Typically, as American cities have expanded, they have largely sprawled along freeway corridors, at least from the 1950s onward. (Obviously rail and other transport modes had a proportionately larger effect before that time.) But there are a few cities where despite the presence of interstates or other freeways, the primary direction of development has not followed those routes. Here are a few off the top of my head:
Lafayette, LA: I-10 and I-49 (formerly US 167 expressway) skirt the northern edge of the urbanized region, but most growth since their completion in the 1960s has largely been to the south and southwest. Evangeline Thruway (US 90) and Johnston Street (US 167) are the primary in-town commuter routes. Granted, Lafayette's downtown/urban core is not really well served by the interstates (at least this is the case until the I-49 extension is completed).
Tucson: I have no idea why the city grew to the east in the exact opposite location from where the freeway corridors were placed. I understand that several freeway projects proposed for the city in the past were quite unpopular with the residents there. Do people in Tucson just not like to live near freeways?
Birmingham: For the most part sprawl in B'ham follows the freeways, but apparently the US 280 corridor attracts a large amount of the recent growth the on the south side of Red Mountain, which of course lends to its well-known congestion.
I'm sure there are other cities with this type of atypical development, not counting of course cities that either do not have freeway systems or are not connected to the Interstate system, or for that matter cities that have grown so fast that they rapidly outgrew the rudimentary freeway systems provided them when they were much smaller (Las Vegas, Austin, Colorado Springs come to mind).
Orlando fits that. Of course I-4 is already taken.
Utica and Rome too. Of course, NY 840 and the Utica-Rome Expressway are both too new for development to have followed them, but NY 8, most of NY 12 (north of the plaza), and NY 5S don't really have development following them either.
Canyon, TX -- One of I-27's last sections to be built was a bypass around Canyon (south of Amarillo) and down to Happy. Since it was built (late 1980s-early 1990s) no new services/development have been built along it. Most everything in Canyon is still along US 60-US 87 or the major cross-road, TX 217. I haven't heard of any major discouragement of development by the city, but it could be the case. I would think something at the TX 217 exit on I-27 would work since TX 217 goes east to the entrance to Palo Duro Canyon, one of the biggest tourist draws in that part of the state (average of 300,000 visitors annually). TX 217 is also the first Canyon exit for I-27 traffic coming from the south; many would also exit here to go into town, some of which to visit or attend West Texas A&M, the main campus of which is just off TX 217 near downtown. There have been 2 new chain hotels (the first chains to come to Canyon) built in recent years, but they are between I-27 and downtown. No gas/food/lodging northbound on I-27 till you get closer to (or into) Amarillo.
Longview, TX -- I-20 brushes the far south side of town, with very little going on, but a few motels and gas/convenience places along it, and only 2 exits for services to choose from there. Most all the happening stuff and development is on the north side, along and near Loop 281. Two reasons that are likely: the river bottom/watershed of the Sabine River flows along/near the south side of Longview, crossing I-20 on the southwest side of town; also a big Eastman chemical plant takes up much acreage south of I-20 on Longview's southeast side.
Plano/Allen/McKinney, TX -- The current US 75 alignment in these cities has been present for many decades (1959 in Plano and Allen, the mid-1960s in McKinney), but yet, it took until just recent years for the 3 cities to fully embrace the corridor and it's possibilities. Plano figured out there was a frontier west of US 75 by the early-mid 1970s but most of it's US 75 frontage wasn't snapped up until the last 5-15 years. It's first mall, Collin Creek, opened along US 75 in 1981 but the beyond-ring-road development (part of which includes US 75's service road area) took a little while. In Allen, nothing west of US 75 appeared until the last 10-25 years. Now, not quite all, but most, of Allen's US 75 frontage has been developed. Before all that, most services in Allen centered on at or near downtown along McDermott or Main Streets, east of US 75. McKinney has had development west of US 75 for several years, and lots more recently along US 75's service road, but until the early-mid 1970s, there wasn't much to see or to be had in McKinney west of US 75; you had to go downtown or along McDonald (US 75's old alignment, now TX 5) or University (US 380) to get to any services there.
Tyler, TX -- For some reason which I've never really understood, I-20 was aligned a good 7-8 miles north of Tyler's urbanized area. And the stranger thing, most all of Tyler's growth has been south/SW/SE, away from I-20, since then. It has just been in very recent years that Tyler is trying to annex land along US 69 out to it's exit on I-20 (some of US 69 has been annexed for quite awhile, as the main plant for Tyler Pipe is along the highway). But Lindale, the next town to the north, has seen the light much sooner, and developed along it's part of US 69 and on it's side of I-20. There is word that Lindale isn't too happy that Tyler is trying to annex out to I-20, including 1 of the 4 corners at the I-20/US 69 crossing. It would be interesting to see what Tyler would have looked like had it's big development all been north to (and along) I-20 instead of where the buzz has been there. The only other part of Tyler near I-20 is a strand of annexed land along US 271-TX 155 out to it's split northeast of town. The area where the 2 roads split is the home of the University of Texas at Tyler Health Science Center, the primary reason for the extension of Tyler's city limits to that area. So far, no move has been made to try to add annexed land further along either of the split roads the rest of the way to their respective I-20 exits.
Chicagoland. The development started along the rail lines in the latter part of the 19th Century. Later, some of the freeways and tollways were built parallel to these rail lines, but out and away from the downtown areas of many suburbs and the satellite cities.
US 27 in Lake and Polk Counties in Florida have rapid sprawl changing once a rural 65 mph highway into an arterial. In fact truckers who shunpiked used this section to avoid the nearby (but not along) Florida's Turnpike. From Clermont to Lake Wales US 27 went from rural orange groves and trailer parks to bedroom community housing and shopping centers in practically a few years.
US 441 between Mt. Dora, FL and Leesburg, FL is also a non freeway corridor that has development along it! However, its because of it long range plans have considered a freeway to be considered along this corridor and along FL 44 from Leesburg west to I-75 at Wildwood to maybe get built 100 years from now.
Fort Collins, CO - The city sprawled southward, with relatively little development occurring near I-25 to the east of the city. Exit 269 (CO 14) supported a typical assortment of highway-oriented motels and restaurants. Exit 267 (Prospect) has no development until Timberline Rd, two miles west. Exit 265 (Harmony) had a single gas station and a park-n-ride until a few years ago, when a Walmart was built, though long range plans exist for a large regional center southwest of the interchange.
If I remember correctly that US 9 between Fishkill, NY and Poughkeepsie, NY has a lot of development making that stretch highly suburbanized in appearence.
I'm in one tonight. Parkersburg, WV. There are a few motels and restaurants at the I-77 exits, but most of the development is along Grand Central Avenue (WV 14/former US 21) north of town toward Vienna and Marietta.
Quote from: Urban Prairie Schooner on August 18, 2013, 01:10:17 AM
Tucson: I have no idea why the city grew to the east in the exact opposite location from where the freeway corridors were placed. I understand that several freeway projects proposed for the city in the past were quite unpopular with the residents there. Do people in Tucson just not like to live near freeways?
Tucson has expanded to the south a bit along I-19 and to the northwest along I-10. I suspect the reason it has expanded east away from the freeways instead of southeast along I-10 is because of the presence of Davis-Monthan Air Force Base. The city is starting to spill around it but it can't well expand into it. And mountains limit its ability to expand directly north or west.
Quote from: roadman65 on August 18, 2013, 08:45:48 PM
If I remember correctly that US 9 between Fishkill, NY and Poughkeepsie, NY has a lot of development making that stretch highly suburbanized in appearence.
Yep. Poughkeepsie is not directly served by any freeway so everyone headed there was going up US 9 from I-84. That traffic meant customers. And now, thanks to all that development, US 9 is no longer the fastest way to get to Poughkeepsie (depending on where you're coming from, either Taconic to NY 55 or US 9W to Mid-Hudson Bridge is better).
While most development in the Jackson area is along the interstates, one high-growth area is along MS 25 (also known as Lakeland Drive), which is an at-grade highway. The area around Dogwood Festival Market is a good five or more miles ftom I-55, and maybe around 10 from I-20.
Apple Valley, MN. Due to protected land, there was no commercial development near I-35E or at the southern fringe of MN 77. Instead, all the commercial development centered around County 42 and Cedar Avenue, the busiest non-freeways in the city. It is a pain in the ass; both are major commuting roads. :banghead:
In Plant City, FL the development follows FL 39 to the south of the city. I-4 runs across the north side of the city and nothing than a few chain restaurants at one interchange, a typical interstate traveler motel at another, and a car dealer at the third interchange. All the main businesses for the city to survive seem to head away from the interstate.
I would have to say that the development in and around Lafayette, IN are along the State Roads and US Highways, with very little development along I-65 through the city, and the county as well.
I like how Delaware has kept a leash on development near the newest freeway by limiting the amount of interchanges through Kent County.
I believe that is what Kokomo, IN is trying to do with zoning issues around the new US 31 freeway as to keep development away from the new road and have it sprawl along the existing US 31. They actually learned it the hard way when they first bypassed Kokomo as the current US 31 is the epicenter of that areas boom!
In Sacramento, suburban areas which revolted against planned freeways (Citrus Heights, Orangevale, Carmichael) all seemed to have been developed by the late 1970s. Sunrise Mall in particular, in Citrus Heights, is nowhere near a freeway, though it would have been near the unbuilt Route 102/Route 65 junction.
Quote from: Zmapper on August 18, 2013, 08:38:12 PM
Fort Collins, CO - The city sprawled southward, with relatively little development occurring near I-25 to the east of the city. Exit 269 (CO 14) supported a typical assortment of highway-oriented motels and restaurants. Exit 267 (Prospect) has no development until Timberline Rd, two miles west. Exit 265 (Harmony) had a single gas station and a park-n-ride until a few years ago, when a Walmart was built, though long range plans exist for a large regional center southwest of the interchange.
My thoughts exactly when I was there last week. There is hardly any development east of I-25 from 470 through Fort Collins. I think Loveland and Greely were the only exceptions
Quote from: Urban Prairie Schooner on August 18, 2013, 01:10:17 AM
I'm sure there are other cities with this type of atypical development, not counting of course cities that either do not have freeway systems or are not connected to the Interstate system, or for that matter cities that have grown so fast that they rapidly outgrew the rudimentary freeway systems provided them when they were much smaller (Las Vegas, Austin, Colorado Springs come to mind).
Montgomery County, Maryland encouraged a lot of development along (already congested) U.S. 29 along its eastern border.
U.S. 29 is a combination of expressway and mostly divided arterial highway, with plenty of failing intersections during peak commute periods.
New York, where the freeways were just stuck in long after development occurred. You don't see freeway-related development until you get out to I-287 in NJ.
Quote from: Steve on August 20, 2013, 08:47:25 PM
New York, where the freeways were just stuck in long after development occurred. You don't see freeway-related development until you get out to I-287 in NJ.
And not so far from I-287, I have always found the lack of freeway-oriented development along I-87 between the N.Y. 17 interchange at Suffern/Sloatsburg/Ramapo (Exit 15A) and N.Y. 17 at Harriman/Woodbury (Exit 16) to be a source of amusement - and something to be pointed out to the "freeways cause sprawl" crowd.
In Michigan City, IN, there is very little development along I-94. From what I can tell, most of the hotels, restaurants, and stores are either downtown (outlet mall and casino), or near the intersection of US-20 and US-421.
Quote from: pianocello on August 21, 2013, 09:42:39 AM
In Michigan City, IN, there is very little development along I-94. From what I can tell, most of the hotels, restaurants, and stores are either downtown (outlet mall and casino), or near the intersection of US-20 and US-421.
Part of that is because Michigan City has two bypasses. The first is US-20/IN-212. The second is I-94. Add that to the fact that US-20 was the established bypass until the early 1970s when InDOT finally got off their asses and finished I-94 between the state line and Burns Harbor. Plus, Michigan City isn't exactly a development hot spot, and hasn't been since the 1960s. It's not much of a surprise that the development stayed closer to the city than I-94.
Chesterton at I-94 (Exit 26, IN-49) is likewise away from the freeway.
Quote from: Brandon on August 21, 2013, 09:49:32 AM
Quote from: pianocello on August 21, 2013, 09:42:39 AM
In Michigan City, IN, there is very little development along I-94. From what I can tell, most of the hotels, restaurants, and stores are either downtown (outlet mall and casino), or near the intersection of US-20 and US-421.
Part of that is because Michigan City has two bypasses. The first is US-20/IN-212. The second is I-94. Add that to the fact that US-20 was the established bypass until the early 1970s when InDOT finally got off their asses and finished I-94 between the state line and Burns Harbor. Plus, Michigan City isn't exactly a development hot spot, and hasn't been since the 1960s. It's not much of a surprise that the development stayed closer to the city than I-94.
Chesterton at I-94 (Exit 26, IN-49) is likewise away from the freeway.
If they do get a development boom at some point, I have a feeling they'll probably extend towards I-94 but won't go past that. Set it as their east and southeast border to a degree
Quote from: cpzilliacus on August 20, 2013, 10:46:32 PM
Quote from: Steve on August 20, 2013, 08:47:25 PM
New York, where the freeways were just stuck in long after development occurred. You don't see freeway-related development until you get out to I-287 in NJ.
And not so far from I-287, I have always found the lack of freeway-oriented development along I-87 between the N.Y. 17 interchange at Suffern/Sloatsburg/Ramapo (Exit 15A) and N.Y. 17 at Harriman/Woodbury (Exit 16) to be a source of amusement - and something to be pointed out to the "freeways cause sprawl" crowd.
That has a lot to do with the fact that the Thruway is on the edge of Harriman State Park. Furthermore, them not adding another interchange in between is a help in that matter. The Old NY 210, I am surprised that they have not interchanged it especially with Greenwood Lake and the Sherwood Forest attraction. Hope they never do either, leave it as is. Too much sprawl and most of it encourages overcrowding of existing roadways plus environmental pollution and the shifting of classes as farther development from city centers leads to other issues as well.
Quote from: roadman65 on August 21, 2013, 02:11:17 PM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on August 20, 2013, 10:46:32 PM
Quote from: Steve on August 20, 2013, 08:47:25 PM
New York, where the freeways were just stuck in long after development occurred. You don't see freeway-related development until you get out to I-287 in NJ.
And not so far from I-287, I have always found the lack of freeway-oriented development along I-87 between the N.Y. 17 interchange at Suffern/Sloatsburg/Ramapo (Exit 15A) and N.Y. 17 at Harriman/Woodbury (Exit 16) to be a source of amusement - and something to be pointed out to the "freeways cause sprawl" crowd.
That has a lot to do with the fact that the Thruway is on the edge of Harriman State Park. Furthermore, them not adding another interchange in between is a help in that matter. The Old NY 210, I am surprised that they have not interchanged it especially with Greenwood Lake and the Sherwood Forest attraction. Hope they never do either, leave it as is. Too much sprawl and most of it encourages overcrowding of existing roadways plus environmental pollution and the shifting of classes as farther development from city centers leads to other issues as well.
Absolutely correct. "OMG all this sprawl and no one lives in t3h Meadowlands."
Quote from: roadman65 on August 21, 2013, 02:11:17 PM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on August 20, 2013, 10:46:32 PM
Quote from: Steve on August 20, 2013, 08:47:25 PM
New York, where the freeways were just stuck in long after development occurred. You don't see freeway-related development until you get out to I-287 in NJ.
And not so far from I-287, I have always found the lack of freeway-oriented development along I-87 between the N.Y. 17 interchange at Suffern/Sloatsburg/Ramapo (Exit 15A) and N.Y. 17 at Harriman/Woodbury (Exit 16) to be a source of amusement - and something to be pointed out to the "freeways cause sprawl" crowd.
That has a lot to do with the fact that the Thruway is on the edge of Harriman State Park. Furthermore, them not adding another interchange in between is a help in that matter. The Old NY 210, I am surprised that they have not interchanged it especially with Greenwood Lake and the Sherwood Forest attraction. Hope they never do either, leave it as is. Too much sprawl and most of it encourages overcrowding of existing roadways plus environmental pollution and the shifting of classes as farther development from city centers leads to other issues as well.
[
Emphasis added above]
I presume that the parkland is off-limits to development (that is nearly always the case in the U.S.), but there still appears to be a fair amount of vacant and possibly developable land on the west side of the Thruway along N.Y. 17 between Ramapo and N.Y. 17A. But it is mostly untouched, and I assert that the lack of access to the Thruway is the primary reason.
Compare and contrast with the development around Exit 16 and Exit 17.
As a former head of statewide planning who I know pretty well said at a public meeting - "if you don't want land use changes caused by a new or existing highway, then don't provide access to the highway."
Quote from: Steve on August 21, 2013, 07:37:26 PM
Absolutely correct. "OMG all this sprawl and no one lives in t3h Meadowlands."
Lack of access to the Turnpike and "free" roads helps to keep the development away - but - given that most (maybe all) of the Meadowlands are considered wetlands under federal law, I would assume it would be nearly impossible to get approval from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to fill any part of them in for development.
Quote from: Steve on August 20, 2013, 08:47:25 PM
New York, where the freeways were just stuck in long after development occurred. You don't see freeway-related development until you get out to I-287 in NJ.
Especially on Long Island, where the development that takes place never has anything to do with freeways, let alone expressways.
Quote from: D-Dey65 on August 22, 2013, 08:28:04 PM
Quote from: Steve on August 20, 2013, 08:47:25 PM
New York, where the freeways were just stuck in long after development occurred. You don't see freeway-related development until you get out to I-287 in NJ.
Especially on Long Island, where the development that takes place never has anything to do with freeways, let alone expressways.
False, though. All of that development was spurred by the initial construction of the Southern and Northern State Parkways, exacerbated by the LIE and Sunrise Highway.
Quote from: Steve on August 24, 2013, 12:50:45 AM
False, though. All of that development was spurred by the initial construction of the Southern and Northern State Parkways, exacerbated by the LIE and Sunrise Highway.
But those roads were never completed, and development takes place beyond the points where they were truncated anyhow.
Quote from: D-Dey65 on August 25, 2013, 11:33:36 PM
Quote from: Steve on August 24, 2013, 12:50:45 AM
False, though. All of that development was spurred by the initial construction of the Southern and Northern State Parkways, exacerbated by the LIE and Sunrise Highway.
But those roads were never completed, and development takes place beyond the points where they were truncated anyhow.
But if not for those roads, the development would not have reached that far out. This is well documented, I'm not just making it up; I read multiple sources in compiling a Cross Bronx/Moses paper in college, and that's where I learned about it.
Quote from: ET21
<two different posts in this thread>
Surprised you didn't mention DeKalb! Both of the exits on I-88, despite being within or bumping against the southern city limits, are almost completely rural. Nor is there much development around NIU on the west side. Looks like the bulk of it is in the northeast, on IL 23 heading toward Sycamore.
It's probably a lot more common on toll highways like this.
In West Allis and Greenfield, WI, I-894, which has been around since the 60s, still goes through a lot of residential areas, and the layouts suggest obliviousness to the freeway. Most of the commercial development is along WIS 100, Layton Av. and a few major north-south streets.
Meanwhile, on the Zoo Fwy past the terminus of I-894 (US 45, soon to be I-41) most of the commercial development in Milwaukee County along the freeway is office and industrial in nature, though Burleigh St. is becoming a big retail strip with the addition of a big box strip mall along the freeway (the old Roundy's distribution center) and allegedly, a Meijer store. Lowes, Aldi and Office Max are already on the west side of the interchange.
Quote from: Steve on August 26, 2013, 10:03:39 PM
Quote from: D-Dey65 on August 25, 2013, 11:33:36 PM
Quote from: Steve on August 24, 2013, 12:50:45 AM
False, though. All of that development was spurred by the initial construction of the Southern and Northern State Parkways, exacerbated by the LIE and Sunrise Highway.
But those roads were never completed, and development takes place beyond the points where they were truncated anyhow.
But if not for those roads, the development would not have reached that far out. This is well documented, I'm not just making it up; I read multiple sources in compiling a Cross Bronx/Moses paper in college, and that's where I learned about it.
And I've read road maps that show developments pre-dating the Long Island Expressway that were never carried out according to their original plans because the Expressway went through where they were supposed to have been built. Furthermore, there are developments east of Long Island Expressway and mansions east of Sunrise Highway that were built in places where both those highways were supposed to have been expanded. And the sections of the Bronx that surround the Cross Bronx Expressway were already developed.
Quote from: cpzilliacus on August 22, 2013, 08:17:55 PM
Quote from: Steve on August 21, 2013, 07:37:26 PM
Absolutely correct. "OMG all this sprawl and no one lives in t3h Meadowlands."
Lack of access to the Turnpike and "free" roads helps to keep the development away - but - given that most (maybe all) of the Meadowlands are considered wetlands under federal law, I would assume it would be nearly impossible to get approval from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to fill any part of them in for development.
Lots of the Meadowlands has been filled in for development. You ever seen a Giants game? There are people who will tell you that the New Jersey Meadowlands Commission is pretty much in the business of developing the Meadowlands.
Click around and see:
http://www.clui.org/content/points-interest-meadowlands
Quote from: roadman65 on August 19, 2013, 11:57:39 AM
I like how Delaware has kept a leash on development near the newest freeway by limiting the amount of interchanges through Kent County.
I believe that is what Kokomo, IN is trying to do with zoning issues around the new US 31 freeway as to keep development away from the new road and have it sprawl along the existing US 31. They actually learned it the hard way when they first bypassed Kokomo as the current US 31 is the epicenter of that areas boom!
Ditto along the US 10 west freeway here in the Appleton, WI area - WisDOT purposely built no interchanges along it between WI 76 (old US 45) and the US 45 Winchester Interchange when the highway was completed in 2003. The part between WI 76 and the US(I)-41 Bridgeview Interchange was completed several years earlier. There is typical suburban-style development in the township area around its interchange with County 'CB' (the unnamed 'Westside Arterial'), its first interchange west of US (I)-41, which was already under way before the highway was built, and some very minor commercial activity at WI 76, but the remainder of the highway is still through very much wide-open farming countryside that has seen zero development activity.
Mike
Quote from: Molandfreak on August 19, 2013, 01:21:24 AM
Apple Valley, MN. Due to protected land, there was no commercial development near I-35E or at the southern fringe of MN 77. Instead, all the commercial development centered around County 42 and Cedar Avenue, the busiest non-freeways in the city. It is a pain in the ass; both are major commuting roads. :banghead:
The busiest non-state highway in the state? It should have been one but that type of road tends to non be a state highway anymore, at least in MN
Quote from: TheStranger on August 19, 2013, 04:13:47 PM
In Sacramento, suburban areas which revolted against planned freeways (Citrus Heights, Orangevale, Carmichael) all seemed to have been developed by the late 1970s. Sunrise Mall in particular, in Citrus Heights, is nowhere near a freeway, though it would have been near the unbuilt Route 102/Route 65 junction.
When I lived in the Sacramento area in the late 1990's, it always surprised me that most of the development followed all the major freeway corridors except for I-5 north. Fairly soon after leaving Downtown Sacramento, it was fairly rural through the Natomas area. Recently, that corridor is getting some development though.
Even though not that close to I-80, I always considered Citrus Heights, Orangevale, and Carmichael to be infill of the Biz-80/I-80 corridor. El Camino and Marconi reach Biz-80 and those roads just continued east to reach the development.
In New Jersey it always surprised me that development along I-80 stops along at Netcong while the other E-W interstate has constant development all the way out to the Delaware River.
I am glad, though, as many of the Hunderton County development has consumed a lot of rural land along I-78. It makes me wonder if Warren County has stricter environmental laws or strong building codes, as that area west of Netcong to the Delaware River is in that county. Plus, I-78 only cuts across the southern end of Warren with only 3 interchanges in six miles (2 of them partial) and one only somewhat only developed either for the short stretch between Hunderton and the Delaware. Only Phillipsburg has some retail development along US 22 near Exit 3, but other than that Warren County is pretty much rural and sparsely populated.
In Metro Nashville, I've always wondered why there is very little if any development on the NW part of the city on I-24 west even though it's almost a straight shot to downtown. But the SE part of Metro on I-24 east all the way to Murfreesboro has boomed. The west loop of Briley Parkway that was completed in the 80's hasn't been developed now for 20+ years. Finally, although SR840 has only been completed for a year, you can't find so much as a gas station on any exit on the entire route as far as I've seen.
Thought of another city. Charleston, WV. There is some development at the Cross Lanes exit on I-64 and the Kanawha City area where the Turnpike intersects WV 61, but the majority of the development is on the south side of town along US 119.
Most of I-95 in Florida, north of Stuart to and south of Palm Bay doesn't seem to notice that the Interstate is there; it follows along US 1. The planned-village-neighborhood of Tradition is the exception, although there wasn't much there until 2007 or so.
Although that's probably because I-95 wasn't completed in much of that area until 1987, the Atlantic Ocean/beaches east of it, and the swampy terrain west of it probably lends a hand to this phenomenon...
Quote from: mrsman on December 10, 2013, 01:06:56 PM
Quote from: TheStranger on August 19, 2013, 04:13:47 PM
In Sacramento, suburban areas which revolted against planned freeways (Citrus Heights, Orangevale, Carmichael) all seemed to have been developed by the late 1970s. Sunrise Mall in particular, in Citrus Heights, is nowhere near a freeway, though it would have been near the unbuilt Route 102/Route 65 junction.
When I lived in the Sacramento area in the late 1990's, it always surprised me that most of the development followed all the major freeway corridors except for I-5 north. Fairly soon after leaving Downtown Sacramento, it was fairly rural through the Natomas area. Recently, that corridor is getting some development though.
The edge of developed Natomas is now further north than it was in the 90s - basically out towards Elkhorn Boulevard's junction with Route 99.
Quote from: mrsman on December 10, 2013, 01:06:56 PM
Even though not that close to I-80, I always considered Citrus Heights, Orangevale, and Carmichael to be infill of the Biz-80/I-80 corridor. El Camino and Marconi reach Biz-80 and those roads just continued east to reach the development.
The area where Business 80 was built was pretty much developed at the same time as the freeway (1940s-1950s), North Sacramento being noticeably older than Arden.
Now, for something that kinda fits the thread concept again - but only slightly - Folsom, where the development is primarily along former US 50 (Folsom Boulevard, old town, Bidwell Street) rather than the newer El Dorado Freeway alignment - though in recent years the area where Bidwell meets the freeway has become very suburbanized.
Hattiesburg, MS, doesn't have a lot of development along I-59. The U.S. 98 corridor is booming west of of the interstate. 59, so to speak, just happens to be in the way.
I also find it rather odd that there's not as much development on I-20 west of Atlanta as there is on all the other interstates in the city.
All 3 (or 4) of the Tri Cities (WA). Kennewick's development is mostly along US-395. Richland's is along George Washington Way (although both cities have sort of leaked along the WA-240 corridor, but I wouldn't say the development follows 240; I'd say this development is centered around Columbia Center Blvd). Pasco is now getting new development along I-182, but for quite a while there wasn't a whole lot along 182 west of the 395 jct. And for West Richland, everything is along WA-224 and Bombing Range Rd. And of course, I-82 completely bypasses everything.
I keep coming up with West Virginia examples. Beckley is another one. There are some highway businesses at the WV 3 and WV 97 exits on I-77/I-64, but most of the development is along the US 19 corridor on the east side of town.
New Mexico's second city, Las Cruces would follow that pattern. Very little development along I- 10 from the south or west. Most commercial growth has been along I-25 or US 70.
I was noticing that in Dallas, the development does not follow I-45 like it does for I-30. In fact the typical interstate interchange does not begin until several miles south of I-20.
I do not know about I-20 as that is one DFW Metroplex freeway I have yet to clinch.
In New Jersey I can say that I-78 and I-195 do not have too much development on them. I-78, for one, is mostly built through residential areas including Newark where is passes through the Weeqhaic Neighborhood, a highly urban residential area. So you will not find many Wal Marts, McDonalds and even too many motels east of Clinton, NJ. I-195 is mostly rural farm land, but being close to the NJ shore there is no demand for typical interstate interchange development other than gas stations.
Quote from: roadman65 on December 28, 2013, 04:27:28 PM
I was noticing that in Dallas, the development does not follow I-45 like it does for I-30. In fact the typical interstate interchange does not begin until several miles south of I-20.
I do not know about I-20 as that is one DFW Metroplex freeway I have yet to clinch.
Those two are strange to me, too. Even north of I-20, I-45 is like a drive in the country, not far from downtown. I don't know if it has to do with the flood plains or what, but that area seems to repel development.
I-20 is (or seems to me) more rural on the Dallas side than the Fort Worth side. The speed limit is higher to the east, 65 in Dallas County and 60 in Tarrant. Before environmental speed limits it was 70 in Dallas and 65 in Tarrant. There's even a piece of it west of Spur 408 that, other than massive 8-lane freeway, almost seems like a rural Hill Country highway.
Also, I-35E seems to get more urban for a while going south from I-20, away from Dallas. This may have to do with zoning and other municipal regulations in DeSoto and Lancaster compared with Dallas, which ends right about at I-20.
I am wondering if it has to do with the suburbs along the way. I-30 to the east passes through Mesquite, among many other cities, where I-45 does not have anything as far as corporated cities. The ironic thing is in I-45's other metro area it is over developed leading in to Houston Metro coming from the DFW direction. From Huntsville southward to Galveston, the I-45 corridor is loaded with development especially from The Woodlands to the 610 Loop where every chain store and restaurant fills the two service roads on both sides non stop.
The same goes in New Jersey. Though the Garden State there is no unicorporated areas whatsoever! If you compare I-80 to I-78 they both regress outward from NYC through different community types. I-78 has Newark, Hillside, Union, Springfield, Summit, Berkley Heights, and Watchung to start things with heading westward. I-80 has Teaneck, Hackensack, Hasbrouck Heights, Lodi, Saddle Brook, Elmwood Park, Paterson, and West Paterson to start its westward trek. Plus I-78 is severed by a mountain from its companion US route unlike I-80 which basically within a mile of its mate US 46 except in Western NJ where US 46 deviates several miles from I-80.
Through Newark I-78 is mostly industrial (near Newark Liberty Airport) and through a socially classed residential neighborhood before entering industrialized Hillside. Hillside has many abandoned buildings that Home Depot or Wal Mart could use, but lack of interchanges makes it not feasible. Union is built through its Vauxhall neighborhood where homes made it residential long before the interstate was even conceived and only two partial interchanges. Springfield has only one interchange with another freeway and also a bedroom township. Summit and Berkley Heights cannot develop as that is within the five mile contraversial area that took NJ years to build do to concerns about the environment so no place to even build there. Watchung is part of Somerset County, NJ (the same county that killed I-95 through Central Jersey) which is highly a bedroom community with a lot of clout in stopping such development. Then westward office parks take over to almost Phillipsburg as prime development.
I-80 has residential Teaneck it passes, plus industrial Hackensack before entering Hasbrouck Heights which has NJ 17 already developed. Then as it enters only a small piece of Lodi it is again industrial before it enters Saddle Brook which does have hotels for travelers at the Garden State Parkway interchange. Then both Elmwood Park and Paterson have their own stories to tell as it is mainly residential and urban downtown with West Paterson a bedroom community on the border of Totawa that has retail, office, and hotel development that cares for both of these. Then the rest are along retail and commercial areas of towns it passes along with its companion US 46 within reach.
Basically it is the area, the population, social class, and environment that has to do with it along with the demand of the users that determine what should get built.
Quote from: wxfree on December 29, 2013, 02:04:42 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on December 28, 2013, 04:27:28 PM
I was noticing that in Dallas, the development does not follow I-45 like it does for I-30. In fact the typical interstate interchange does not begin until several miles south of I-20.
I do not know about I-20 as that is one DFW Metroplex freeway I have yet to clinch.
Those two are strange to me, too. Even north of I-20, I-45 is like a drive in the country, not far from downtown. I don't know if it has to do with the flood plains or what, but that area seems to repel development.
I-20 is (or seems to me) more rural on the Dallas side than the Fort Worth side. The speed limit is higher to the east, 65 in Dallas County and 60 in Tarrant. Before environmental speed limits it was 70 in Dallas and 65 in Tarrant. There's even a piece of it west of Spur 408 that, other than massive 8-lane freeway, almost seems like a rural Hill Country highway.
Also, I-35E seems to get more urban for a while going south from I-20, away from Dallas. This may have to do with zoning and other municipal regulations in DeSoto and Lancaster compared with Dallas, which ends right about at I-20.
I used to drive semi-regularly between Dallas/Ft Worth, Houston and San Antonio (this was mostly in the late 1990s, early 2000s). I was always struck with how different development was between I-45 and I-35. Most towns and cities along I-35 spread over to the interstate, even when it was several miles away from the old US highway the interstate replaced. I never had to plan gas or food stops along I-35 because there was an option of some sort every few miles. By contrast, there would seldom be any visual evidence on I-45 itself of towns that were only one or two miles away. Between Corsicana and Huntsville one used to have to leave the interstate to get gas and food; one just had to know that Centerville or Madisonville were large and close - no truck stops, no fast food, and poor signage, at least back then. I-10 was midway between these: rural stretches, but having gas stations and fast food from the larger towns like Columbus extending to and visible from the freeway.
I remember being puzzled by these differences but never understood why they existed.