Cities which don't need beltways but have them.

[achilles765]

Does Houston need 3??

Not currently, but from what I understand, the outermost of the three (or four, if you count the downtown loop), was built with significant future growth in mind.

Since sections of the Grand Parkway have opened, has there been significant growth around it??

How about Beltway 8? It's been a decade since I've driven on Beltway 8, but I remember the southern section from US 59 until I-45 being pretty sparse.

Like coreysamson said, the sw and nw portions have. There's a lot of development on grand parkway between 249 and 45, and I'm seeing a lot of stuff pop up between hardy toll road and IH 69.
This weekend when I had to drive to Louisiana it looked like there was a good amount of development popping up on the east side where they are building the stretch from IH 69 to IH 10

As for the beltway there is a lot of traffic on pretty much every stretch and like coreysamson mentioned, a lot of spots aren't necessarily packed with businesses but are near major streets or lead into neighborhoods where a lot of people live. The only stretches that are not very developed are the south belt between US 90 Alternate and 45; and the northeast quadrant from 59 to 90

I need to get back down there.  I haven't driven Beltway 8 since they made the NE section limited access, and I'd like to check out the progress of the Grand Parkway.

Oh! And eat some Texas BBQ! :-)

Grand parkway looks great from Sugar Land all the way to Kingwood.  Its four to sis lanes from IH 69 to IH 69.  Full, five level stacks with IH 10, US 290, frontage road connections at SH 249, but they're building direct connectors, a partial stack with IH 45 and another with Hardy, then a partial at IH 69.  They seem to be making progress with the section from IH 69 to IH 10 in Baytown. 

Beltway 8 has had some work done, like widening the south belt to six lanes and they're building direct connectors at SH 225.  The Northeast section is nice, but boring.  No interesting exits, and not a lot of development out there.  The west and North belts remain the busiest and most developed segments. 

[dvferyance]

WI-36 Burlington WI. Really almost all the traffic that goes down WI-36 from the Milwaukee area either Waterford or Burlington is it's destination. If they are going to Lake Geneva they take I-43 to WI-120.
US-18 Waukesha WI. Again long distance traffic leaving Milwaukee heading west takes I-94 not US-18.

[Skye]

Not a full beltway, but I think Knoxville I-640 is unnecessary.

[SkyPesos]

Not a full beltway, but I think Knoxville I-640 is unnecessary.

I-40 through downtown Knoxville already sucks with it. Imagine all the traffic that will be using it without I-640, especially the I-75 traffic.

[Dirt Roads]

Not a full beltway, but I think Knoxville I-640 is unnecessary.

I-40 through downtown Knoxville already sucks with it. Imagine all the traffic that will be using it without I-640, especially the I-75 traffic.

The main reason for I-640 and the rerouting of I-75 along its northwest section is the legendary Malfunction Junction and its gridlock.  Sometimes it would take 3 or 4 hours to get through Knoxville even when there were no accidents. 

Amazingly, I've clinched all of these but never driven the entire loop at one time (always used the northwest section to stay on I-75 and sometimes use the northeast section to bypass Knoxville on the way to Lexington.  Most of the time, I use the northeast section to find less crowded restaurants when heading for games at Neyland Stadium.

[hobsini2]

Does Houston need 3??

Being that it is the 4th largest city in the country, I could see it.

[tchafe1978]

WI-36 Burlington WI. Really almost all the traffic that goes down WI-36 from the Milwaukee area either Waterford or Burlington is it's destination. If they are going to Lake Geneva they take I-43 to WI-120.
US-18 Waukesha WI. Again long distance traffic leaving Milwaukee heading west takes I-94 not US-18.

The US 18 bypass of Waukesha isn't meant as a bypass for long distance traffic from Milwaukee to Madison. Nobody is taking 18 as an alternative to I-94. I've done it before as an alternative to I-94 once or twice just for something different, but it is so much slower. the bypass is meant as a way to get from the south and west side of Waukesha to I-94 more efficiently and to take traffic off local streets. I'd say it serves its purpose well. My brother lives on the south side of Waukesha and it has reduced the time to get to I-94 by about half from using the old Merrill Hills Rd.

[mrcmc888]

Huntingdon, TN is much too small to need a beltway, but it has one that goes all the way around.  Martin, TN also has no need for a full beltway.

[MCRoads]

For the city with the most useless beltway, I nominate Paris! (TX)

Also, with regard to the Huston issue, Huston is a massive example of "induced demand" . That is, "if you build it, they will come."  Was the second beltway around Huston needed? Maybe. The area was already somewhat developed, and 610 was struggling. Was the 3rd beltway needed? From what I can tell, no. The reason it seems to have been built is that they were anticipating sprawl. But... the sprawl that will develop is almost certainly because of the 3rd beltway! See the issue? That anticipate growth, so they build a new road... which causes growth to be more desirable, causing more sprawl, necessitating another new beltway!

There are problems with not having a beltway in an attempt to prevent sprawl (see: Tucson, AZ), but I'll step of my soapbox for now.

Being as I am not local, maybe I got some details wrong, but from an outsider perspective, this seems to be what is happening.

[achilles765]

For the city with the most useless beltway, I nominate Paris! (TX)

Also, with regard to the Huston issue, Huston is a massive example of "induced demand" . That is, "if you build it, they will come."  Was the second beltway around Huston needed? Maybe. The area was already somewhat developed, and 610 was struggling. Was the 3rd beltway needed? From what I can tell, no. The reason it seems to have been built is that they were anticipating sprawl. But... the sprawl that will develop is almost certainly because of the 3rd beltway! See the issue? That anticipate growth, so they build a new road... which causes growth to be more desirable, causing more sprawl, necessitating another new beltway!

There are problems with not having a beltway in an attempt to prevent sprawl (see: Tucson, AZ), but I'll step of my soapbox for now.

Being as I am not local, maybe I got some details wrong, but from an outsider perspective, this seems to be what is happening.

You're not incorrect either.  The original selling point was that it would serve as a way for people to bypass the city altogether... since traffic and congestion and all that begin pretty much at the spot where the grand parkway was originally touted...Katy.  The Katy portion was already heavily built up--Katy became a major suburb.  So did Sugar Land to the southwest. 
The segment from IH 10 in Katy to Spring is built through mostly rural fields, until it gets to around FM 2920... that area was growing a lot when I first moved to Houston in 2007... I never would have imagined how much different it would end up looking.  And that was largely due to the parkway.  Now the other segments are basically pointless.  No one is using the Grand Parkway as a bypass because its too long.  Its mostly helpful for locals in that it is a much quicker connection between major suburbs.  It used to take close to 2 hours to get from Sugar Land to The Woodlands and it involved using IH 69, then going through downtown--or getting stuck on the always congested 610 loop.  The beltway is also congested around Memorial City and near the airport.  Now, one can make the trip in about 35 minutes.  But I dont see any long distance travelers choosing the parkway.

Instead, there's been a rush on building subdivisions and chain businesses in places.  I figure that we shall see another beltway in my lifetime to connect Conroe, Fulshear, Lake Jackson, Winnie, Texas City, and Victoria lol

[SkyPesos]

Not a full beltway, but I think Knoxville I-640 is unnecessary.

I-40 through downtown Knoxville already sucks with it. Imagine all the traffic that will be using it without I-640, especially the I-75 traffic.

The main reason for I-640 and the rerouting of I-75 along its northwest section is the legendary Malfunction Junction and its gridlock.  Sometimes it would take 3 or 4 hours to get through Knoxville even when there were no accidents. 

Amazingly, I've clinched all of these but never driven the entire loop at one time (always used the northwest section to stay on I-75 and sometimes use the northeast section to bypass Knoxville on the way to Lexington.  Most of the time, I use the northeast section to find less crowded restaurants when heading for games at Neyland Stadium.

I've never been on all of I-640 in one sitting either. Used the concurrent section with I-75 for, well, I-75, and the section not part of I-75 as part of the way home from the Smokies.

[jlam]

Although not a freeway, I would nominate the SC 118 - SC 302 loop around Aiken, South Carolina.