Sized Cities That Aren't Control Cities, But Maybe Should Be
Post by: thspfc on June 06, 2019, 05:02:50 PM
-I-44 westbound from St. Louis should be Springfield, MO

My guess as for why it's Tulsa is to eliminate confusion between Springfield MO and Springfield IL. Springfield is used as a control city once you get west of Rolla or east of Joplin.

Likewise, Springfield IL is skipped in favor of Chicago, and Springfield IL is a state capital, even.
More likely, Chicago is used over Springfield IL because Chicago is 45 times bigger in terms of metro population.
Title: Re: Mid-Sized Cities That Aren't Control Cities, But Maybe Should Be
Post by: Hurricane Rex on June 08, 2019, 03:34:39 PM
Proceeding east of I-5 in Springfield (SR 126), Albany (US 20) and Salem (SR 22), the control city mentioned on any I-5 signage relating to those highways should be Bend, which is about 100K for population.  ODOT does not do well with designating control cities for highways/freeways coming off of I-5.  Little or no mention is made of Astoria, Seaside, Tillamook, Lincoln City, Newport, Coos Bay/North Bend, Coquille, Bandon or any place in Curry County. 

This combines with not doing well for signing major out of state cities to make one feel like they are in a bubble when driving in Oregon.  WA, CA, ID and NV all let you know more about the Really Important Farther Off Places than Oregon does.

Rick
They need to say it for each city on the coast for each route. That being said I have seen signs for Bend on OR 22, or was it central Oregon? I can't remember.

On I-5 in Eugene, Portland is the control city and IMO it should be Salem/Portland duplexes on major signs and Salem on non-major signs because it's closer, people commute to Eugene from there, and Salem is a control city for I-5 South.

And for the Seattle area, Olympia should be the control city, not Tacoma from Downtown Seattle.


SM-J737T