I would like to have some way of knowing what "served by" means in this context. If an Interstate carries a bunch of traffic to and from a city, saying that the city isn't served by that Interstate just because it's technically 10 feet outside of the city limit is absurd.
I propose a definition of service that's based on proximity and destination. First, if an Interstate has an access point inside a city, that's service. If an Interstate is inside a city and has an access point nearby, that's service. If an Interstate is never inside a city, that's when we use the proximity and destination criteria.
Is Dallas "served by" I-10? If you're in Dallas and want to drive to Los Angeles, then the road serves you. But that's an extreme example. I propose using a reasonably short distance, about 30 miles or about a half-hour of driving time at reasonable speeds (not 0 mph in heavy traffic or 150 mph in no traffic). If the Interstate is within that distance of some part of a city, along other Interstates, then it meets the proximity eligibility. The second question is destination, by which I mean that the Interstate is the best way to get from the place "served by" it to the places that Interstate goes. By my criteria, Fort Worth is served by I-45, because it's within about 30 miles of the city along other Interstates, and it's the best way to get from there to Houston. Chicago is served by I-65, because it starts close to the city and is the best way to get to Indianapolis, and the best way to get from there to Chicago. Dallas is not served by I-10 because it's too far away and couldn't reasonably be considered a road important to people in Dallas.
For smaller towns, I would say that the town is served by an Interstate if it's the best way to get to the nearest bigger city that serves the town's populace.
The MUTCD even says that city limits are often arbitrary and should generally be ignored, particularly when distinguishing urban interstates and rural interstates.
I would say that, at a minimum, an Interstate that enters the urbanized area of a city (even if not in the city limit) and has an interchange within such area, "serves" that city. It could be argued what exactly the urban area is, but a good starting point would be the US Census Bureau's delineations of urban areas (not the same thing as metro areas).
In before lock.
According to one forum user, I-70 doesn't serve Baltimore.
Quote from: SkyPesos on October 11, 2021, 11:34:02 PM
According to one forum user, I-70 doesn't serve Baltimore.
That's what my "10 feet outside of the city limit" reference is based on.
Quote from: SkyPesos on October 11, 2021, 11:34:02 PM
According to one forum user, I-70 doesn't serve Baltimore.
Just like I-40 don't serve Los Angeles, yet AZDOT Signs it west of Flagstaff.
Long before US-64 was upgraded, I-85 was the north-south route that "served" most of Raleigh, North Carolina from the northeast. The only times I used I-95 to get to Raleigh was when I was working on other projects along the former Atlantic Coast Line between Emporia and Rocky Mount. Even today, I-85 is nowhere near the sprawling Raleigh metro area (and certainly wasn't back then when the Raleigh metro was just outside of the Beltline.
Uhh, should I consider the same problem with I-95 now serving Raleigh? Maybe I'd better wait for I-87 to get posted.
I kinda asked this as a clarification in the "Cities served by the most 2di interstates" thread. This didn't need to be an entirely new thread. There is also no need to be entirely this technical about this, fighting pedantry with pedantry.
Is this "served" like when someone busts out into a hip hop song and gives someone a musical beat down?
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on October 11, 2021, 11:57:25 PM
Is this "served" like when someone busts out into a hip hop song and gives someone a musical beat down?
If I remember correctly, according so South Park, if they "serve" you and then you "serve" them back, now "it's on."
Quote from: roadman65 on October 11, 2021, 11:47:27 PM
Just like I-40 don't serve Los Angeles, yet AZDOT Signs it west of Flagstaff.
I-40 most certainly does serve Los Angeles. Just not directly.
If one is traveling from OKC to LA, he's driving on I-40 most of the way. It's just that he has to get on I-15 and then I-10 (or other suburban LA-area freeway) to get there. No biggie.
Quote from: wxfree on October 12, 2021, 12:01:03 AM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on October 11, 2021, 11:57:25 PM
Is this "served" like when someone busts out into a hip hop song and gives someone a musical beat down?
If I remember correctly, according so South Park, if they "serve" you and then you "serve" them back, now "it's on."
Yes, so what Interstates are "serving" cities? What cities have "served" the Interstates back because "it's on?"
Quote from: KeithE4Phx on October 12, 2021, 12:02:55 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on October 11, 2021, 11:47:27 PM
Just like I-40 don't serve Los Angeles, yet AZDOT Signs it west of Flagstaff.
I-40 most certainly does serve Los Angeles. Just not directly.
If one is traveling from OKC to LA, he's driving on I-40 most of the way. It's just that he has to get on I-15 and then I-10 (or other suburban LA-area freeway) to get there. No biggie.
I know that, but responding to the user who claims I-70 doesn't serve Baltimore a while back. I was pointing out ( hopefully that certain user will see my post) that if I-40 serves Los Angeles, than I-70 definitely serves Baltimore.
Quote from: roadman65 on October 12, 2021, 12:09:08 AM
Quote from: KeithE4Phx on October 12, 2021, 12:02:55 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on October 11, 2021, 11:47:27 PM
Just like I-40 don't serve Los Angeles, yet AZDOT Signs it west of Flagstaff.
I-40 most certainly does serve Los Angeles. Just not directly.
If one is traveling from OKC to LA, he's driving on I-40 most of the way. It's just that he has to get on I-15 and then I-10 (or other suburban LA-area freeway) to get there. No biggie.
I know that, but responding to the user who claims I-70 doesn't serve Baltimore a while back. I was pointing out ( hopefully that certain user will see my post) that if I-40 serves Los Angeles, than I-70 definitely serves Baltimore.
I-40 serves LA. So does I-15. Both serve LA because they drive traffic to the LA metro area and eventually to the city proper, even though neither enters the LA city limits (and I-40 doesn't even come close).
I-70 serves Baltimore So does I-97.
I-65, I-80, and I-88 serve Chicago.
I-78, 80, and 87 don't serve NYC? OK, 78 does touch Manhattan. Barely.
Some people need to get over it. Metro areas are what matter. City limits do not.
Quote from: KeithE4Phx on October 12, 2021, 12:39:14 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on October 12, 2021, 12:09:08 AM
Quote from: KeithE4Phx on October 12, 2021, 12:02:55 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on October 11, 2021, 11:47:27 PM
Just like I-40 don't serve Los Angeles, yet AZDOT Signs it west of Flagstaff.
I-40 most certainly does serve Los Angeles. Just not directly.
If one is traveling from OKC to LA, he's driving on I-40 most of the way. It's just that he has to get on I-15 and then I-10 (or other suburban LA-area freeway) to get there. No biggie.
I know that, but responding to the user who claims I-70 doesn't serve Baltimore a while back. I was pointing out ( hopefully that certain user will see my post) that if I-40 serves Los Angeles, than I-70 definitely serves Baltimore.
I-40 serves LA. So does I-15. Both serve LA because they drive traffic to the LA metro area and eventually to the city proper, even though neither enters the LA city limits (and I-40 doesn't even come close).
I-70 serves Baltimore So does I-97.
I-65, I-80, and I-88 serve Chicago.
I-78, 80, and 87 don't serve NYC? OK, 78 does touch Manhattan. Barely.
Some people need to get over it. Metro areas are what matter. City limits do not.
My intent is to start a pragmatic discussion of what service means, based on compromise and understanding of differing views. I would say that I-40 accesses Los Angeles, but does not service it, and that these are two different things. How often do people in Los Angeles need to go to Needles? Service is a balance between distance and need. I say that I-45 serves Fort Worth because it is fairly close to the city and leads to a major destination Worthians might be inclined to go to with some frequency. I-40 is useful to people in Los Angeles only for travel of such long distances that it is rarely needed and is so far away that most Angelinos don't think of it as a road that they have significant use for. My suggestion is that we not emphasize either metro areas or city limits, but usefulness.
Personally, I think an interstate serves a city if it actually goes through the city itself...or the metro area...in a significant way. For small towns, if there is an exit with the town name on it, and it connects it to a bigger city, it's served by that interstate.
I-45 does not serve Ft. worth in my mind. Ft. Worth is served by I-35W, I-20, and I-30. And I-820, plus all the US and State Highways that run through it. Dallas is served by I-20, I-30, I-35E, I-45 and I-635. San Antonio is served by I-10, I-35, I-37, and I-410. For Houston: I-10, I-45, I-69, I-610.
My hometown of Kentwood, Louisiana is served by I-55; Hammond, LA is served by I-12 and I-55. I don't consider Slidell technically "served" by I-59; and certainly not New Orleans. I-12 and I-10 serve Slidell.
To me, New Orleans is served by I-10, I-310, I-510, and I-610.
The Baltimore thing has been beat to death, but I would be interested in whether people think that I-94 "serves" St. Cloud, MN, for example (I believe I've argued no before on this forum.)
Or does I-90 "serve" Rochester and Syracuse, NY, even though it doesn't enter the city limits? And does the presence of 3di's for that route affect whether or not it is "served"?
1. Interstate actually enters city = serves (example: I-70 serves Baltimore)
2. Interstate passes near major city requiring changing interstates for only a short distance to reach city = serves (example: I-80 serves New York)
3. Interstate does not enter a city but passes close enough that businesses at the exits will have that city as their address = serves (example: I-70 serves Dayton)
4. Interstate is a primary route for getting to a major city but requires changing interstates for a significant distance to reach city = does NOT serve (example: I-40 does not serve Los Angeles)
To me, the line between Categories 2 and 4 is something like I-65 and Chicago. It gets you close, but not really close. It can go either way.
Quote from: achilles765 on October 12, 2021, 03:32:28 AM
I don't consider Slidell technically "served" by I-59; and certainly not New Orleans. ... To me, New Orleans is served by I-10, I-310, I-510, and I-610.
New Orleans is just as "served" by I-59 as Los Angeles is by I-40.
If we're talking signage, then I-10 still "serves" Bay St. Louis even though there's less logic to using Bay St. Louis as an I-10 control city than using New Orleans as an I-59 control city.
QuoteThe Baltimore thing has been beat to death, but I would be interested in whether people think that I-94 "serves" St. Cloud, MN, for example (I believe I've argued no before on this forum.)
Moot point given the commercial area (including I-94) around Exit 171 is inside the city limits, as is the new Opportunity Pkwy interchange and the 94/15 cloverleaf.
Quote from: SkyPesos on October 11, 2021, 11:34:02 PM
According to one forum user, I-70 doesn't serve Baltimore.
I don't think that would be me
Quote from: froggie on October 12, 2021, 10:33:16 AM
QuoteThe Baltimore thing has been beat to death, but I would be interested in whether people think that I-94 "serves" St. Cloud, MN, for example (I believe I've argued no before on this forum.)
Moot point given the commercial area (including I-94) around Exit 171 is inside the city limits, as is the new Opportunity Pkwy interchange and the 94/15 cloverleaf.
Is that a recent development?
If you think of the terms "serve" and "service" in the same way that a bull serves or services a cow, then this thread can take all kinds of screwy (pun intended) twists and turns.
Does I-70 serve DC? I'd argue yes, although you have to use I-270, I-495, and other routes to get into the district. DC is even listed on I-70 signage at Breezewood, along with Baltimore.
How about I-22? Does it serve either Memphis or Birmingham?
Per the I-10 and Dallas example, I could say that I-95 serves Seattle because it's part of the route between Seattle and Portland, ME.
My definition would be that the Interstate has to have at least one of three things:
a. an access point within city limits
b. a freeway connection of less than 20 miles
c. a non-freeway connection of less than 10 miles
Quote from: webny99 on October 12, 2021, 12:58:08 PM
Quote from: froggie on October 12, 2021, 10:33:16 AM
QuoteThe Baltimore thing has been beat to death, but I would be interested in whether people think that I-94 "serves" St. Cloud, MN, for example (I believe I've argued no before on this forum.)
Moot point given the commercial area (including I-94) around Exit 171 is inside the city limits, as is the new Opportunity Pkwy interchange and the 94/15 cloverleaf.
Is that a recent development?
Only the Opportunity Pkwy interchange. St Cloud has reached I-94 at Exit 171 for at least 20 years, and there's been gas stations there dating back to when I was a kid.
Quote from: roadman65 on October 11, 2021, 11:47:27 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on October 11, 2021, 11:34:02 PM
According to one forum user, I-70 doesn't serve Baltimore.
Just like I-40 don't serve Los Angeles, yet AZDOT Signs it west of Flagstaff.
By this logic this could be like I-5 to San Francisco if you are from Southern California trying to reach the Bay Area or from Redding heading south to the Bay Area. Although to reach San Francisco via I-5 you would have to go through I-580 West to get to the city or from Redding that would be I-505 south to Vacaville and I-80 West to reach San Francisco.
Quote from: wxfree on October 11, 2021, 11:22:08 PM
I would like to have some way of knowing what "served by" means in this context. If an Interstate carries a bunch of traffic to and from a city, saying that the city isn't served by that Interstate just because it's technically 10 feet outside of the city limit is absurd.
I propose a definition of service that's based on proximity and destination. First, if an Interstate has an access point inside a city, that's service. If an Interstate is inside a city and has an access point nearby, that's service. If an Interstate is never inside a city, that's when we use the proximity and destination criteria.
Is Dallas "served by" I-10? If you're in Dallas and want to drive to Los Angeles, then the road serves you. But that's an extreme example. I propose using a reasonably short distance, about 30 miles or about a half-hour of driving time at reasonable speeds (not 0 mph in heavy traffic or 150 mph in no traffic). If the Interstate is within that distance of some part of a city, along other Interstates, then it meets the proximity eligibility. The second question is destination, by which I mean that the Interstate is the best way to get from the place "served by" it to the places that Interstate goes. By my criteria, Fort Worth is served by I-45, because it's within about 30 miles of the city along other Interstates, and it's the best way to get from there to Houston. Chicago is served by I-65, because it starts close to the city and is the best way to get to Indianapolis, and the best way to get from there to Chicago. Dallas is not served by I-10 because it's too far away and couldn't reasonably be considered a road important to people in Dallas.
For smaller towns, I would say that the town is served by an Interstate if it's the best way to get to the nearest bigger city that serves the town's populace.
Nope, in your example the city is still not served by the interstate.
The interstate dumps traffic onto the town, without actually providing a conduit through or about the city.
Prime example 1: I-70 and Baltimore is almost exactly as you describe, I-70 dumps traffic into the metro but does not serve Baltimore in any meaningful way, you cannot get on I-70 and use it to get to a different part of Baltimore, therefore no service.
Prime example 2: I-95 in DC, same thing, road not built, just dumps traffic into the area.
The case where this breaks down is when you have a small enough town that the it will not be practicable to use the interstate for travel within it.
Quote from: epzik8 on October 12, 2021, 12:04:35 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on October 11, 2021, 11:34:02 PM
According to one forum user, I-70 doesn't serve Baltimore.
I don't think that would be me
That user I'm referring to just posted right above this post :clap:
Quote from: SkyPesos on October 13, 2021, 03:07:53 PM
Quote from: epzik8 on October 12, 2021, 12:04:35 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on October 11, 2021, 11:34:02 PM
According to one forum user, I-70 doesn't serve Baltimore.
I don't think that would be me
That user I'm referring to just posted right above this post :clap:
Sorry I was late to my own party! :bigass:
Quote from: HighwayStar on October 13, 2021, 03:00:37 PM
Prime example 1: I-70 and Baltimore is almost exactly as you describe, I-70 dumps traffic into the metro but does not serve Baltimore in any meaningful way, you cannot get on I-70 and use it to get to a different part of Baltimore, therefore no service.
Sure, but if I leave Baltimore to the west, I'm probably ending up on I-70.
Try again.
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on October 13, 2021, 04:08:18 PM
Quote from: HighwayStar on October 13, 2021, 03:00:37 PM
Prime example 1: I-70 and Baltimore is almost exactly as you describe, I-70 dumps traffic into the metro but does not serve Baltimore in any meaningful way, you cannot get on I-70 and use it to get to a different part of Baltimore, therefore no service.
Sure, but if I leave Baltimore to the west, I'm probably ending up on I-70.
Try again.
Eventually ending up on some road is not the same as being served by that. If I go west of Dallas I am probably ending up on I-10 too.
Serving the place means you can use the road for intraurban travel, as intended, rather than driving over miles of surface streets to accomplish the same.
Quote from: HighwayStar on October 13, 2021, 04:54:37 PM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on October 13, 2021, 04:08:18 PM
Quote from: HighwayStar on October 13, 2021, 03:00:37 PM
Prime example 1: I-70 and Baltimore is almost exactly as you describe, I-70 dumps traffic into the metro but does not serve Baltimore in any meaningful way, you cannot get on I-70 and use it to get to a different part of Baltimore, therefore no service.
Sure, but if I leave Baltimore to the west, I'm probably ending up on I-70.
Try again.
Eventually ending up on some road is not the same as being served by that. If I go west of Dallas I am probably ending up on I-10 too.
Serving the place means you can use the road for intraurban travel, as intended, rather than driving over miles of surface streets to accomplish the same.
Not true. If a road dead ends at another roads in a metro area, it still serves the metro area. I-66 deadends in DC but it still serves DC.
Quote from: HighwayStar on October 13, 2021, 03:00:37 PM
Nope, in your example the city is still not served by the interstate.
The interstate dumps traffic onto the town, without actually providing a conduit through or about the city.
Prime example 1: I-70 and Baltimore is almost exactly as you describe, I-70 dumps traffic into the metro but does not serve Baltimore in any meaningful way, you cannot get on I-70 and use it to get to a different part of Baltimore, therefore no service.
Prime example 2: I-95 in DC, same thing, road not built, just dumps traffic into the area.
The case where this breaks down is when you have a small enough town that the it will not be practicable to use the interstate for travel within it.
To me, an Interstate serves a city when it's useful for going somewhere far away where people are likely to go from that city. I don't view Interstate highway service as going from the far-south side of town to the near-south side. That use is convenient, and it's to be the purpose of a three-digit Interstate, or a state highway freeway that carries a lot of traffic across town, but Interstates (one- and two-digit), specifically, have the purpose of providing all-freeway access to far-away places. That's what I view as an Interstate serving a city, not going across town, but carrying traffic into and out of town. The cross-town function is secondary, and is an added benefit if the Interstate goes across.
I think we're not disagreeing about different types of utility, but about what types of utility constitute service. If the Interstates had been built around big cities and weren't useful for getting around inside the cities, I'd say that they would still serve the cities, because providing freeway travel between towns is what that system is for. Cross-town traffic can be handled by avenues and expressways, or state highway freeways, and if there happens to be an Interstate there, then it can serve that additional purpose, but to serve a town means to provide its primary purpose, which is access in and out.
Quote from: HighwayStar on October 13, 2021, 04:54:37 PM
Serving the place means you can use the road for intraurban travel, as intended, rather than driving over miles of surface streets to accomplish the same.
Then by this definition, neither I-64 nor I-75 serve Lexington, as they bypass downtown proper to the northeast. There's very little local use for the interstates; the main spokes in and out of downtown, New Circle Road (KY 4), and other routes such as Man O'War Boulevard are the primary routes between points in town. The interstates are good at delivering traffic from elsewhere in Kentucky and from the posted control cities (Louisville, Cincinnati, etc.) to the area, but they don't get you to any major destinations in town.
Quote from: hbelkins on October 14, 2021, 10:38:14 AM
Quote from: HighwayStar on October 13, 2021, 04:54:37 PM
Serving the place means you can use the road for intraurban travel, as intended, rather than driving over miles of surface streets to accomplish the same.
Then by this definition, neither I-64 nor I-75 serve Lexington, as they bypass downtown proper to the northeast. There's very little local use for the interstates; the main spokes in and out of downtown, New Circle Road (KY 4), and other routes such as Man O'War Boulevard are the primary routes between points in town. The interstates are good at delivering traffic from elsewhere in Kentucky and from the posted control cities (Louisville, Cincinnati, etc.) to the area, but they don't get you to any major destinations in town.
Then that definition is incorrect. My direct route to Lexington includes I-64 and I-75. There is no better way to get there and they certainly serve Lexington in my book.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on October 13, 2021, 07:07:27 PM
Quote from: HighwayStar on October 13, 2021, 04:54:37 PM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on October 13, 2021, 04:08:18 PM
Quote from: HighwayStar on October 13, 2021, 03:00:37 PM
Prime example 1: I-70 and Baltimore is almost exactly as you describe, I-70 dumps traffic into the metro but does not serve Baltimore in any meaningful way, you cannot get on I-70 and use it to get to a different part of Baltimore, therefore no service.
Sure, but if I leave Baltimore to the west, I'm probably ending up on I-70.
Try again.
Eventually ending up on some road is not the same as being served by that. If I go west of Dallas I am probably ending up on I-10 too.
Serving the place means you can use the road for intraurban travel, as intended, rather than driving over miles of surface streets to accomplish the same.
Not true. If a road dead ends at another roads in a metro area, it still serves the metro area. I-66 deadends in DC but it still serves DC.
No, read what I wrote above, by my definition I-66 does not serve DC, you cannot use it to get anywhere within DC.
Quote from: wxfree on October 13, 2021, 08:12:16 PM
Quote from: HighwayStar on October 13, 2021, 03:00:37 PM
Nope, in your example the city is still not served by the interstate.
The interstate dumps traffic onto the town, without actually providing a conduit through or about the city.
Prime example 1: I-70 and Baltimore is almost exactly as you describe, I-70 dumps traffic into the metro but does not serve Baltimore in any meaningful way, you cannot get on I-70 and use it to get to a different part of Baltimore, therefore no service.
Prime example 2: I-95 in DC, same thing, road not built, just dumps traffic into the area.
The case where this breaks down is when you have a small enough town that the it will not be practicable to use the interstate for travel within it.
To me, an Interstate serves a city when it's useful for going somewhere far away where people are likely to go from that city. I don't view Interstate highway service as going from the far-south side of town to the near-south side. That use is convenient, and it's to be the purpose of a three-digit Interstate, or a state highway freeway that carries a lot of traffic across town, but Interstates (one- and two-digit), specifically, have the purpose of providing all-freeway access to far-away places. That's what I view as an Interstate serving a city, not going across town, but carrying traffic into and out of town. The cross-town function is secondary, and is an added benefit if the Interstate goes across.
I think we're not disagreeing about different types of utility, but about what types of utility constitute service. If the Interstates had been built around big cities and weren't useful for getting around inside the cities, I'd say that they would still serve the cities, because providing freeway travel between towns is what that system is for. Cross-town traffic can be handled by avenues and expressways, or state highway freeways, and if there happens to be an Interstate there, then it can serve that additional purpose, but to serve a town means to provide its primary purpose, which is access in and out.
Ever tried to drive across DC? Its obvious that I-95 is not serving it. Driving the city streets takes forever and is not interstate level service. So if interstate level service clearly does not exist then how can we say that interstate "serves" that city?
Quote from: wxfree on October 11, 2021, 11:22:08 PM
I would like to have some way of knowing what "served by" means in this context. If an Interstate carries a bunch of traffic to and from a city, saying that the city isn't served by that Interstate just because it's technically 10 feet outside of the city limit is absurd.
I propose a definition of service that's based on proximity and destination. First, if an Interstate has an access point inside a city, that's service. If an Interstate is inside a city and has an access point nearby, that's service. If an Interstate is never inside a city, that's when we use the proximity and destination criteria.
Is Dallas "served by" I-10? If you're in Dallas and want to drive to Los Angeles, then the road serves you. But that's an extreme example. I propose using a reasonably short distance, about 30 miles or about a half-hour of driving time at reasonable speeds (not 0 mph in heavy traffic or 150 mph in no traffic). If the Interstate is within that distance of some part of a city, along other Interstates, then it meets the proximity eligibility. The second question is destination, by which I mean that the Interstate is the best way to get from the place "served by" it to the places that Interstate goes. By my criteria, Fort Worth is served by I-45, because it's within about 30 miles of the city along other Interstates, and it's the best way to get from there to Houston. Chicago is served by I-65, because it starts close to the city and is the best way to get to Indianapolis, and the best way to get from there to Chicago. Dallas is not served by I-10 because it's too far away and couldn't reasonably be considered a road important to people in Dallas.
For smaller towns, I would say that the town is served by an Interstate if it's the best way to get to the nearest bigger city that serves the town's populace.
I would say that an Interstate X "serves" a city when one doesn't have to ask someone or something "How do I get to I-X?" from some part of the city. If you can see it from downtown, or there are signs directing you to it, or you can just drive on some major road and get to it before a reasonable person would give up or get to some freeway where the BGS would show it before a reasonable person would give up, I would say that it "serves" the city.
By that definition, neither I-15 nor I-40 "serves" LA. I-10 and I-5 (as well as a number of I-x05 and I-x10s) do.
I-5 serves Sacramento because you can see if from downtown. I-80 serves Sacramento because there are signs all over Sacramento directing you to it.
I-505 might be a useful route to people from Sacramento, San Francisco, and the East Bay, but no one in those area can see it from Downtown nor happen onto it before a reasonable person would give up (like crossing a couple of bridges) and no signs in the East Bay direct anyone to I-505.
... and so it goes...
Quote from: hbelkins on October 14, 2021, 10:38:14 AM
Quote from: HighwayStar on October 13, 2021, 04:54:37 PM
Serving the place means you can use the road for intraurban travel, as intended, rather than driving over miles of surface streets to accomplish the same.
Then by this definition, neither I-64 nor I-75 serve Lexington, as they bypass downtown proper to the northeast. There's very little local use for the interstates; the main spokes in and out of downtown, New Circle Road (KY 4), and other routes such as Man O'War Boulevard are the primary routes between points in town. The interstates are good at delivering traffic from elsewhere in Kentucky and from the posted control cities (Louisville, Cincinnati, etc.) to the area, but they don't get you to any major destinations in town.
Not overwhelmingly familiar with KY geography, but looking at the map I would argue that both do in fact serve Lexington by my definition. Lexington is a good deal smaller than Baltimore or DC, and while they do not pass through center city, at least I-75 transverses a decent chunk of town. Depending on where you lived, it would be of significant use.
Also tipping in favor of this is that, as far as I know, those routes are running where they were designed to give an acceptable level of service, unlike I-70 or I-95 where the route does not run where it was designed to give an acceptable level of service.
Quote from: HighwayStar on October 14, 2021, 12:25:18 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on October 13, 2021, 07:07:27 PM
Quote from: HighwayStar on October 13, 2021, 04:54:37 PM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on October 13, 2021, 04:08:18 PM
Quote from: HighwayStar on October 13, 2021, 03:00:37 PM
Prime example 1: I-70 and Baltimore is almost exactly as you describe, I-70 dumps traffic into the metro but does not serve Baltimore in any meaningful way, you cannot get on I-70 and use it to get to a different part of Baltimore, therefore no service.
Sure, but if I leave Baltimore to the west, I'm probably ending up on I-70.
Try again.
Eventually ending up on some road is not the same as being served by that. If I go west of Dallas I am probably ending up on I-10 too.
Serving the place means you can use the road for intraurban travel, as intended, rather than driving over miles of surface streets to accomplish the same.
Not true. If a road dead ends at another roads in a metro area, it still serves the metro area. I-66 deadends in DC but it still serves DC.
No, read what I wrote above, by my definition I-66 does not serve DC, you cannot use it to get anywhere within DC.
Huh? It literally puts you out on Constitution Avenue, and if you continue on it until its end, it puts you out on Pennsylvania Avenue. Again, using your definition. the interstates in Fayette County, Ky., don't "serve" Lexington. While it's true that Lexington and Fayette County are one governmental body (a city-county merged government) neither interstate significantly "serves" the urban services boundary, with the possible exception of I-75 skirting Hamburg Pavilion. There's been some buildup, but traditionally, the routes between the interstate and New Circle (KY 922/Newtown Pike), US 27-68/Paris Pike, and US 60/Winchester Road) were very reminiscent of rural roads with highway services located at the exits and either farmland or residential areas between the interstate and New Circle.
Quote from: hbelkins on October 14, 2021, 04:25:03 PM
Quote from: HighwayStar on October 14, 2021, 12:25:18 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on October 13, 2021, 07:07:27 PM
Quote from: HighwayStar on October 13, 2021, 04:54:37 PM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on October 13, 2021, 04:08:18 PM
Quote from: HighwayStar on October 13, 2021, 03:00:37 PM
Prime example 1: I-70 and Baltimore is almost exactly as you describe, I-70 dumps traffic into the metro but does not serve Baltimore in any meaningful way, you cannot get on I-70 and use it to get to a different part of Baltimore, therefore no service.
Sure, but if I leave Baltimore to the west, I'm probably ending up on I-70.
Try again.
Eventually ending up on some road is not the same as being served by that. If I go west of Dallas I am probably ending up on I-10 too.
Serving the place means you can use the road for intraurban travel, as intended, rather than driving over miles of surface streets to accomplish the same.
Not true. If a road dead ends at another roads in a metro area, it still serves the metro area. I-66 deadends in DC but it still serves DC.
No, read what I wrote above, by my definition I-66 does not serve DC, you cannot use it to get anywhere within DC.
Huh? It literally puts you out on Constitution Avenue, and if you continue on it until its end, it puts you out on Pennsylvania Avenue. Again, using your definition. the interstates in Fayette County, Ky., don't "serve" Lexington. While it's true that Lexington and Fayette County are one governmental body (a city-county merged government) neither interstate significantly "serves" the urban services boundary, with the possible exception of I-75 skirting Hamburg Pavilion. There's been some buildup, but traditionally, the routes between the interstate and New Circle (KY 922/Newtown Pike), US 27-68/Paris Pike, and US 60/Winchester Road) were very reminiscent of rural roads with highway services located at the exits and either farmland or residential areas between the interstate and New Circle.
https://www.google.com/maps/dir/''/Masterson+Station+Neighborhood,+328+Masterson+Station+Dr,+Lexington,+KY+40511/@38.0890128,-84.5367781,12z/data=!4m14!4m13!1m5!1m1!1s0x88424fd01417d6d9:0x58a370518ba7f674!2m2!1d-84.4098281!2d38.0243244!1m5!1m1!1s0x884243c28d60436b:0xe236d05fe1c06fb6!2m2!1d-84.5442661!2d38.093444!3e0 (https://www.google.com/maps/dir/''/Masterson+Station+Neighborhood,+328+Masterson+Station+Dr,+Lexington,+KY+40511/@38.0890128,-84.5367781,12z/data=!4m14!4m13!1m5!1m1!1s0x88424fd01417d6d9:0x58a370518ba7f674!2m2!1d-84.4098281!2d38.0243244!1m5!1m1!1s0x884243c28d60436b:0xe236d05fe1c06fb6!2m2!1d-84.5442661!2d38.093444!3e0)
https://www.google.com/maps/dir/''/''/@38.028307,-84.4682538,10.83z/data=!4m14!4m13!1m5!1m1!1s0x8842423545f234ef:0x6f7f659f197fdddb!2m2!1d-84.5600986!2d38.085026!1m5!1m1!1s0x884251ca7d73e865:0x4ffbdca30b3bd39e!2m2!1d-84.394515!2d37.993782!3e0 (https://www.google.com/maps/dir/''/''/@38.028307,-84.4682538,10.83z/data=!4m14!4m13!1m5!1m1!1s0x8842423545f234ef:0x6f7f659f197fdddb!2m2!1d-84.5600986!2d38.085026!1m5!1m1!1s0x884251ca7d73e865:0x4ffbdca30b3bd39e!2m2!1d-84.394515!2d37.993782!3e0)
Seems to provide some utility. Just because it does not go from your house to the store does not mean it is not serving the area. I will agree it is not perhaps the primary route, or a particularly high level of service, but it is miles above the nonexistent I-70 or nonexistent I-95.
(Actually I like that idea, they should have to sign the route that way as a reminder to motorists that they have been screwed out of a decent route, "Nonexistent I-95 Left Lane" has a good ring to it)
Here's a similar scenario to I-70 in Baltimore, another route that didn't make it to its intended endpoint: Does I-75 "serve" Miami?
Quote from: SkyPesos on October 14, 2021, 06:06:26 PM
Here's a similar scenario to I-70 in Baltimore, another route that didn't make it to its intended endpoint: Does I-75 "serve" Miami?
I would argue no.
Obviously you can get to Miami via I-75, but it provides no real benefit to people traveling locally, particularly for such a large city.
Quote from: HighwayStar on October 14, 2021, 06:53:06 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on October 14, 2021, 06:06:26 PM
Here's a similar scenario to I-70 in Baltimore, another route that didn't make it to its intended endpoint: Does I-75 "serve" Miami?
I would argue no.
Obviously you can get to Miami via I-75, but it provides no real benefit to people traveling locally, particularly for such a large city.
How to get from Tampa to Miami...
Our sillyness in here knows no bounds.
Quote from: Rothman on October 14, 2021, 11:45:09 PM
Quote from: HighwayStar on October 14, 2021, 06:53:06 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on October 14, 2021, 06:06:26 PM
Here's a similar scenario to I-70 in Baltimore, another route that didn't make it to its intended endpoint: Does I-75 "serve" Miami?
I would argue no.
Obviously you can get to Miami via I-75, but it provides no real benefit to people traveling locally, particularly for such a large city.
How to get from Tampa to Miami...
Our sillyness in here knows no bounds.
Surprisingly (to me, at least), the FL 60 and Turnpike routing between Tampa and Miami is only 8 minutes longer than I-75. Turning to I-95 from FL 60 instead of the turnpike would add another 4 minutes.
Quote from: thspfc on October 12, 2021, 05:33:47 PM
Per the I-10 and Dallas example, I could say that I-95 serves Seattle because it's part of the route between Seattle and Portland, ME.
My definition would be that the Interstate has to have at least one of three things:
a. an access point within city limits
b. a freeway connection of less than 20 miles
c. a non-freeway connection of less than 10 miles
I like this criteria...
Quote from: thspfc on October 12, 2021, 05:33:47 PM
Per the I-10 and Dallas example, I could say that I-95 serves Seattle because it's part of the route between Seattle and Portland, ME.
My definition would be that the Interstate has to have at least one of three things:
a. an access point within city limits
b. a freeway connection of less than 20 miles
c. a non-freeway connection of less than 10 miles
If I'm understanding your criteria correctly, that would barely include I-65 for serving Chicago (as it's 17 miles between its northern terminus and Chicago city limits), but exclude I-70 for serving DC, as I-270 is 33 miles long plus however long it is from I-495 to DC city limits, despite both routes entering their respective metro areas.
Quote from: SkyPesos on October 15, 2021, 12:00:47 AM
Quote from: Rothman on October 14, 2021, 11:45:09 PM
Quote from: HighwayStar on October 14, 2021, 06:53:06 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on October 14, 2021, 06:06:26 PM
Here's a similar scenario to I-70 in Baltimore, another route that didn't make it to its intended endpoint: Does I-75 "serve" Miami?
I would argue no.
Obviously you can get to Miami via I-75, but it provides no real benefit to people traveling locally, particularly for such a large city.
How to get from Tampa to Miami...
Our sillyness in here knows no bounds.
Surprisingly (to me, at least), the FL 60 and Turnpike routing between Tampa and Miami is only 8 minutes longer than I-75. Turning to I-95 from FL 60 instead of the turnpike would add another 4 minutes.
Not sure what your point is by pointing out routes that take longer.