Control Cities

[Scott5114]

I just spent a weekend in Hays and my opinion on the I-70 control cities between Topeka and Denver has changed. What I think a lot of people may not understand from just looking at a map–I sure as hell didn't until I actually visited–is how empty western Kansas is. Not only is it empty in the sense of there being a lot of space between towns, but most of those towns are small enough there isn't much in the way of traveler services. We're talking multiple hours between McDonald'ses and Walmarts here. (I was thinking Russell, Hays, WaKeeney, Oakley, and Colby were all about the same size. They're very much not; Hays is way bigger than the rest of them.)

In that case, Hays absolutely makes sense as a control city because it's the only thing for hours in any direction that actually has some semblance of civilization. Miss Hays and your next halfway-decent stop is going to be Colby, 90 minutes to the west, or Salina, 90 minutes to the east. The towns in between just aren't big enough to support the sort of "small-town-on-an-Interstate" trappings you see in the other states.

I would imagine that anyone passingly familiar with the area would know where exactly where Hays is and why it's important. Now does that mean that first-time pass-through traffic would know where Hays and Limon are? Of course not. So I feel like the best way to handle this is to post both primary and secondary controls. "Hays/Denver" and "Limon/Denver" going westbound, "Limon/Topeka", "Hays/Topeka", and "Salina/Topeka" going eastbound. (Based on a cursory look at the map, a case could be made for including Colby, but I cried uncle at Oakley and retreated to Hays, so I have no first-hand experience there.) Both the primary and secondary controls need to be included on every sign, not just alternating or only posted on side ramps, to pound it into drivers' heads that "this town you have never heard of is important; ignore it at your own peril."

[JayhawkCO]

I just spent a weekend in Hays and my opinion on the I-70 control cities between Topeka and Denver has changed. What I think a lot of people may not understand from just looking at a map–I sure as hell didn't until I actually visited–is how empty western Kansas is. Not only is it empty in the sense of there being a lot of space between towns, but most of those towns are small enough there isn't much in the way of traveler services. We're talking multiple hours between McDonald'ses and Walmarts here. (I was thinking Russell, Hays, WaKeeney, Oakley, and Colby were all about the same size. They're very much not; Hays is way bigger than the rest of them.)

I'm for sure well aware of just how empty it is out there with my mother-in-law being from Hoisington, several other family members on my wife's side living in WaKeeney, Victoria, and Hoxie, and having driven I-70 between Denver and KC probably 35-40 total times? 

In that case, Hays absolutely makes sense as a control city because it's the only thing for hours in any direction that actually has some semblance of civilization. Miss Hays and your next halfway-decent stop is going to be Colby, 90 minutes to the west, or Salina, 90 minutes to the east. The towns in between just aren't big enough to support the sort of "small-town-on-an-Interstate" trappings you see in the other states.

I would imagine that anyone passingly familiar with the area would know where exactly where Hays is and why it's important. Now does that mean that first-time pass-through traffic would know where Hays and Limon are? Of course not. So I feel like the best way to handle this is to post both primary and secondary controls. "Hays/Denver" and "Limon/Denver" going westbound, "Limon/Topeka", "Hays/Topeka", and "Salina/Topeka" going eastbound. (Based on a cursory look at the map, a case could be made for including Colby, but I cried uncle at Oakley and retreated to Hays, so I have no first-hand experience there.) Both the primary and secondary controls need to be included on every sign, not just alternating or only posted on side ramps, to pound it into drivers' heads that "this town you have never heard of is important; ignore it at your own peril."

I guess I take your thinking and look at it the other way.  Because there are no other towns of any substance, you SHOULD put the smaller towns (Hays, etc.) as the main control cities.  Otherwise people might think they can skip by those towns if they needed services. 

I did a little math, and below are all the cities and towns that you drive through between Aurora and Salina (their population rank is in parentheses).  It shows the distance to get to another town of X size going in either direction.  From looking at it, I'd argue that eastbound from Denver, the control cities should be Limon, Colby, Hays, Salina.  Westbound from Salina (which should 100% be a control city), the control cities should be Hays, Colby, Burlington, Denver.

[Scott5114]

I'm for sure well aware of just how empty it is out there with my mother-in-law being from Hoisington, several other family members on my wife's side living in WaKeeney, Victoria, and Hoxie, and having driven I-70 between Denver and KC probably 35-40 total times?

Victoria is a gorgeous little town. I came into town on Old Highway 40 and cut up to I-70 to clinch K-255. It's cool how you can see the cathedral for miles.

On the other hand, WaKeeney was a lot smaller than I was expecting.

In that case, Hays absolutely makes sense as a control city ... I would imagine that anyone passingly familiar with the area would know where exactly where Hays is and why it's important. Now does that mean that first-time pass-through traffic would know where Hays and Limon are? Of course not. So I feel like the best way to handle this is to post both primary and secondary controls. "Hays/Denver" and "Limon/Denver" going westbound, "Limon/Topeka", "Hays/Topeka", and "Salina/Topeka" going eastbound...

I guess I take your thinking and look at it the other way.  Because there are no other towns of any substance, you SHOULD put the smaller towns (Hays, etc.) as the main control cities.  Otherwise people might think they can skip by those towns if they needed services. 

Exactly. The only reason I suggest adding Denver and Topeka (in addition to the smaller cities in between) is for navigational purposes, so people who may not know the order of the towns have a frame of reference for "toward Colorado" and "toward Kansas". (Obviously "west" and "east" should do that, but we all know that some people have problems using compass directions.)

[ran4sh]

The problem with that is, services come and go but the list of control cities hardly ever gets updated (and when it does, it often takes a while to change all the signs).

Service signage should be used to indicate the availability of services, such as a "Next Services X Miles" sign before the last exit in a town with services. Sure, they're also affected by the opening or closing of services, but it's easier to change a few specific signs rather than an entire segment of Interstate.

[JayhawkCO]

Or use city populations to determine control cities since they are unlikely to change so much as to lose services.

Chris

[SkyPesos]

Or use city populations to determine control cities since they are unlikely to change so much as to lose services.

Chris

Would you suggest the minimum population for control city status to be 1105* people then?. Because that would include a lot of cities and towns on any given highway 

*Population estimate for Limon, CO in 2019

[JayhawkCO]

Or use city populations to determine control cities since they are unlikely to change so much as to lose services.

Chris

Would you suggest the minimum population for control city status to be 1105* people then?. Because that would include a lot of cities and towns on any given highway 

*Population estimate for Limon, CO in 2019

It's relative.  The most populous city in an area.  Does something with a population of 2,000 on the East Coast make sense?  No. Does something with a population of 2,000 make sense when it's the largest city for 100 miles?  Maybe.

Chris

[ran4sh]

Or use city populations to determine control cities since they are unlikely to change so much as to lose services.

Chris

City populations don't change? You're kidding, right?

[JayhawkCO]

Or use city populations to determine control cities since they are unlikely to change so much as to lose services.

Chris

City populations don't change? You're kidding, right?

Relative to other cities in the area?  Not much.  You're saying all of a sudden Victoria, KS is going to pass Hays in population sometime soon?  Maybe Newark will outgrow NYC in the next ten years?  Why do we even have MSAs and MicroSAs defined?  The most important city in an area can just dry up in a week like a gold rush boomtown, right?

Chris

[thspfc]

Or use city populations to determine control cities since they are unlikely to change so much as to lose services.

Chris

City populations don't change? You're kidding, right?

Relative to other cities in the area?  Not much.  You're saying all of a sudden Victoria, KS is going to pass Hays in population sometime soon?  Maybe Newark will outgrow NYC in the next ten years?  Why do we even have MSAs and MicroSAs defined?  The most important city in an area can just dry up in a week like a gold rush boomtown, right?

Chris

A very small percentage of rural towns are significantly growing right now. The population change argument is only relevant to large metro areas.

[JayhawkCO]

Or use city populations to determine control cities since they are unlikely to change so much as to lose services.

Chris

City populations don't change? You're kidding, right?

Relative to other cities in the area?  Not much.  You're saying all of a sudden Victoria, KS is going to pass Hays in population sometime soon?  Maybe Newark will outgrow NYC in the next ten years?  Why do we even have MSAs and MicroSAs defined?  The most important city in an area can just dry up in a week like a gold rush boomtown, right?

Chris

A very small percentage of rural towns are significantly growing right now. The population change argument is only relevant to large metro areas.

Fully agreed, which IMO is what makes those rural outposts even more important, as the other smaller towns nearby, if they actually have businesses, are likely to lose them.

I think the innermost quote in this post might be being taken out of context.  I was saying that cities with a higher population compared to their region aren't likely to lose "stature" and therefore wouldn't all of a sudden be a service wasteland.

Chris

[hbelkins]

Control cities are for navigational purposes. Many of the established control cities are population centers, but many are not. Not every major intersection is located in a large city. (Washington, Pa.; Breezewood, Wytheville, Hancock, etc.)

[ran4sh]

I disagree with using a junction as a control city if it isn't already important on its own. It would be better to indicate the distance to it by using "Jct [route X]" and for the control city to reflect the next actual important city that most traffic is going to (i.e. if most traffic continues straight on the route, use that city, but if most traffic exits to the intersecting route to go left or right, use the city in that direction.

For example, I would argue that Raleigh would qualify as a valid control city for I-95 south of the I-40 junction. And in Pennsylvania instead of Hazleton for I-81 I would skip it and use Wilkes-Barre and Harrisburg (and Allentown for I-81 nb leaving Harrisburg, due to the amount of traffic exiting to I-78).

[US20IL64]

An example of a control city losing population and thus, 'stature' is Gary IN. Not used on newer signs, in place is simply 'Indiana' or from the south, 'Chicago'.

[thspfc]

Control cities are for navigational purposes. Many of the established control cities are population centers, but many are not. Not every major intersection is located in a large city. (Washington, Pa.; Breezewood, Wytheville, Hancock, etc.)

Here we go again with this . . . nobody cares about the name of the town where they turn from I-70 onto I-79; they simply care that they turn from I-70 onto I-79. If it's that important of a junction, then sign it as "To I-79". "Washington PA" does not help anyone.

[Scott5114]

I'm starting to think I could go through this thread and predict who has I-70 between Denver and Salina marked on their Travel Mapping with a fair degree of accuracy.

(On that note, Salina is also way more substantial than I was expecting. It has a dense downtown area that is way more extensive than I was expecting for a city of its size.)

[SkyPesos]

I'm starting to think I could go through this thread and predict who has I-70 between Denver and Salina marked on their Travel Mapping with a fair degree of accuracy.

(On that note, Salina is also way more substantial than I was expecting. It has a dense downtown area that is way more extensive than I was expecting for a city of its size.)

For a sec, I thought you were referring to Salina, UT, also a control city on I-70 in the opposite direction from Denver. So I was actually blown away when clicking on the GSV link with that in mind.

[Flint1979]

I'm starting to think I could go through this thread and predict who has I-70 between Denver and Salina marked on their Travel Mapping with a fair degree of accuracy.

(On that note, Salina is also way more substantial than I was expecting. It has a dense downtown area that is way more extensive than I was expecting for a city of its size.)

Well it is a decent sized city with multiple colleges and is the regional trade center for North Central Kansas in a rather in the middle of nowhere area about 400 miles east of Denver, 80 miles north of Wichita and 160 miles west of Kansas City. Myself I would expect it to have some degree of denseness but in reality it's about the same size as Midland, Michigan which also has a pretty dense downtown area.

[Scott5114]

I'm starting to think I could go through this thread and predict who has I-70 between Denver and Salina marked on their Travel Mapping with a fair degree of accuracy.

(On that note, Salina is also way more substantial than I was expecting. It has a dense downtown area that is way more extensive than I was expecting for a city of its size.)

Well it is a decent sized city with multiple colleges and is the regional trade center for North Central Kansas in a rather in the middle of nowhere area about 400 miles east of Denver, 80 miles north of Wichita and 160 miles west of Kansas City. Myself I would expect it to have some degree of denseness but in reality it's about the same size as Midland, Michigan which also has a pretty dense downtown area.

Well, I think most of that is just because most Oklahoma cities have shit downtowns, so my expectations are lowered. Salina (KS)'s downtown felt more extensive than Norman's, and we're twice the size of Salina.

[thspfc]

I'm starting to think I could go through this thread and predict who has I-70 between Denver and Salina marked on their Travel Mapping with a fair degree of accuracy.

(On that note, Salina is also way more substantial than I was expecting. It has a dense downtown area that is way more extensive than I was expecting for a city of its size.)

Well it is a decent sized city with multiple colleges and is the regional trade center for North Central Kansas in a rather in the middle of nowhere area about 400 miles east of Denver, 80 miles north of Wichita and 160 miles west of Kansas City. Myself I would expect it to have some degree of denseness but in reality it's about the same size as Midland, Michigan which also has a pretty dense downtown area.

Well, I think most of that is just because most Oklahoma cities have shit downtowns, so my expectations are lowered. Salina (KS)'s downtown felt more extensive than Norman's, and we're twice the size of Salina.

Salina was founded in the 1850s, Norman in the 1880s. In the first half of the 19th century (when most of the buildings in American downtowns were constructed), Salina was larger than Norman - Salina was twice as large at the 1940 census (21k to 11k), before Norman started growing like crazy in the 40s. Then sometime in the last 50-60 years (you would know better exactly when), Norman became a de facto suburb of OKC, causing more growth compared to Salina. So Norman has a smaller downtown because it's a newer city.

[Flint1979]

I'm starting to think I could go through this thread and predict who has I-70 between Denver and Salina marked on their Travel Mapping with a fair degree of accuracy.

(On that note, Salina is also way more substantial than I was expecting. It has a dense downtown area that is way more extensive than I was expecting for a city of its size.)

Well it is a decent sized city with multiple colleges and is the regional trade center for North Central Kansas in a rather in the middle of nowhere area about 400 miles east of Denver, 80 miles north of Wichita and 160 miles west of Kansas City. Myself I would expect it to have some degree of denseness but in reality it's about the same size as Midland, Michigan which also has a pretty dense downtown area.

Well, I think most of that is just because most Oklahoma cities have shit downtowns, so my expectations are lowered. Salina (KS)'s downtown felt more extensive than Norman's, and we're twice the size of Salina.

Probably because Norman takes up so much land area. Oklahoma has 6 cities in the top 150 in that category. I never realized how massive those cities in Oklahoma are.

[thspfc]

I'm starting to think I could go through this thread and predict who has I-70 between Denver and Salina marked on their Travel Mapping with a fair degree of accuracy.

(On that note, Salina is also way more substantial than I was expecting. It has a dense downtown area that is way more extensive than I was expecting for a city of its size.)

Well it is a decent sized city with multiple colleges and is the regional trade center for North Central Kansas in a rather in the middle of nowhere area about 400 miles east of Denver, 80 miles north of Wichita and 160 miles west of Kansas City. Myself I would expect it to have some degree of denseness but in reality it's about the same size as Midland, Michigan which also has a pretty dense downtown area.

Well, I think most of that is just because most Oklahoma cities have shit downtowns, so my expectations are lowered. Salina (KS)'s downtown felt more extensive than Norman's, and we're twice the size of Salina.

Probably because Norman takes up so much land area. Oklahoma has 6 cities in the top 150 in that category. I never realized how massive those cities in Oklahoma are.

With no geographic boundaries whatsoever they can build as many suburban neighborhoods of twisty roads and single family homes as they want.

[hobsini2]

Or use city populations to determine control cities since they are unlikely to change so much as to lose services.

Chris

City populations don't change? You're kidding, right?

Relative to other cities in the area?  Not much.  You're saying all of a sudden Victoria, KS is going to pass Hays in population sometime soon?  Maybe Newark will outgrow NYC in the next ten years?  Why do we even have MSAs and MicroSAs defined?  The most important city in an area can just dry up in a week like a gold rush boomtown, right?

Chris

Chris, let me introduce to you the case of Cairo, IL, a very important place at the confluence of the Ohio into the Mississippi.  In 1890, the population reached over the 10k milestone. In 1920, the population had peaked at a bit more than 15k. It stayed above 10k until the 1960 census to 9,348. The city has been in decline for decades ever since. The 2010 census had the pop at 2,831. The estimate for 2019 puts it at 2,082. If you ever drive on US 51 in town, it will depress you with all the vacant lots and closed businesses.

While population is an important factor for a control city, a city can severely change over decades.

[Scott5114]

Cairo was also pretty heavily dependent on riverboat traffic. When technology advanced and the river wasn't the primary means of doing business in the area, the reason for the town's existence was gone, and the town quickly faded into irrelevance.

A place like Hays exists as a market town serving as the place that all of the people in the surrounding farm towns travel to when they need something they can't get back home. Towns like that are just as likely to grow as people in the farm towns decide that maybe it's easier to just give up the farm business and stay in Hays full-time (and indeed 606 people moved to Hays between the 2010 and 2020 Census–not a huge growth, but Oakley added 1 person, while WaKeeney lost 63 people, Russell lost 105, etc.)

[JayhawkCO]

Or use city populations to determine control cities since they are unlikely to change so much as to lose services.

Chris

City populations don't change? You're kidding, right?

Relative to other cities in the area?  Not much.  You're saying all of a sudden Victoria, KS is going to pass Hays in population sometime soon?  Maybe Newark will outgrow NYC in the next ten years?  Why do we even have MSAs and MicroSAs defined?  The most important city in an area can just dry up in a week like a gold rush boomtown, right?

Chris

Chris, let me introduce to you the case of Cairo, IL, a very important place at the confluence of the Ohio into the Mississippi.  In 1890, the population reached over the 10k milestone. In 1920, the population had peaked at a bit more than 15k. It stayed above 10k until the 1960 census to 9,348. The city has been in decline for decades ever since. The 2010 census had the pop at 2,831. The estimate for 2019 puts it at 2,082. If you ever drive on US 51 in town, it will depress you with all the vacant lots and closed businesses.

While population is an important factor for a control city, a city can severely change over decades.

Sure.  Decades.  Detroit has massively changed in decades.  We can react accordingly.  Vegas wasn't important in the 40's.  Decades later, it is.  That's my point that using relative population is important because it's not going to change that quickly.  If there were an interstate that ran through Cairo and Paducah, if Cairo were the control city in the 60's, I might agree we can now change it to Paducah.  If there weren't another town above 2,000 that said interstate ran into for over 100 miles? I'd probably argue Cairo is still valid.

Side note, drove through Limon today and got gas.  First station I went to was completely full with people waiting.  Long line at drive thrus.  Seems important for such a little town...

Chris