AARoads Forum

National Boards => General Highway Talk => Topic started by: Bruce on August 12, 2015, 05:07:47 PM

Title: Major cities with least amount of state highways
Post by: Bruce on August 12, 2015, 05:07:47 PM
Just wondering, since Seattle has a definite lack of state routes (a grand total of 10 when counting ferry routes, 7 without). There's plenty of corridors (expressways and freeways, even) that could have state designations, and plenty that had them in the past, but the city prefers to maintain its own roads for understandable reasons.
Title: Re: Major cities with least amount of state highways
Post by: iBallasticwolf2 on August 12, 2015, 05:10:25 PM
Indianapolis comes to mind immediately for not having a lot of state highways. Pittsburgh doesn't have a lot of state highways either. Mainly just the important routes. Knoxville comes to mind too.
Title: Re: Major cities with least amount of state highways
Post by: hobsini2 on August 12, 2015, 05:15:24 PM
Chicago only has IL 19 (Irving Park Rd), IL 64 (North Ave), IL 50 (Cicero Ave), IL 43 (Harlem Ave), IL 72 (Higgins Rd), IL 171 (Cumberland Ave) and IL 1 (Halsted St). So that's 7 state highways within the city limits.
Title: Re: Major cities with least amount of state highways
Post by: TheStranger on August 12, 2015, 05:17:03 PM
San Francisco has Route 1, 35 (1934-1964 Route 5), and a one-mile snippet of Route 82.  (in the past: Route 480, and what is now I-280 east of US 101 was planned as the north portion of a never-built Route 87 extension; unconstructed Route 230 through Hunters Point is a vestige of that extension plan.  For a few years, the canceled I-80 extension west of the Central Freeway was downgraded to Route 231 before completely being deleted)

Sacramento has Route 160, Route 99, unsigned Route 51, and unsigned Route 244.  Route 16 in city limits is being relinquished this year.  In the past, Route 70 followed 99 to downtown Sacramento, and unbuilt routes 143 and 148 would enter city limits if they existed.

Oakland has a bit more: Route 13, Route 24, Route 61 (including unsigned Route 260), Route 185 and the stub of Route 77.  Previously, the Nimitz Freeway was Route 17 (until 1984).

San Jose has Route 17, Route 82, Route 85, Route 87, Route 130, and Route 237.  (Route 238 used to extend south of Fremont from 1964-1968 or so, and part of 85 and 237 corridors was Route 9 pre-1964)

Title: Re: Major cities with least amount of state highways
Post by: Brandon on August 12, 2015, 05:31:09 PM
Quote from: hobsini2 on August 12, 2015, 05:15:24 PM
Chicago only has IL 19 (Irving Park Rd), IL 64 (North Ave), IL 50 (Cicero Ave), IL 43 (Harlem Ave), IL 72 (Higgins Rd), IL 171 (Cumberland Ave) and IL 1 (Halsted St). So that's 7 state highways within the city limits.

Many have also been decommissioned over the years.  However, the state routes within Chicago city limits seem to be maintained by the City, not the State.
Title: Re: Major cities with least amount of state highways
Post by: Rothman on August 12, 2015, 05:49:35 PM
NYC doesn't have that many for its size:

US 1
US 9
NY 9A
NY 22
NY 24
NY 25
NY 25A
NY 25B
NY 27
NY 440
NY 495
NY 878

Probably others that I missed.
Title: Re: Major cities with least amount of state highways
Post by: hotdogPi on August 12, 2015, 07:31:43 PM
Washington, D. C. only has one.
Title: Re: Major cities with least amount of state highways
Post by: cl94 on August 12, 2015, 08:49:48 PM
Quote from: iBallasticwolf2 on August 12, 2015, 05:10:25 PM
Indianapolis comes to mind immediately for not having a lot of state highways. Pittsburgh doesn't have a lot of state highways either. Mainly just the important routes. Knoxville comes to mind too.

No cities in Indiana have many because the mileage cap forces INDOT to throw everything on a freeway bypass when one is built.
Title: Re: Major cities with least amount of state highways
Post by: US71 on August 12, 2015, 08:54:01 PM
Quote from: Bruce on August 12, 2015, 05:07:47 PM
Just wondering, since Seattle has a definite lack of state routes (a grand total of 10 when counting ferry routes, 7 without). There's plenty of corridors (expressways and freeways, even) that could have state designations, and plenty that had them in the past, but the city prefers to maintain its own roads for understandable reasons.

How "major"?
Title: Re: Major cities with least amount of state highways
Post by: iBallasticwolf2 on August 12, 2015, 08:54:41 PM
Quote from: cl94 on August 12, 2015, 08:49:48 PM
Quote from: iBallasticwolf2 on August 12, 2015, 05:10:25 PM
Indianapolis comes to mind immediately for not having a lot of state highways. Pittsburgh doesn't have a lot of state highways either. Mainly just the important routes. Knoxville comes to mind too.

No cities in Indiana have many because the mileage cap forces INDOT to throw everything on a freeway bypass when one is built.
At the very least Ft. Wayne gets IN 920 probably because that is an intra-city route and Evansville retains all of its state routes, the 2 in the city that exist unless you count US 41 which would make it 3.
Title: Re: Major cities with least amount of state highways
Post by: SD Mapman on August 12, 2015, 11:42:42 PM
Quote from: US71 on August 12, 2015, 08:54:01 PM
Quote from: Bruce on August 12, 2015, 05:07:47 PM
Just wondering, since Seattle has a definite lack of state routes (a grand total of 10 when counting ferry routes, 7 without). There's plenty of corridors (expressways and freeways, even) that could have state designations, and plenty that had them in the past, but the city prefers to maintain its own roads for understandable reasons.

How "major"?
Yeah, is it relative?
Title: Re: Major cities with least amount of state highways
Post by: mcdonaat on August 13, 2015, 12:13:41 AM
How major are we talking? Is there a population limit, or does a city have to be the county seat? I know of cities that are 50,000+ people in Louisiana that aren't the parish seat, and parish seats that aren't even cities, just a town.

If it's the seat of government, Columbia LA only has US 165 and LA 2, both of which run concurrent the entire length through town. If it's 50,000 people or more, Lake Charles has LA 14/384/385/1138/3020, with US 90, I-10 and I-210, for 8 state highways, 5 of which are non-US and non-Interstate.
Title: Re: Major cities with least amount of state highways
Post by: hbelkins on August 13, 2015, 11:46:35 AM
Charleston, WV, the state capitol, has only a handful. I know WV 61 and WV 114 are within the city limits. Not sure if WV 25, WV 601 or the unsigned portion of WV 214 near the Southridge area make it into Charleston's city limits or not.

How many state routes enter the corporate limits of Cincinnati? OH 3 and OH 264, for sure.
Title: Re: Major cities with least amount of state highways
Post by: iBallasticwolf2 on August 13, 2015, 11:51:20 AM
Quote from: hbelkins on August 13, 2015, 11:46:35 AM
How many state routes enter the corporate limits of Cincinnati? OH 3 and OH 264, for sure.
Assuming Google's vectors for the city limits are correct. OH 3, OH 264, OH 4, OH 562, OH 561, OH 32, OH 125, and OH 126 all enter the city limits at one point. A decent handful there.
Title: Re: Major cities with least amount of state highways
Post by: pianocello on August 13, 2015, 01:06:43 PM
Davenport has IA 22 and IA 130, both of which end on the outskirts of town. There's also IA 461, which exists only on paper. That's only 2, not counting the 3 US highways and the 3 interstates that enter city limits.

Granted, since "major" is relative, it's possible Davenport (pop. 99K and change as of 2010) doesn't make the cut for many of you.
Title: Re: Major cities with least amount of state highways
Post by: NWI_Irish96 on August 13, 2015, 02:34:38 PM
Quote from: cl94 on August 12, 2015, 08:49:48 PM
Quote from: iBallasticwolf2 on August 12, 2015, 05:10:25 PM
Indianapolis comes to mind immediately for not having a lot of state highways. Pittsburgh doesn't have a lot of state highways either. Mainly just the important routes. Knoxville comes to mind too.

No cities in Indiana have many because the mileage cap forces INDOT to throw everything on a freeway bypass when one is built.

The mileage cap isn't the reason that was done.  In any case, the city limits of Indy extend beyond I-465 so all those state highways do enter the city limits.
Title: Re: Major cities with least amount of state highways
Post by: TravelingBethelite on August 13, 2015, 02:58:16 PM
Dover has probably been mentioned, but it "only"(?) has DE 1, 8, 15, and possibly 10 in the city limits.
Title: Re: Major cities with least amount of state highways
Post by: Big John on August 13, 2015, 03:04:35 PM
Not sure if Madison WI is consider major, but the only state highways entering the city are 30 and 113
Title: Re: Major cities with least amount of state highways
Post by: jeffandnicole on August 13, 2015, 03:09:41 PM
I think I remember looking this up for another thread, but Camden, NJ only has 1 state route (NJ 168) which is only in the city for a matter of a few hundred feet...and that's because of an odd bumpout of an otherwise straight boundary line that allows 168 to enter the city.
Title: Re: Major cities with least amount of state highways
Post by: roadman65 on August 13, 2015, 03:32:17 PM
Newark, NJ only has NJ 21 and NJ 27.  It once had more, but NJ 58 became I-280, and NJ 10 and NJ 24 both were truncated years ago.

BTW NJ 27 is barely signed anymore, except on overhead signal street blades.
Title: Re: Major cities with least amount of state highways
Post by: TEG24601 on August 13, 2015, 05:28:06 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on August 13, 2015, 02:34:38 PM
Quote from: cl94 on August 12, 2015, 08:49:48 PM
Quote from: iBallasticwolf2 on August 12, 2015, 05:10:25 PM
Indianapolis comes to mind immediately for not having a lot of state highways. Pittsburgh doesn't have a lot of state highways either. Mainly just the important routes. Knoxville comes to mind too.

No cities in Indiana have many because the mileage cap forces INDOT to throw everything on a freeway bypass when one is built.

The mileage cap isn't the reason that was done.  In any case, the city limits of Indy extend beyond I-465 so all those state highways do enter the city limits.


Regardless of why they do it, that INDOT does it is stupid and causes so much confusion.


If one were to count Flint, MI, it technically only has 2 State Highways, M-21 and M-54.


I could also say the same for Spokane, WA, which has only two SR-290 and SR-291, unless you count US 195, 395, and 2.
Title: Re: Major cities with least amount of state highways
Post by: Bruce on August 13, 2015, 06:26:48 PM
Quote from: SD Mapman on August 12, 2015, 11:42:42 PM
Quote from: US71 on August 12, 2015, 08:54:01 PM
Quote from: Bruce on August 12, 2015, 05:07:47 PM
Just wondering, since Seattle has a definite lack of state routes (a grand total of 10 when counting ferry routes, 7 without). There's plenty of corridors (expressways and freeways, even) that could have state designations, and plenty that had them in the past, but the city prefers to maintain its own roads for understandable reasons.

How "major"?
Yeah, is it relative?

I'd say the anchor of a metro area (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_metropolitan_areas_of_the_United_States) with at least 250,000 people would be a good enough minimum.
Title: Re: Major cities with least amount of state highways
Post by: NE2 on August 13, 2015, 06:29:40 PM
A more interesting question: how common are state-maintained surface streets?
Title: Re: Major cities with least amount of state highways
Post by: corco on August 13, 2015, 06:46:19 PM
Tucson! Pretty much just I-10 and SR 210, with a couple miles each of SRs 77, 86, and I-19 along the edges of city limits.
Title: Re: Major cities with least amount of state highways
Post by: GaryV on August 13, 2015, 08:11:25 PM
Quote from: TEG24601 on August 13, 2015, 05:28:06 PM
If one were to count Flint, MI, it technically only has 2 State Highways, M-21 and M-54.
Other Michigan cities have low counts as well:  Lansing and Kalamazoo each have 2 (both including M-43).  Ann Arbor* and Jackson (ok, that's pushing it for major) only have 1 each.

* Just M-14.  M-17 ends at the US-23 interchange, and the city limits bend around the interchange.
Title: Re: Major cities with least amount of state highways
Post by: cl94 on August 14, 2015, 10:50:22 AM
Quote from: NE2 on August 13, 2015, 06:29:40 PM
A more interesting question: how common are state-maintained surface streets?

That's an entirely different matter. In New York, pretty rare. New York City has nothing and Buffalo is limited to a small amount of NY 384, NY 130/former NY 130, and a couple of one-way pairs downtown. Rochester and Albany are pretty limited, as well.
Title: Re: Major cities with least amount of state highways
Post by: noelbotevera on August 14, 2015, 11:34:45 AM
Baltimore doesn't have much SR's. If Google's boundaries are correct, I-70 and MD 122 end at the city limits. The only ones that I can find are US 1, MD 2, MD 26, US 40, MD 41, MD 45, I-83, I-95, MD 126, MD 129, MD 139, MD 144, MD 147, MD 151, MD 295, I-695, and I-895. That gives Baltimore a total of 11 state routes.
Title: Re: Major cities with least amount of state highways
Post by: empirestate on August 14, 2015, 11:34:52 AM

Quote from: cl94 on August 14, 2015, 10:50:22 AM
Quote from: NE2 on August 13, 2015, 06:29:40 PM
A more interesting question: how common are state-maintained surface streets?

That's an entirely different matter. In New York, pretty rare. New York City has nothing and Buffalo is limited to a small amount of NY 384, NY 130/former NY 130, and a couple of one-way pairs downtown. Rochester and Albany are pretty limited, as well.

Right, they're generally limited to expressways (in the engineering sense) and upgraded arterials, particularly of the urban renewal variety (often manifested as a couplet of multi-lane one-way streets). I'd guess that the vast majority of state-maintained surface routes were upgraded between about 1950 and 1971.


iPhone
Title: Re: Major cities with least amount of state highways
Post by: cl94 on August 14, 2015, 11:58:24 AM
Quote from: empirestate on August 14, 2015, 11:34:52 AM

Quote from: cl94 on August 14, 2015, 10:50:22 AM
Quote from: NE2 on August 13, 2015, 06:29:40 PM
A more interesting question: how common are state-maintained surface streets?

That's an entirely different matter. In New York, pretty rare. New York City has nothing and Buffalo is limited to a small amount of NY 384, NY 130/former NY 130, and a couple of one-way pairs downtown. Rochester and Albany are pretty limited, as well.

Right, they're generally limited to expressways (in the engineering sense) and upgraded arterials, particularly of the urban renewal variety (often manifested as a couplet of multi-lane one-way streets). I'd guess that the vast majority of state-maintained surface routes were upgraded between about 1950 and 1971.


iPhone

Correct. There is exactly one example in Buffalo (NY 130/954L) of something that isn't upgraded. I honestly don't know why NYSDOT is holding onto it.
Title: Re: Major cities with least amount of state highways
Post by: freebrickproductions on August 14, 2015, 12:00:56 PM
Huntsville, AL only has three or four state routes that go into the city limits: AL 1, AL 2, AL 53, and possibly AL 20 (depends on how far east AL 20 goes in overlapping I-565).
Title: Re: Major cities with least amount of state highways
Post by: DaBigE on August 14, 2015, 01:47:37 PM
Quote from: Big John on August 13, 2015, 03:04:35 PM
Not sure if Madison WI is consider major, but the only state highways entering the city are 30 and 113

Thanks to the interstates (among other routing changes), Wis 30 never leaves the city of Madison.
Title: Re: Major cities with least amount of state highways
Post by: Rothman on August 14, 2015, 04:30:55 PM
Quote from: cl94 on August 14, 2015, 11:58:24 AM
Quote from: empirestate on August 14, 2015, 11:34:52 AM

Quote from: cl94 on August 14, 2015, 10:50:22 AM
Quote from: NE2 on August 13, 2015, 06:29:40 PM
A more interesting question: how common are state-maintained surface streets?

That's an entirely different matter. In New York, pretty rare. New York City has nothing and Buffalo is limited to a small amount of NY 384, NY 130/former NY 130, and a couple of one-way pairs downtown. Rochester and Albany are pretty limited, as well.

Right, they're generally limited to expressways (in the engineering sense) and upgraded arterials, particularly of the urban renewal variety (often manifested as a couplet of multi-lane one-way streets). I'd guess that the vast majority of state-maintained surface routes were upgraded between about 1950 and 1971.


iPhone

Correct. There is exactly one example in Buffalo (NY 130/954L) of something that isn't upgraded. I honestly don't know why NYSDOT is holding onto it.

The negotiations between Erie County and NYSDOT over who's going to maintain what are both hilarious and terrifying.
Title: Re: Major cities with least amount of state highways
Post by: iBallasticwolf2 on August 14, 2015, 07:50:41 PM
What about NYC? NYC has NY 9A, NY 25, NY 25A, NY 25B, NY 27, NY 24 (Reference route?) NY 908L, NY 495 (Unsigned?) and (Unsigned)NY 878. Pretty tiny selection for the sheer size of the city.
Title: Re: Major cities with least amount of state highways
Post by: empirestate on August 14, 2015, 08:27:32 PM

Quote from: iBallasticwolf2 on August 14, 2015, 07:50:41 PM
What about NYC? NYC has NY 9A, NY 25, NY 25A, NY 25B, NY 27, NY 24 (Reference route?) NY 908L, NY 495 (Unsigned?) and (Unsigned)NY 878. Pretty tiny selection for the sheer size of the city.

If you're counting reference routes, you have all the parkways to add as well. (Also: NY 440.)

NYC always seems like it will lead in this category, but when you actually start counting, it kinds of looks like a lot of other cities.


iPhone
Title: Re: Major cities with least amount of state highways
Post by: iBallasticwolf2 on August 14, 2015, 08:36:35 PM
Quote from: empirestate on August 14, 2015, 08:27:32 PM

Quote from: iBallasticwolf2 on August 14, 2015, 07:50:41 PM
What about NYC? NYC has NY 9A, NY 25, NY 25A, NY 25B, NY 27, NY 24 (Reference route?) NY 908L, NY 495 (Unsigned?) and (Unsigned)NY 878. Pretty tiny selection for the sheer size of the city.

If you're counting reference routes, you have all the parkways to add as well. (Also: NY 440.)

NYC always seems like it will lead in this category, but when you actually start counting, it kinds of looks like a lot of other cities.


iPhone
I do agree with you. Although considering the city has 8 million people the state route selection seems small.
In NJ Jersey City does have a population of somewhere between 225k and 290k and its only state routes are NJ 7, NJ 139, and NJ 440.
Title: Re: Major cities with least amount of state highways
Post by: hotdogPi on August 14, 2015, 09:07:51 PM
Population divided by state highways squared:

Washington DC = 650000 / 1 = 650000 (only DC 295)
Ann Arbor = 115000 / 1 = 115000
New York City = 8500000 / 100 = 85000 (you also forgot NY 22)
Camden = 77000 / 1 = 77000
Newark = 280000 / 4 = 70000
Madison = 250000 / 4 = 62500
Tucson = 525000 / 9 ≈ 58000
Chicago = 2700000 / 49 ≈ 55000
San Francisco = 850000 / 16 = 53125
Spokane = 210000 / 4 = 52500
Sacramento = 500000 / 16 = 31250
Lansing = 115000 / 4 = 28750
San Jose = 1000000 / 36 ≈ 28000
Davenport = 100000 / 4 = 25000
Oakland = 410000 / 25 = 16400
Seattle = 660000 / 49 ≈ 13500
Title: Re: Major cities with least amount of state highways
Post by: corco on August 14, 2015, 09:16:06 PM
QuoteTucson = 525000 / 9 ≈ 58000

How does Tucson have nine state highways?
Title: Re: Major cities with least amount of state highways
Post by: iBallasticwolf2 on August 14, 2015, 09:19:05 PM
Quote from: corco on August 14, 2015, 09:16:06 PM
QuoteTucson = 525000 / 9 ≈ 58000

How does Tucson have nine state highways?
Even if you included Tuscon's two interstates and BR 19 it still wouldn't add up to 9.
Title: Re: Major cities with least amount of state highways
Post by: hotdogPi on August 14, 2015, 09:19:53 PM
Quote from: corco on August 14, 2015, 09:16:06 PM
QuoteTucson = 525000 / 9 ≈ 58000

How does Tucson have nine state highways?

State highways squared (so 3 state highways). A 20 mile x 20 mile city would be expected to have twice the number of state highways, but four times the population, of a 10 mile x 10 mile city.
Title: Re: Major cities with least amount of state highways
Post by: Rothman on August 15, 2015, 01:01:53 AM
I wouldn't count reference routes for signed NY state routes.  Seems people missed my listing on the first page!
Title: Re: Major cities with least amount of state highways
Post by: empirestate on August 15, 2015, 09:20:49 AM
Quote from: Rothman on August 15, 2015, 01:01:53 AM
I wouldn't count reference routes for signed NY state routes.  Seems people missed my listing on the first page!

But are we counting US routes?
Title: Re: Major cities with least amount of state highways
Post by: Rothman on August 15, 2015, 11:38:53 AM
Quote from: empirestate on August 15, 2015, 09:20:49 AM
Quote from: Rothman on August 15, 2015, 01:01:53 AM
I wouldn't count reference routes for signed NY state routes.  Seems people missed my listing on the first page!

But are we counting US routes?

That's just crazy talk.
Title: Re: Major cities with least amount of state highways
Post by: cl94 on August 15, 2015, 03:23:18 PM
Quote from: Rothman on August 15, 2015, 11:38:53 AM
Quote from: empirestate on August 15, 2015, 09:20:49 AM
Quote from: Rothman on August 15, 2015, 01:01:53 AM
I wouldn't count reference routes for signed NY state routes.  Seems people missed my listing on the first page!

But are we counting US routes?

That's just crazy talk.

Reference routes go under "unsigned" state highways which may as well be "normal" highways as far as the GP is concerned. I interpreted it as signed routes. Whether or not US routes are counted is up for debate. I'd lean toward "yes" if they're on the surface, mainly because a significant segment of the GP can't tell the difference and most (if not all) states count US routes as state routes.
Title: Re: Major cities with least amount of state highways
Post by: JMoses24 on August 15, 2015, 07:22:04 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on August 13, 2015, 11:46:35 AM
How many state routes enter the corporate limits of Cincinnati? OH 3 and OH 264, for sure.

Those 2, plus the following:

OH 32 (major east-west route through the southern part of the state, starts inside the corporation limit at US 50/OH 561 with OH 125, quickly exits into Anderson Township en route to Batavia and points east)
OH 125 (begins within the corporation limit at US 50/OH 561 along with OH 32, continues out into Anderson Township where 32 splits off, crosses BACK inside the limits, back into Anderson Township, then into Clermont County)
OH 126 (crosses the northern side of the city)
OH 4 (begins within the corp limit at US 42 and continues out into Wyoming, Woodlawn and points north to Sandusky)
OH 562 (from just east of US 42 to I-75 and at the interchange with I-71)

Also, OH 561 could be considered for this purpose if we're counting all state routes. It both begins (at US 50/OH 32/OH 125) and ends (at OH 4) inside the corp limit, with a section in Norwood as well.
Title: Re: Major cities with least amount of state highways
Post by: empirestate on August 15, 2015, 09:19:30 PM

Quote from: Rothman on August 15, 2015, 11:38:53 AM
Quote from: empirestate on August 15, 2015, 09:20:49 AM
Quote from: Rothman on August 15, 2015, 01:01:53 AM
I wouldn't count reference routes for signed NY state routes.  Seems people missed my listing on the first page!

But are we counting US routes?

That's just crazy talk.

Well, they were in your listing, is why I asked.


iPhone
Title: Re: Major cities with least amount of state highways
Post by: Kacie Jane on August 16, 2015, 12:39:26 AM
Quote from: cl94 on August 15, 2015, 03:23:18 PM
Quote from: Rothman on August 15, 2015, 11:38:53 AM
Quote from: empirestate on August 15, 2015, 09:20:49 AM
Quote from: Rothman on August 15, 2015, 01:01:53 AM
I wouldn't count reference routes for signed NY state routes.  Seems people missed my listing on the first page!

But are we counting US routes?

That's just crazy talk.

Reference routes go under "unsigned" state highways which may as well be "normal" highways as far as the GP is concerned. I interpreted it as signed routes. Whether or not US routes are counted is up for debate. I'd lean toward "yes" if they're on the surface, mainly because a significant segment of the GP can't tell the difference and most (if not all) states count US routes as state routes.

Except the specific reference routes we're talking about (in New York City) aren't unsigned.  They're just signed by name (i.e. Grand Central Parkway) instead of number.
Title: Re: Major cities with least amount of state highways
Post by: corco on August 16, 2015, 01:55:46 PM
QuoteEven if you included Tuscon's two interstates and BR 19 it still wouldn't add up to 9.

And 19 Business hasn't existed since the early 90s
Title: Re: Major cities with least amount of state highways
Post by: Rothman on August 16, 2015, 02:48:17 PM
Quote from: Kacie Jane on August 16, 2015, 12:39:26 AM
Quote from: cl94 on August 15, 2015, 03:23:18 PM
Quote from: Rothman on August 15, 2015, 11:38:53 AM
Quote from: empirestate on August 15, 2015, 09:20:49 AM
Quote from: Rothman on August 15, 2015, 01:01:53 AM
I wouldn't count reference routes for signed NY state routes.  Seems people missed my listing on the first page!

But are we counting US routes?

That's just crazy talk.

Reference routes go under "unsigned" state highways which may as well be "normal" highways as far as the GP is concerned. I interpreted it as signed routes. Whether or not US routes are counted is up for debate. I'd lean toward "yes" if they're on the surface, mainly because a significant segment of the GP can't tell the difference and most (if not all) states count US routes as state routes.

Except the specific reference routes we're talking about (in New York City) aren't unsigned.  They're just signed by name (i.e. Grand Central Parkway) instead of number.

Phooey.
Title: Re: Major cities with least amount of state highways
Post by: SteveG1988 on August 16, 2015, 03:35:09 PM
Atlantic City NJ

NJ187

NJ 87

Atlantic City Expressway (unsigned 446)

Brigantine Connector (446X)

I am only counting routes that make it onto the land of the island, 152 ends before the bridge.
Title: Re: Major cities with least amount of state highways
Post by: OCGuy81 on August 17, 2015, 12:37:00 PM
San Francisco comes to mind.  Other than 1 and 35, I don't think the city has any state highways.

Maybe CA-82 enters the city limits, but barely.
Title: Re: Major cities with least amount of state highways
Post by: TheStranger on August 17, 2015, 01:48:32 PM
Quote from: OCGuy81 on August 17, 2015, 12:37:00 PM
San Francisco comes to mind.  Other than 1 and 35, I don't think the city has any state highways.

Maybe CA-82 enters the city limits, but barely.

82 does continue for a mile past the Daly City limit to end at the San Jose Avenue/I-280/Sagamore/Alemany Boulevard intersection.  (280 north of there used to be part of 82 from 1964-1968)

Prior to 1991, 480 had been a state route in city limits from 1968 to its demolition.

Technically, I-80 along the San Francisco Skyway between US 101 and the Bay Bridge is not in the Interstate highway system (a technicality which came about as part of an Interstate mileage transfer in the late 1960s for I-105, but which has never been reflected in signage).
Title: Re: Major cities with least amount of state highways
Post by: thefro on August 17, 2015, 04:12:34 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on August 13, 2015, 02:34:38 PM
Quote from: cl94 on August 12, 2015, 08:49:48 PM
Quote from: iBallasticwolf2 on August 12, 2015, 05:10:25 PM
Indianapolis comes to mind immediately for not having a lot of state highways. Pittsburgh doesn't have a lot of state highways either. Mainly just the important routes. Knoxville comes to mind too.

No cities in Indiana have many because the mileage cap forces INDOT to throw everything on a freeway bypass when one is built.

The mileage cap isn't the reason that was done.  In any case, the city limits of Indy extend beyond I-465 so all those state highways do enter the city limits.

I just count SR 37/SR 67 (and 37 may go away in the city limits depending on what is done with I-69 Sec 6).
Title: Re: Major cities with least amount of state highways
Post by: cpzilliacus on August 17, 2015, 04:19:23 PM
D.C. has exactly one "state" route, D.C. 295.

It has these Interstates:

I-66
I-95 (very short section at the Wilson Bridge)
I-295
I-395
I-695

U.S. 1
U.S. 1 Alternate (not signed in D.C.)
U.S. 29
U.S. 50
Title: Re: Major cities with least amount of state highways
Post by: discochris on September 28, 2015, 12:45:01 AM
I'm pretty sure that Fargo, ND has no state routes, which when I lived there, I always thought was very odd.
Title: Re: Major cities with least amount of state highways
Post by: NWI_Irish96 on September 28, 2015, 08:47:22 AM
Quote from: thefro on August 17, 2015, 04:12:34 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on August 13, 2015, 02:34:38 PM
Quote from: cl94 on August 12, 2015, 08:49:48 PM
Quote from: iBallasticwolf2 on August 12, 2015, 05:10:25 PM
Indianapolis comes to mind immediately for not having a lot of state highways. Pittsburgh doesn't have a lot of state highways either. Mainly just the important routes. Knoxville comes to mind too.

No cities in Indiana have many because the mileage cap forces INDOT to throw everything on a freeway bypass when one is built.

The mileage cap isn't the reason that was done.  In any case, the city limits of Indy extend beyond I-465 so all those state highways do enter the city limits.

I just count SR 37/SR 67 (and 37 may go away in the city limits depending on what is done with I-69 Sec 6).

IN 135 also enters the city limits and IN 134 is entirely within the city limits.
Title: Re: Major cities with least amount of state highways
Post by: noelbotevera on September 28, 2015, 10:12:09 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on September 28, 2015, 08:47:22 AM
Quote from: thefro on August 17, 2015, 04:12:34 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on August 13, 2015, 02:34:38 PM
Quote from: cl94 on August 12, 2015, 08:49:48 PM
Quote from: iBallasticwolf2 on August 12, 2015, 05:10:25 PM
Indianapolis comes to mind immediately for not having a lot of state highways. Pittsburgh doesn't have a lot of state highways either. Mainly just the important routes. Knoxville comes to mind too.

No cities in Indiana have many because the mileage cap forces INDOT to throw everything on a freeway bypass when one is built.

The mileage cap isn't the reason that was done.  In any case, the city limits of Indy extend beyond I-465 so all those state highways do enter the city limits.

I just count SR 37/SR 67 (and 37 may go away in the city limits depending on what is done with I-69 Sec 6).

IN 135 also enters the city limits and IN 134 is entirely within the city limits.
135 doesn't exist, and technically 465 cheats by exiting Indianapolis sometimes along its route. For example at US 136 it's actually in the town of Speedway.
Title: Re: Major cities with least amount of state highways
Post by: Buffaboy on September 28, 2015, 10:42:27 PM
I mean, it's not a "major" city, but in NY, Utica is the biggest city without a US highway.
edit: Rochester as well
Title: Re: Major cities with least amount of state highways
Post by: NWI_Irish96 on September 29, 2015, 08:09:00 AM
Quote from: noelbotevera on September 28, 2015, 10:12:09 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on September 28, 2015, 08:47:22 AM
Quote from: thefro on August 17, 2015, 04:12:34 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on August 13, 2015, 02:34:38 PM
Quote from: cl94 on August 12, 2015, 08:49:48 PM
Quote from: iBallasticwolf2 on August 12, 2015, 05:10:25 PM
Indianapolis comes to mind immediately for not having a lot of state highways. Pittsburgh doesn't have a lot of state highways either. Mainly just the important routes. Knoxville comes to mind too.

No cities in Indiana have many because the mileage cap forces INDOT to throw everything on a freeway bypass when one is built.

The mileage cap isn't the reason that was done.  In any case, the city limits of Indy extend beyond I-465 so all those state highways do enter the city limits.

I just count SR 37/SR 67 (and 37 may go away in the city limits depending on what is done with I-69 Sec 6).

IN 135 also enters the city limits and IN 134 is entirely within the city limits.
135 doesn't exist, and technically 465 cheats by exiting Indianapolis sometimes along its route. For example at US 136 it's actually in the town of Speedway.

Not sure where you're getting that 135 doesn't exist.  I was on it a couple weeks ago.  Also not sure what 465 weaving in and out of the city limits has to do with anything.
Title: Re: Major cities with least amount of state highways
Post by: silverback1065 on September 29, 2015, 09:38:42 AM
Quote from: noelbotevera on September 28, 2015, 10:12:09 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on September 28, 2015, 08:47:22 AM
Quote from: thefro on August 17, 2015, 04:12:34 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on August 13, 2015, 02:34:38 PM
Quote from: cl94 on August 12, 2015, 08:49:48 PM
Quote from: iBallasticwolf2 on August 12, 2015, 05:10:25 PM
Indianapolis comes to mind immediately for not having a lot of state highways. Pittsburgh doesn't have a lot of state highways either. Mainly just the important routes. Knoxville comes to mind too.

No cities in Indiana have many because the mileage cap forces INDOT to throw everything on a freeway bypass when one is built.

The mileage cap isn't the reason that was done.  In any case, the city limits of Indy extend beyond I-465 so all those state highways do enter the city limits.

I just count SR 37/SR 67 (and 37 may go away in the city limits depending on what is done with I-69 Sec 6).

IN 135 also enters the city limits and IN 134 is entirely within the city limits.
135 doesn't exist, and technically 465 cheats by exiting Indianapolis sometimes along its route. For example at US 136 it's actually in the town of Speedway.

SR 135 most certainly does exist, and has existed in Marion county since it was created, it's been cut back a lot but still begins at 31 on the southside:
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.693134,-86.1491975,3a,75y,85h,90t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sXhzQ01zlnAUUFuqddcjLnA!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo1.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DXhzQ01zlnAUUFuqddcjLnA%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dsearch.TACTILE.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D96%26h%3D64%26yaw%3D85.1153%26pitch%3D0!7i13312!8i6656
Title: Re: Major cities with least amount of state highways
Post by: ekt8750 on September 29, 2015, 03:12:39 PM
While Philadelphia has a bunch of unsigned state roads that run through it, there's only a total of 9 signed routes and three of which are US Routes.

US 1
US 13
US 30
PA 3
PA 63
PA 73
PA 232
PA 532
PA 611

Title: Re: Major cities with least amount of state highways
Post by: kkt on September 29, 2015, 07:03:05 PM
Quote from: 1 on August 14, 2015, 09:19:53 PM
Quote from: corco on August 14, 2015, 09:16:06 PM
QuoteTucson = 525000 / 9 ≈ 58000

How does Tucson have nine state highways?

State highways squared (so 3 state highways). A 20 mile x 20 mile city would be expected to have twice the number of state highways, but four times the population, of a 10 mile x 10 mile city.

An interesting comparison would be (miles of state highway)**2 / (square miles of land), however that would be getting to be a lot like work to figure out...
Title: Re: Major cities with least amount of state highways
Post by: ztonyg on October 10, 2015, 04:31:43 AM
I'd say Phoenix has a small number of State Routes for a city its size:

If we're going by state routes only, it has:

AZ 51
AZ 74
Loop 101
AZ 143
Loop 202
Loop 303

Adding US routes adds:

US 60

Adding interstates adds:

I-17
I-10

And that's it.  A maximum of 9. 
Title: Re: Major cities with least amount of state highways
Post by: jp the roadgeek on October 10, 2015, 09:39:28 AM
Hartford only has 4 signed state routes, CT 2 (barely, as a bridge approach), CT 15 (skirts it as an expressway), CT 187, and CT 189.  There are 3 US routes (5,6,44), and 2 interstates (84 + 91). CT 99, CT 159, and CT 176 all end at the city line.
Title: Re: Major cities with least amount of state highways
Post by: ftballfan on November 15, 2015, 07:51:43 PM
Detroit has few that run in the city itself: M-1, M-3, M-5, M-8, M-10, M-39, M-53, M-85, M-97 (nine). M-102 runs along the city's north edge and M-153 ends at the western city limit. Also, M-3 and M-85 should have the same number, but that's a different topic.
Title: Re: Major cities with least amount of state highways
Post by: oscar on November 15, 2015, 08:55:42 PM
Anchorage (population over 300,000) has only one state route with route number markers, AK 1 (which includes, within city limits, parts of unsigned Interstates A-1 and A-3). However, many other roads within municipal limits are state-maintained but have no posted route numbers.
Title: Re: Major cities with least amount of state highways
Post by: JCinSummerfield on November 16, 2015, 01:42:15 PM
Quote from: GaryV on August 13, 2015, 08:11:25 PM
Other Michigan cities have low counts as well:  Lansing and Kalamazoo each have 2 (both including M-43).  Ann Arbor and Jackson (ok, that's pushing it for major) only have 1 each.


Jackson, MI has two that I know of: M-50 & M-106.
Title: Re: Major cities with least amount of state highways
Post by: silverback1065 on November 16, 2015, 01:59:16 PM
Quote from: ftballfan on November 15, 2015, 07:51:43 PM
Detroit has few that run in the city itself: M-1, M-3, M-5, M-8, M-10, M-39, M-53, M-85, M-97 (nine). M-102 runs along the city's north edge and M-153 ends at the western city limit. Also, M-3 and M-85 should have the same number, but that's a different topic.

Why does M-97 even exist at all? it's a complete clone of m-3 in the area
Title: Re: Major cities with least amount of state highways
Post by: FightingIrish on November 16, 2015, 02:32:34 PM
Minneapolis is now down to three - 47,55 and 65 (there's also the tiny stub freeway 121 that ends at the city limits.

In recent years, all state routes through downtown were turned back to the city or county, with 55 being rerouted via I-94 and 65 getting a gap.
Title: Re: Major cities with least amount of state highways
Post by: GaryV on November 16, 2015, 07:12:50 PM
Quote from: JCinSummerfield on November 16, 2015, 01:42:15 PM
Quote from: GaryV on August 13, 2015, 08:11:25 PM
Other Michigan cities have low counts as well:  Lansing and Kalamazoo each have 2 (both including M-43).  Ann Arbor and Jackson (ok, that's pushing it for major) only have 1 each.


Jackson, MI has two that I know of: M-50 & M-106.

You're right, I shouldn't rely on Google Maps for my research.  Google doesn't show M-106 south of I-94, whereas it really does continue to downtown.
Title: Re: Major cities with least amount of state highways
Post by: odditude on November 17, 2015, 12:43:03 PM
Quote from: ekt8750 on September 29, 2015, 03:12:39 PM
While Philadelphia has a bunch of unsigned state roads that run through it, there's only a total of 9 signed routes and three of which are US Routes.

US 1
US 13
US 30
PA 3
PA 63
PA 73
PA 232
PA 532
PA 611
as well as...
PA 291
PA 309
I-76
I-95
I-676
Title: Re: Major cities with least amount of state highways
Post by: DeaconG on November 22, 2015, 10:11:17 AM
Quote from: odditude on November 17, 2015, 12:43:03 PM
Quote from: ekt8750 on September 29, 2015, 03:12:39 PM
While Philadelphia has a bunch of unsigned state roads that run through it, there's only a total of 9 signed routes and three of which are US Routes.

US 1
US 13
US 30
PA 3
PA 63
PA 73
PA 232
PA 532
PA 611
as well as...
PA 291
PA 309
I-76
I-95
I-676

You got in with Philly before I did...PA 23 would have been on this list before it got truncated to Lower Merion township with City Avenue (originally it extended down Belmont Avenue through Fairmount Park and ended at Lancaster Avenue).