Control Cities

[hotdogPi]

MA 24, as far as I know, was always intended to end at the inner beltway instead of going all the way into Boston. Is that any different from I-70 and Baltimore?

[kphoger]

The examples you cite are not analogous, as those routes were completed as intended for the given level of service, which I-70 was not.

How it was intended to be completed does not have anything to do with modern utility.

Exactly.  Who the heck cares what the original plan was?  Nobody outside this forum, that's for sure!

[bing101]

I-70 goes through Pittsburgh in the same sense that I-80 goes through Cleveland and Chicago.

What about I-40 going to Los Angeles? AZ signs I-40 west of Flagstaff as LA despite you having to use two other interstates to get there.

I-80 and New York City
I-65 and Chicago
I-57 and Memphis
I-24 and St Louis
I-88(IL) and Iowa
I-22 and Memphis
I-15 and LA
I-70 and Las Vegas

Its not like this is that rare a phenomenon

True I-5 San Francisco does get mentioned at the I-5 North and CA-99 North interchange on the south end of the San Joaquin valley even though both I-5 and CA-99 meet again in Sacramento.

[Flint1979]

A further requirement should be that the road actually serves the location in question.

Disagree. There are many instances where it would be logical to sign a control city on a route that doesn't officially serve that location, if it's a large population center and that route indirectly serves it. An example of this would be I-70 Baltimore.

Indirect service confuses the purpose of a control city. Control cities are not there for designating all the various destinations a route might take you to, they are to mark the route itself, and therefore must be meaningfully on the route. I-70 ends without serving Baltimore, so an appropriate designation might be "Baltimore Beltway" which has transportation and military significance.

I-70 does not end without serving Baltimore. It connects to the beltway around it which has several highways that take you into Baltimore, it also has an exit at Security Blvd. which connects to Baltimore. Just because I-70 doesn't go into the city doesn't mean it doesn't serve it. I-75 doesn't go into Tampa but it serves it, same with I-80 serving Chicago and Cleveland.

Connecting to a highway that can take you someplace is not enough for control city status. I-90 can take you to New York City, but since it does not serve it it is disqualified.
The examples you cite are not analogous, as those routes were completed as intended for the given level of service, which I-70 was not. (Also key is the fact that both of them pass by the cities in question, rather than dead ending to a parking lot on the edge of nothing.

You know what? I'm going to go with the Department of Transportation's in each state know more about what city to sign as a control city than you do. Is Baltimore not signed at the Beltway? Oh look it is, https://www.google.com/maps/@39.3070757,-76.7534512,3a,15y,105.66h,107.75t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sI5WMIM7x3YSe37o0rBBu5w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Therefore it makes sense to sign it as the control city on I-70 it fucking ends in Baltimore what else needs to be said?

[Flint1979]

The examples you cite are not analogous, as those routes were completed as intended for the given level of service, which I-70 was not.

How it was intended to be completed does not have anything to do with modern utility.

Exactly.  Who the heck cares what the original plan was?  Nobody outside this forum, that's for sure!

I sure don't especially considering plans can be altered which they were.

[kphoger]

Connecting to a highway that can take you someplace is not enough for control city status.

Your theory is contradicted by a whole lot of reality.

I-70 goes through Pittsburgh in the same sense that I-80 goes through Cleveland and Chicago.

What about I-40 going to Los Angeles? AZ signs I-40 west of Flagstaff as LA despite you having to use two other interstates to get there.

I-80 and New York City
I-65 and Chicago
I-57 and Memphis
I-24 and St Louis
I-88(IL) and Iowa
I-22 and Memphis
I-15 and LA
I-70 and Las Vegas

Its not like this is that rare a phenomenon

[SSOWorld]

Disney World can be signed as an exit. It can't be a control city unless you're willing to make Universal Studios and Sea World control cities on other roads.

Disney World and it's segments are ALL control points from I-4 to local roads.

Ohio Turnpike - where you have THRU-TRAFFIC and EXIT ONLY

Pittsburgh on I-76 - where you have Ohio and West

In Chicagoland - Tollway should be a yellow TOLL banner. also Wisconsin, Iowa and Indiana (Not the Quads, Milwaukee (or Madison) and South Bend and/or Detroit.

[SkyPesos]

Disney World can be signed as an exit. It can't be a control city unless you're willing to make Universal Studios and Sea World control cities on other roads.

Disney World and it's segments are ALL control points from I-4 to local roads.

Ohio Turnpike - where you have THRU-TRAFFIC and EXIT ONLY

Pittsburgh on I-76 - where you have Ohio and West

In Chicagoland - Tollway should be a yellow TOLL banner. also Wisconsin, Iowa and Indiana (Not the Quads, Milwaukee (or Madison) and South Bend and/or Detroit.

I-10 in CA - where Caltrans look down on Phoenix for some reason and groups it in "Other Desert Cities"

[ran4sh]

A further requirement should be that the road actually serves the location in question.

Disagree. There are many instances where it would be logical to sign a control city on a route that doesn't officially serve that location, if it's a large population center and that route indirectly serves it. An example of this would be I-70 Baltimore.

Indirect service confuses the purpose of a control city. Control cities are not there for designating all the various destinations a route might take you to, they are to mark the route itself, and therefore must be meaningfully on the route. I-70 ends without serving Baltimore, so an appropriate designation might be "Baltimore Beltway" which has transportation and military significance.

This thread should be locked, people are getting into the same debates repeatedly. Specifically, the above comment is wrong and is established as wrong by the various state DOTs that determine control cities.

All this talk about I-70's eastern terminus. How about its western end? What is an appropriate control city to post west of Grand Junction? Cove Fort is basically the same as Washington, Wytheville, Breezewood, etc. -- a major highway intersection in a town with no other significance.

And how about I-40? It goes nowhere near Los Angeles, yet that's posted. And I'm pretty sure that I-40 ends well short of actually entering Wilmington.

For I-70 I would post Las Vegas west of Denver.

Disney World can be signed as an exit. It can't be a control city unless you're willing to make Universal Studios and Sea World control cities on other roads.

Disney World and it's segments are ALL control points from I-4 to local roads.

Ohio Turnpike - where you have THRU-TRAFFIC and EXIT ONLY

Pittsburgh on I-76 - where you have Ohio and West

In Chicagoland - Tollway should be a yellow TOLL banner. also Wisconsin, Iowa and Indiana (Not the Quads, Milwaukee (or Madison) and South Bend and/or Detroit.

I-10 in CA - where Caltrans look down on Phoenix for some reason and groups it in "Other Desert Cities"

This is not quite accurate. You're focusing on what's posted in LA, but Caltrans posts Phoenix in Indio.

[Roadgeekteen]

Disney World can be signed as an exit. It can't be a control city unless you're willing to make Universal Studios and Sea World control cities on other roads.

Disney World and it's segments are ALL control points from I-4 to local roads.

Ohio Turnpike - where you have THRU-TRAFFIC and EXIT ONLY

Pittsburgh on I-76 - where you have Ohio and West

In Chicagoland - Tollway should be a yellow TOLL banner. also Wisconsin, Iowa and Indiana (Not the Quads, Milwaukee (or Madison) and South Bend and/or Detroit.

I-10 in CA - where Caltrans look down on Phoenix for some reason and groups it in "Other Desert Cities"

I think that they are referring to the cities near Palm Springs.

[SSOWorld]

More Chicagoland

The artist formerly known as the Circle Interchange had "West Suburbs" for 290 (Now Aurora - via I-88).  The connections along I-355 and I-290 really genericize the controls with "Southwest/Northwest/West Suburbs" along and at crossings with I-80, I-88, I-90.  There are points where Joliet is used for I-355 south, All but Rolling Meadows and Shaumburg gets zero respect - the two mentioned are relegated to a smaller sign.

On top of that, the Tollway is more interested in tellng you to take roads to go to other roads it administers (like IL-390 and I-355 from I-90 at I-290).

[tolbs17]

Wilson NC

[roadman65]

We are never going to get the control cities we want just as we won't get I-87 in NC for I-46 or whatever many propose it should be.  Just like we cant get Rhode Island to sign US 1 through Providence, why argue over spilled milk here.

[Roadgeekteen]

We are never going to get the control cities we want just as we won't get I-87 in NC for I-46 or whatever many propose it should be.  Just like we cant get Rhode Island to sign US 1 through Providence, why argue over spilled milk here.

We can talk about what they should be, just don't expect any changes.

[bassoon1986]

For HighwayStar or others who think cities should not be signed on highways that do not enter the city limits, what would you sign instead for I-55 and I-59's southern terminus? This is purely my curiosity.


iPhone

[Roadgeekteen]

For HighwayStar or others who think cities should not be signed on highways that do not enter the city limits, what would you sign instead for I-55 and I-59's southern terminus? This is purely my curiosity.


iPhone

HighwayStar only cares if it was "intended" to reach the city. So New Orleans is fine on I-59 unless it was planned to go to New Orleans.

[Scott5114]

It's not the main control, but the Kansas Turnpike now has a supplemental sign for Denver on the northbound approach to the I-135 interchange.

[Roadgeekteen]

It's not the main control, but the Kansas Turnpike now has a supplemental sign for Denver on the northbound approach to the I-135 interchange.

Denver? Why, seems a bit indirect (via I-70)?

[US 89]

It's not the main control, but the Kansas Turnpike now has a supplemental sign for Denver on the northbound approach to the I-135 interchange.

Denver? Why, seems a bit indirect (via I-70)?

How else do you think people get from Wichita to Denver? You think people are going to drive US 400/50 to Garden City and Lamar and then 287 up to Limon? That’s over an hour longer than just going through Salina on 135 and 70.

[Roadgeekteen]

It's not the main control, but the Kansas Turnpike now has a supplemental sign for Denver on the northbound approach to the I-135 interchange.

Denver? Why, seems a bit indirect (via I-70)?

How else do you think people get from Wichita to Denver? You think people are going to drive US 400/50 to Garden City and Lamar and then 287 up to Limon? That's over an hour longer than just going through Salina on 135 and 70.

I guess it makes sense for a supplemental sign.

[webny99]

It's not the main control, but the Kansas Turnpike now has a supplemental sign for Denver on the northbound approach to the I-135 interchange.

Denver? Why, seems a bit indirect (via I-70)?

How else do you think people get from Wichita to Denver? You think people are going to drive US 400/50 to Garden City and Lamar and then 287 up to Limon? That's over an hour longer than just going through Salina on 135 and 70.

Considering that the sign is south of Wichita, it wouldn't be much use to anyone from there. But it certainly makes sense for Oklahoma City to Denver.

[roadman65]

It's not the main control, but the Kansas Turnpike now has a supplemental sign for Denver on the northbound approach to the I-135 interchange.

Does KDOT have one in Salina at I-70 west from I-135 to follow up?

[ilpt4u]

It's not the main control, but the Kansas Turnpike now has a supplemental sign for Denver on the northbound approach to the I-135 interchange.

Does KDOT have one in Salina at I-70 west from I-135 to follow up?

Don't see one via GSV

Why is Hays the 70 WB Control in Salina @I-135, anyway? Denver is roughly 400 miles away - plenty close enough to be the WB Control - just ask I-57 in Chicago about Memphis!

[Roadgeekteen]

It's not the main control, but the Kansas Turnpike now has a supplemental sign for Denver on the northbound approach to the I-135 interchange.

Does KDOT have one in Salina at I-70 west from I-135 to follow up?

Not that I could find.

[roadman65]

Lost my photos of that interchange when my pc crashed. Don't remember any either.