Largest Cities Not Connected by Freeway

[webny99]

How about a big one that's been overlooked: Houston to Little Rock?

Looks like a total pick your poison situation as far as getting between Nacogdoches and Texarkana. Maybe someone who's done that route could say what the best option is. Google seems to recommend taking US 259 to TX 315 to the Carthage bypass back to US 59. Taking US 59 all the way would be another option. You could also hop over to I-49 and take that to Texarkana, maybe using TX 7.
I guess this just points up that it's not very easy to get into the Houston area from points north and northeast.

[Beltway]

How about a big one that's been overlooked: Houston to Little Rock?

I-45, I-30.

[sprjus4]

How about a big one that's been overlooked: Houston to Little Rock?

I-45, I-30.

Not a direct connection, over 100 miles longer than the current quickest route up US-59 to Texarkana / I-30. The point is to identify cities not directly connected. Of course any cities on an interstate are connected to the other, but is not always direct. Not the point of this thread.

I-69 and I-369 between Houston and Texarkana, once completed, will complete this connection along with I-30.

[Beltway]

How about a big one that's been overlooked: Houston to Little Rock?

I-45, I-30.

Not a direct connection, over 100 miles longer than the current quickest route up US-59 to Texarkana / I-30. The point is to identify cities not directly connected. Of course any cities on an interstate are connected to the other, but is not always direct. Not the point of this thread.
I-69 and I-369 between Houston and Texarkana, once completed, will complete this connection along with I-30.

Houston is very large, but Little Rock isn't.

Little Rock is a smallish area, 1/2 the metro population of Richmond, for example.

[CoreySamson]

How about a big one that's been overlooked: Houston to Little Rock?

Looks like a total pick your poison situation as far as getting between Nacogdoches and Texarkana. Maybe someone who's done that route could say what the best option is. Google seems to recommend taking US 259 to TX 315 to the Carthage bypass back to US 59. Taking US 59 all the way would be another option. You could also hop over to I-49 and take that to Texarkana, maybe using TX 7.
I guess this just points up that it's not very easy to get into the Houston area from points north and northeast.

I've driven that route many times and it seems that 259 to 315 is the fastest option, however, at the moment 315 at the Carthage loop has some construction; last time I passed through the area that intersection had a poorly timed light so it took maybe 5-10 minutes just to get through that intersection.

To me the next best alternative is taking 259 all the way to Henderson then to TX 43 to Loop 390 around Marshall. Not as busy as the other routes, plus you don't have to go through the time-consuming traffic lights in Marshall.

Taking 59 the entire distance takes you out of the way and goes through some towns with low speed limits, so it's not the best option.

From Marshall to Texarkana it's fastest just to take 59.

Of course, when I-69 and 369 are done, that will be the fastest route.

[skluth]

I think the being a part of a theoretical grid statement by the original poster has been completely ignored by most everyone. SF-Vegas, Des Moines-St Louis, and several other suggestions are diagonals, even if they are potentially quite useful. But being part of a grid is why this is challenging. We can find hundreds of diagonal routes where a freeway could really help connect two cites. It's much harder to find cities that fit the requirement when the directions between two cities are limited to the four cardinal directions.

[hotdogPi]

I think the being a part of a theoretical grid statement by the original poster has been completely ignored by most everyone. SF-Vegas, Des Moines-St Louis, and several other suggestions are diagonals, even if they are potentially quite useful. But being part of a grid is why this is challenging. We can find hundreds of diagonal routes where a freeway could really help connect two cites. It's much harder to find cities that fit the requirement when the directions between two cities are limited to the four cardinal directions.

Des Moines-St. Louis was mentioned in the OP.

[Hwy 61 Revisited]

Reading and Allentown, for one.

[webny99]

I think the being a part of a theoretical grid statement by the original poster has been completely ignored by most everyone. SF-Vegas, Des Moines-St Louis, and several other suggestions are diagonals, even if they are potentially quite useful. But being part of a grid is why this is challenging. We can find hundreds of diagonal routes where a freeway could really help connect two cites. It's much harder to find cities that fit the requirement when the directions between two cities are limited to the four cardinal directions.

Des Moines-St. Louis was mentioned in the OP.

Yes, sorry, I guess that's my bad for not being more clear in the OP.

When I mentioned "theoretical grid" I was not actually thinking about the cardinal directions. Maybe there's a better word than grid that we can use, but essentially the question is what corridors would need to be improved in order for all major cities to be connected by freeway.

More specifically, the fastest route needs to be freeway, regardless of whether or not the connection is direct.
It really all comes down to whether the current fastest route is freeway or not.

Maybe me mentioning "grid" caused more confusion than it's worth, but let me try to explain.
Take Knoxville and Atlanta as an example. Knoxville has a freeway connection to Atlanta through Chattanooga. Therefore, we don't need a direct freeway connection from Knoxville to Atlanta. So basically, for cases where the fastest route is already freeway, we can ignore the other more direct routes and just follow the "grid". Essentially, if the fastest route uses existing freeways to go city-hopping until you reach your destination, then we don't need to explore improvements to other corridors, regardless of how indirect the freeway route may be.

[Roadrunner75]

Reading and Allentown, for one.

This is definitely needed.  My wife grew up along the 222 corridor in between and the traffic can be terrible at times.  It's been studied, and they've upgraded 222 to a freeway around and south of Reading, as well as a partial fix south of Allentown to an expressway with some signals.  They've also added a roundabout in the middle of the corridor (ugh!) and of course there's the Kutztown bypass.  But the corridor really needs a full freeway from Reading to the Kutztown bypass, and then from the north end of Kutztown out to 78 (or to the new section north of Breinigsville upgraded to full freeway).  There's a lot of through truck traffic along that route and no good alternative routes.  The corridor is not particularly long, built up or topographically challenging either - not saying it won't cost big bucks, but it could be a lot worse and the benefits would be significant.

[Rothman]

It is counterintuitive that a full freeway would be needed between Reading and Allentown.  Neither city is on the up-and-up.

[Hwy 61 Revisited]

It is counterintuitive that a full freeway would be needed between Reading and Allentown.  Neither city is on the up-and-up.

Allentown has been growing nearly-consistently since 1950; it's been Reading on the decline since then (Reading was at one point considered the poorest city in the nation, with ~45% of residents below the poverty line). A full 222 freeway between them and Lancaster could hopefully spur some growth between the three cities, with the added benefit of easing traffic.

[webny99]

It is counterintuitive that a full freeway would be needed between Reading and Allentown.  Neither city is on the up-and-up.

Even a declining population doesn't change the fact that the 2- and 3-lane sections of US 222 are overburdened, and have been for many years. Whether it's a full freeway or just a widening that's needed could be debated.

[Roadrunner75]

It is counterintuitive that a full freeway would be needed between Reading and Allentown.  Neither city is on the up-and-up.

Maybe, but drive that stretch sometime.  It was particularly terrible just north of Reading, where the freeway ends at the Route 73 intersection.  Even widening to four lanes throughout might be a compromise, although widening of the existing roadway will be difficult in a couple spots to avoid wiping out entire villages.  It's a big trucking corridor, and it's part of a larger corridor from points north and east down to Lancaster as well.

[sprjus4]

It is counterintuitive that a full freeway would be needed between Reading and Allentown.  Neither city is on the up-and-up.

Maybe, but drive that stretch sometime.  It was particularly terrible just north of Reading, where the freeway ends at the Route 73 intersection.  Even widening to four lanes throughout might be a compromise, although widening of the existing roadway will be difficult in a couple spots to avoid wiping out entire villages.  It's a big trucking corridor, and it's part of a larger corridor from points north and east down to Lancaster as well.

Seems like it would be better to entirely bypass the existing road with a new location 4-lane freeway.

[Roadrunner75]

It is counterintuitive that a full freeway would be needed between Reading and Allentown.  Neither city is on the up-and-up.

Maybe, but drive that stretch sometime.  It was particularly terrible just north of Reading, where the freeway ends at the Route 73 intersection.  Even widening to four lanes throughout might be a compromise, although widening of the existing roadway will be difficult in a couple spots to avoid wiping out entire villages.  It's a big trucking corridor, and it's part of a larger corridor from points north and east down to Lancaster as well.

Seems like it would be better to entirely bypass the existing road with a new location 4-lane freeway.

Yes, agreed.  It's been studied and pops up in the news periodically.  They've had to settle for some spot improvements, and they built a section of "almost freeway" approaching Allentown which did clear up some jams in that area.  However, at one point I heard they were considering extending 222 straight out to 78 north of Kutztown, and avoiding this section entirely.  It's really just two freeway segments needed on each end of the Kutztown bypass, neither of which are particularly long.   A significant amount of truck traffic comes from 78 via the interchange with 100, extending down Schantz Road to 222.  If I recall they banned truck traffic from this road to push it onto the new section of widened 222 and installed a signal on what is mostly a freeway for access into the nearby industrial park.  As a side note it looks like from Streetview that PennDOT more recently wised up and put in some advance signage for that intersection, rather than have people rely on the signs on the signals themselves - particularly bad for a high speed route with heavy truck traffic at that light.

[sprjus4]

A freeway connecting the existing US-222 freeway at Reading to the US-222 Kutztown Bypass (7-8 miles new location), then another freeway from the Kutztown Bypass to I-78 (3-4 miles new location), would be a reasonable proposal.

10-12 miles of new freeway, and would complete the link between Reading and Allentown. May also necessitate I-78 widening to 3x3.

[michravera]

Las Vegas-San Francisco

Or for a closer one, Las Vegas-Reno.

Or Las Vegas-Fresno

[dvferyance]

Indianapolis to Grand Rapids.

[sprjus4]

Indianapolis to Grand Rapids.

I-65 -> I-94 -> I-196 is a reasonable freeway connection between the two if desired.

[Hwy 61 Revisited]

Indianapolis to Grand Rapids.

I-65 -> I-94 -> I-196 is a reasonable freeway connection between the two if desired.

FTFY.

[webny99]

Indianapolis to Grand Rapids.

Applying my logic from upthread, in this case I don't think it makes sense to look at Indianapolis-Grand Rapids as a single corridor.
The next city due north from Indy is South Bend. If we can get to South Bend, then we can get from there to Grand Rapids on the freeway (or will be able to once the US 131/I-94/I-196 debacle is sorted). Therefore, we can reduce the scope of the problem: it's really just US 31 between Indy and South Bend that's the issue, not US 131 in Michigan and all the various state routes between Vistula and Indy.

I-65 -> I-94 -> I-196 is a reasonable freeway connection between the two if desired.

I would have thought I-69 > I-94 > US 131 would be a shorter/faster option.
Google suggests otherwise, but it's actually very close, within 5 minutes or so.

[Beltway]

Honolulu to Los Angeles?

[Verlanka]

Honolulu to Los Angeles?

Would need a plane or boat to connect the two.

[hotdogPi]

Honolulu to Los Angeles?

OP says continental US.