Limon should be a control city

[hotdogPi]

At first glance, I'd prefer Eau Claire or even Saint Paul.  However, traffic following I-90 west from Chicago isn't going to either of those cities.  They're only useful for I-94 traffic.

Control City Freak suggested using "Minnesota" because both I-90 and I-94 go there, but some of the forum would freak out if they heard that.

I think Minnesota could work (if you're before the 90/94 split, you'll want to go to at least the split for all parts of Minnesota), but doing so leaves out Eau Claire which is before the state line.

[Big John]

At first glance, I'd prefer Eau Claire or even Saint Paul.  However, traffic following I-90 west from Chicago isn't going to either of those cities.  They're only useful for I-94 traffic.

Control City Freak suggested using "Minnesota" because both I-90 and I-94 go there, but some of the forum would freak out if they heard that.

I think Minnesota could work (if you're before the 90/94 split, you'll want to go to at least the split for all parts of Minnesota), but doing so leaves out Eau Claire which is before the state line.

and La Crosse for I-90

[roadman65]

By the way, I think "Kansas" is fine on I-70 eastbound in Colorado. Unlike many other control states, it's valid for all of Kansas, at least as a first step (e.g. for Dodge City or Wichita, you'll be on I-70 for the first part of the journey). This is unlike New Hampshire's use of "To All Maine Points" on I-95 where NH 16 splits and some of the inland areas of Maine are better reached by ignoring the Maine sign and getting on NH 16. I'm not that familiar with Illinois's control states, but I believe they're even worse in this regard than NH's signing of Maine.

Whenever someone brings up control states, a bunch of users always raid the thread with cries of AH I HATE CONTROL STATES  without actually giving an explanation to why they hate them.

Being from New Jersey, where neighboring Delaware, New York, and Pennsylvania like to sign all roads into our state with a New Jersey instead of recognizing that we have cities too, I'm against it.

[TheHighwayMan3561]

"Minnesota" is used on I-90 in the La Crosse area.

[kphoger]

"Minnesota" is used on I-90 in the La Crosse area.

Example:  https://goo.gl/maps/MmgBmc42UanWjMC66

[SEWIGuy]

"Minnesota" is used on I-90 in the La Crosse area.

BuT wHaT iF tHeY tHiNk ThEy ArE gOiNg To MiNnEaPoLiS?

[hotdogPi]

"Minnesota" is used on I-90 in the La Crosse area.

BuT wHaT iF tHeY tHiNk ThEy ArE gOiNg To MiNnEaPoLiS?

I-90 to US 52. It still works.

[kalvado]

"Minnesota" is used on I-90 in the La Crosse area.

BuT wHaT iF tHeY tHiNk ThEy ArE gOiNg To MiNnEaPoLiS?

TheY wILl End uP hERe:

[kirbykart]

How is one meant to read the plaque underneath at speed?

[JayhawkCO]

How is one meant to read the plaque underneath at speed?

Quickly.

[Roadgeekteen]

"Minnesota" is used on I-90 in the La Crosse area.

They really don't want to use Rochester

[formulanone]

"Minnesota" is used on I-90 in the La Crosse area.

They really don't want to use Rochester

Too many Rochesters.

[sprjus4]

"Minnesota" is used on I-90 in the La Crosse area.

They really don't want to use Rochester

Don't tell HighwayStar.

[Scott5114]

We made quite a leap in logic here . . .

Let's say we live in a universe where there are no control cities, only control states.

Is not valid justification for control states never existing in any cases.

Control cities are case-by-case. Any mention of "always"  or "never"  or "only"  is an automatic no for me.

The point is that if you're picking cities, you have more flexibility to avoid ambiguity than if you're picking states.

[Roadgeekteen]

"Minnesota" is used on I-90 in the La Crosse area.

They really don't want to use Rochester

Don't tell HighwayStar.

Highway star would hate control city freak. His ideal control cities for I-95 north in South Carolina? Charleston and Columbia.

[hotdogPi]

HighwayStar said Rochester for I-90 in Minnesota would be somewhat acceptable because there are no good options at all. Remember that he also hates tiny control cities. (This might have applied eastbound only given Sioux Falls to the west, but I don't remember.)

[KCRoadFan]

I could see Limon growing bigger if the US 287 corridor between there and Amarillo is made into a freeway (northern extension of I-27?) or at least a four-lane - thus creating an expressway connection between Denver and Dallas - as I've seen rumors about on the forum from time to time. If that were to happen, then I suppose Limon would actually work as a control city. Anyway, what do you think?

[HighwayStar]

HighwayStar said Rochester for I-90 in Minnesota would be somewhat acceptable because there are no good options at all. Remember that he also hates tiny control cities. (This might have applied eastbound only given Sioux Falls to the west, but I don't remember.)

Not sure if the second sentence was referring to me, but I don't hate tiny control cities, there are times and places where they are the right decision.
Rochester on I-90 in Minnesota is definitely an edge case of no clear contender, and because of my minimum of 1 control city per state rule its not possible to skip to WI from SD.

[sprjus4]

. Anyway, what do you think?

I think this isn't going to happen until at least 2050.

[sprjus4]

"Minnesota" is used on I-90 in the La Crosse area.

They really don't want to use Rochester

Don't tell HighwayStar.

Highway star would hate control city freak. His ideal control cities for I-95 north in South Carolina? Charleston and Columbia.

Okay, these genuinely don't make any sense. Neither are remotely close to or served by I-95. I-70 east in Maryland, traffic is pointed due east towards the Baltimore suburbs, I-90 traffic is pointed west towards the outer edges of Rochester, MN...

On I-95 in South Carolina, it doesn't get within 50 miles to either city. Florence would be / is an appropriate control.

[Flint1979]

If I had to choose the control cities on I-95 in SC I would go with

SB: Florence, Savannah.

NB: Florence, Fayetteville

Using Columbia and Charleston makes no sense at all.

[Flint1979]

By the way, I think "Kansas" is fine on I-70 eastbound in Colorado. Unlike many other control states, it's valid for all of Kansas, at least as a first step (e.g. for Dodge City or Wichita, you'll be on I-70 for the first part of the journey). This is unlike New Hampshire's use of "To All Maine Points" on I-95 where NH 16 splits and some of the inland areas of Maine are better reached by ignoring the Maine sign and getting on NH 16. I'm not that familiar with Illinois's control states, but I believe they're even worse in this regard than NH's signing of Maine.

Whenever someone brings up control states, a bunch of users always raid the thread with cries of AH I HATE CONTROL STATES  without actually giving an explanation to why they hate them.

Because they are functionally useless for navigation purposes.

Let's say we live in a universe where there are no control cities, only control states.

You're driving I-35 southbound into Oklahoma City. You come to the exit for I-40 east, Arkansas. All good so far. Now, staying on I-35 south, you merge onto westbound I-40. Your options are I-35 south, Texas, and I-40 west, Texas. You decide to go west on I-40 through downtown, toward Texas. In a few dozen miles, your options will be I-40 west, Texas; I-44 west, Texas; and I-44 east, Missouri.

Obviously it would be ludicrous to sign the Oklahoma highway system this way. But it would be entirely accurate, it just overlooks the fact that despite the fact that Dallas, Wichita Falls, and Amarillo are all in Texas, they are nowhere near one another, and not all routes that lead to those places will bring you to your intended destination, just a point that happens to be in the same state.

Likewise, following I-70 eastbound out of Denver will eventually bring you to Kansas, but staying on it until you enter Kansas is not necessarily the best route to all points in Kansas.

Likewise it would be like Michigan signing Indiana for both I-69 and I-94 when they enter Indiana nowhere near each other.

[Roadgeekteen]

If I had to choose the control cities on I-95 in SC I would go with

SB: Florence, Savannah.

NB: Florence, Fayetteville

Using Columbia and Charleston makes no sense at all.

His logic is to use Charleston until the US 17 exit, as Charleston is a big city and lots of people are going there, and use Columbia until I-26 as it's angling that way or something. He also says that Raleigh should be used on I-95 in North Carolina. He hates small cities being used. You know what I wouldn't mind being used instead of Florence? Washington DC.

[Flint1979]

If I had to choose the control cities on I-95 in SC I would go with

SB: Florence, Savannah.

NB: Florence, Fayetteville

Using Columbia and Charleston makes no sense at all.

His logic is to use Charleston until the US 17 exit, as Charleston is a big city and lots of people are going there, and use Columbia until I-26 as it's angling that way or something. He also says that Raleigh should be used on I-95 in North Carolina. He hates small cities being used. You know what I wouldn't mind being used instead of Florence? Washington DC.

Richmond is a big city in Virginia and the state capital.

[hotdogPi]

You know what I wouldn't mind being used instead of Florence? Washington DC.

Richmond is a big city in Virginia and the state capital.

I was about to type the name of another city that shouldn't be skipped (Fayetteville), but you beat me to it as I was multitasking.