Oddly Designated Control Cities

[nwi_navigator_1181]

Hello folks! This is (kinda sorta) a spinoff of the "Control Cities in Your State" thread.

Are there any control city designations that, while not necessarily wrong, are quite odd in the grand scheme of things? Here's an example:

After recently expanding I-80 between Joliet and U.S. 45 (La Grange Road), the control city of I-355 was changed from "West Suburbs" to "Rockford." While there is a connection to I-90 from I-355 (via I-290), that particular tollway never comes anywhere close to Rockford, nor is there any mention of the city until you reach I-290, about seven miles before I-90 proper. On I-80, the real Rockford exit is about 60 miles from that point, via a more direct connection on I-39.

Do you have examples? Share them here. Thanks in advance for your responses.

Edited for correction, thanks to hobsini2 for the call out.

[NE2]

Yes, control cities are sometimes not on the route itself. This is nothing new.

[nwi_navigator_1181]

Yes, control cities are sometimes not on the route itself. This is nothing new.

Oh, I agree with you. We have a classic example of that with I-65 north given Chicago. At the same time, this instance makes a little more sense because I-65 ends just short of the city, and there is signage to inform drivers of which routes can be taken to get to Chicago proper.

The I-355 example does none of the above, and that's what I was going for here.

As you said, this technique is nothing new. I just find Rockford to be too far out of the way to give designation for I-355, when Aurora (an I-88 control city) is much closer and requires less connections.

[oscar]

Hello folks! This is (kinda sorta) a spinoff of the "Control Cities in Your State" thread.

Are there any control city designations that, while not necessarily wrong, are quite odd in the grand scheme of things?

Not particularly odd, but the "control city" for westbound Alberta 43 in Grand Prairie is Alaska.  True, you have British Columbia and for many travelers Yukon Territory between Grande Prairie and Alaska.  But many Alaska-bound travelers stop in Grande Prairie (the last major city before the Alaska Highway, for people headed there from the east), and many travelers on AB 43 west of Grande Prairie are headed for Alaska, so the "control city" steers them in the right direction.

I just stopped there a few days ago on my way to the Northwest Territories.  Grande Prairie isn't on the main route to NWT, and the control cities heading north of town are all within Alberta.

[hbelkins]

Several of the ones in West Virginia, which are only small towns or regionally important cities, and not of national significance or where a lot of through traffic would be headed.

Examples: Lewisburg on I-64, Parkersburg and Clarksburg on I-77 and I-79.

Should be Lexington, VA (if not Richmond) on I-64, Cambridge, OH on I-77 (intersection with I-70) and Morgantown (intersection with I-68) on I-79.

[bulldog1979]

I-275 northbound has Flint as a control city, even though from the northern terminus of I-275, traffic would have to take I-96 west to US 23 north or I-696 east to I-75 north. Of course, if the freeway was completed as originally planned, it would connect to I-75 directly.

[agentsteel53]

Delaware Water Gap 

[Interstate Trav]

San Fernando for I-210 Westbound

I'm not sure if "Oregon Coast" along US 101 would qualify, or "Other Desert Cities" on I-10 East. 

[flowmotion]

<<Insert routine complaint about I-580 Stockton>>

[NE2]

Yes, control cities are sometimes not on the route itself. This is nothing new.

Oh, I agree with you. We have a classic example of that with I-65 north given Chicago. At the same time, this instance makes a little more sense because I-65 ends just short of the city, and there is signage to inform drivers of which routes can be taken to get to Chicago proper.

The I-355 example does none of the above, and that's what I was going for here.

As you said, this technique is nothing new. I just find Rockford to be too far out of the way to give designation for I-355, when Aurora (an I-88 control city) is much closer and requires less connections.

It's pretty normal (in some states) to use a radial control city on a beltway.

[hobsini2]

Yes, control cities are sometimes not on the route itself. This is nothing new.

Oh, I agree with you. We have a classic example of that with I-65 north given Chicago. At the same time, this instance makes a little more sense because I-65 ends just short of the city, and there is signage to inform drivers of which routes can be taken to get to Chicago proper.

The I-355 example does none of the above, and that's what I was going for here.

As you said, this technique is nothing new. I just find Rockford to be too far out of the way to give designation for I-355, when Aurora (an I-88 control city) is much closer and requires less connections.

It's pretty normal (in some states) to use a radial control city on a beltway.

I as well was dismayed when i saw Rockford for 355 north at 80. NWI, there is actually one mention of Rockford before 90 at the 355/290 jct in Addison. And more to NE2's point, bypasses that use radial control cities are common however Rockford is IMO not acceptable. You have to exit twice to get to the Rockford area where as if you had say Aurora (which is a control city used in the area), that would be more acceptable since it is 1 exit off of 355.  Going southbound, I actually agree with ISTHA using both Joliet and St Louis as you enter the tollway mainline at Army Trail Rd (BTW no other mention of St Louis until 55).

[TXtoNJ]

NJ often uses just "Phila" for Philadelphia.

In Houston, many of the freeways list "Downtown" as their control city within the city limits.

[Brandon]

Yes, control cities are sometimes not on the route itself. This is nothing new.

Oh, I agree with you. We have a classic example of that with I-65 north given Chicago. At the same time, this instance makes a little more sense because I-65 ends just short of the city, and there is signage to inform drivers of which routes can be taken to get to Chicago proper.

The I-355 example does none of the above, and that's what I was going for here.

As you said, this technique is nothing new. I just find Rockford to be too far out of the way to give designation for I-355, when Aurora (an I-88 control city) is much closer and requires less connections.

It's pretty normal (in some states) to use a radial control city on a beltway.

Rockford still makes minimal sense for I-355.  Schaumburg, home of Woodfield and many other destinations, would've been a far better choice.

[BigMattFromTexas]

Not so much odd, but it's funny how El Paso is the control city in southern Tuscon. Even though it's a whole state and a half away.
BigMatt

[NE2]

Rockford still makes minimal sense for I-355.  Schaumburg, home of Woodfield and many other destinations, would've been a far better choice.

Control cities are based on geographic prominence. Rockford is easy to pick out on the map, while Schaumburg is one of many cookie-cutter suburbs.

[Brandon]

Rockford still makes minimal sense for I-355.  Schaumburg, home of Woodfield and many other destinations, would've been a far better choice.

Control cities are based on geographic prominence. Rockford is easy to pick out on the map, while Schaumburg is one of many cookie-cutter suburbs.

And I will discount your comment based on your sigs and the fact that you aren't even from here.

Usually towns with large tourist destinations get noted as some sort of control on a bgs.

[NE2]

*yawn*

[drummer_evans_aki]

US-97 South from Klamath Falls, OR

Weed
San Francisco

[NE2]

US-97 South from Klamath Falls, OR

Weed
San Francisco

The two things hippies want most?

[mcdonaat]

I-310 has Boutte and Houma, although Boutte isn't even a true town, and Houma is reached via 310 to US 90 to La. 182.

[sp_redelectric]

I'm not sure if "Oregon Coast" along US 101 would qualify

And "Oregon Coast" is a fairly recent change; for many years it was "Ocean Beaches".

I-205 at its southern end has "Oregon City" as the control city, replacing The Dalles (via I-84) and Seattle (via I-5).

I-405 actually has Seattle and Salem as control cities.  Nevermind the freeway is only about four miles long.

Oregon 217 southbound uses Salem...not sure why ODOT doesn't use Tigard (actually on 217) or Lake Oswego (right at the very end of 217).  Northbound uses Beaverton...there were a few "Sunset Highway" control cities but those signs have been removed.

But my favorite is on U.S. 195 in Colfax, Washington - SR 26 to Seattle.  Only about 300 miles away.

[DandyDan]

Nebraska has a few odd ones once you get off the interstate, at least on older signage.  NE 92 west of its separation from US 275 has Grand Island.  US 75 going south from its separation from US 34 has Falls City and US 34 going east from Lincoln and the other towns and highway intersections on its route has Nebraska City.  OTOH, the first two are remnants of previous designations.  When I was working for a courier company years ago here in Omaha, there was one particular driver from the Grand Island branch of my employer who actually swore by that route (NE 92 to US 30) over I-80.

Iowa, FWIW, as you leave Council Bluffs going east on Iowa 92, has Muscatine as its final control city, Muscatine being all the way across Iowa.  Yeah, it's on Iowa 92, but you have to be totally not in a hurry to actually do that one.

[corco]

But my favorite is on U.S. 195 in Colfax, Washington - SR 26 to Seattle.  Only about 300 miles away.

26 is the main northern Idaho-Seattle route. If you're going from Moscow/Pullman (where WSU is and lots of people going back and forth from Seattle) to Seattle, that's the way to go. Lewiston/Clarkston is about the dividing line- it's probably faster to take 12 from Clarkston but 26 from Lewiston if you're on the east side of town (you can pretty much go 65 the whole way on 26, but you have to slow way down on surprisingly windy SR 261 to get from US-12 to SR 26). I'm not sure why Google Maps hates SR 26 so much- it's a really good road.

I-10 uses Lordsburg and Deming as control cities in New Mexico, but for some reason this sign where 70 joins I-10 in Las Cruces just uses "Arizona"

[Interstate Trav]

<<Insert routine complaint about I-580 Stockton>>

Doesn't I-580 also list Fresno at some point?  That is even worse.

[DTComposer]

CA-55 heading north from I-5 uses Anaheim as a control city, even though to get to Downtown Anaheim, Disneyland, Anaheim Stadium, Anaheim Convention Center, etc., you should actually stay on I-5, as CA-55 takes you away from all of that.

Worse yet, if you continue on CA-55 north then you reach CA-91, for which one of the eastbound control cities is also Anaheim.

So if you follow the control cities you will do almost a full u-turn away from Anaheim.