AARoads Forum

National Boards => General Highway Talk => Topic started by: epzik8 on October 23, 2018, 02:28:46 PM

Title: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: epzik8 on October 23, 2018, 02:28:46 PM
I can think of four U.S. counties that don't have any U.S. or Interstate highways: Calvert, Caroline and St. Mary's counties in Maryland, and Mathews County, Virginia. Carroll County, Maryland is an almost-example; I-70/U.S. 40 cut its southwest corner in the area of Mount Airy.

Any other examples?
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: Roadsguy on October 23, 2018, 02:34:18 PM
I think Cameron County is Pennsylvania's only example.
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: paulthemapguy on October 23, 2018, 02:38:00 PM
Illinois has a bunch in rather remote areas--state highways only.  Calhoun, Hardin, and Gallatin counties spring to mind immediately.  There are a lot of counties in the Great Plains states that have one or two north-south state routes and one or two east-west state routes, but no US or Interstate.

This is a very common occurrence west of the Appalachians, I think you'll find.
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: kphoger on October 23, 2018, 02:51:49 PM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on October 23, 2018, 02:38:00 PM
Illinois has a bunch in rather remote areas--state highways only.  Calhoun, Hardin, and Gallatin counties spring to mind immediately. 

US-45 crosses into Gallatin County (https://goo.gl/maps/23D1QMymMUn) along that pretty stretch through the river bottoms between Eldorado and Norris.
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: froggie on October 23, 2018, 03:20:07 PM
^^ Even east of the Appalachians, you'll find several.  Besides the OP's mention of Mathews County, there's also Charles City, Craig, Dickenson, and Westmoreland Counties in VA as well as the City of Poquoson.

Lamoille County, VT

Piscataquis County, ME

Dukes and Nantucket Counties, MA

Newport County, RI
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: BrianP on October 23, 2018, 03:29:58 PM
Cumberland County, NJ: US 40 just misses it.
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: Brandon on October 23, 2018, 03:38:29 PM
Quote from: kphoger on October 23, 2018, 02:51:49 PM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on October 23, 2018, 02:38:00 PM
Illinois has a bunch in rather remote areas--state highways only.  Calhoun, Hardin, and Gallatin counties spring to mind immediately. 

US-45 crosses into Gallatin County (https://goo.gl/maps/23D1QMymMUn) along that pretty stretch through the river bottoms between Eldorado and Norris.

Yep, just nicks it.  However, for Illinois, there are:
Hardin, Pope, Edwards, Wabash, Crawford, Randolph, Calhoun, Stark, and Menard Counties.

Moutrie County gets the eastbound lane of US-36.  Putnam County gets the tail end of I-180.  Jasper County gets nicked by US-40 (but not I-70).
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: BrianP on October 23, 2018, 03:43:14 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on October 23, 2018, 02:34:18 PM
I think Cameron County is Pennsylvania's only example.
Historically it used to have US 120. 
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: CNGL-Leudimin on October 23, 2018, 03:43:41 PM
All counties of Hawaii except Honolulu.
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: ilpt4u on October 23, 2018, 04:07:34 PM
Quote from: Brandon on October 23, 2018, 03:38:29 PM
Quote from: kphoger on October 23, 2018, 02:51:49 PM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on October 23, 2018, 02:38:00 PM
Illinois has a bunch in rather remote areas--state highways only.  Calhoun, Hardin, and Gallatin counties spring to mind immediately. 

US-45 crosses into Gallatin County (https://goo.gl/maps/23D1QMymMUn) along that pretty stretch through the river bottoms between Eldorado and Norris.

Yep, just nicks it.  However, for Illinois, there are:
Hardin, Pope, Edwards, Wabash, Crawford, Randolph, Calhoun, Stark, and Menard Counties.

Moutrie County gets the eastbound lane of US-36.  Putnam County gets the tail end of I-180.  Jasper County gets nicked by US-40 (but not I-70).
I'll have to look, but do decommissioned US Routes in IL make any changes?

I doubt US 66 would make a change, as I-55 is pretty much a direct replacement. Do former US 54 and US 460 make any dents on that list? They had interstate replacements, but not quite as 1:1 as 66:55
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: frankenroad on October 23, 2018, 04:12:27 PM
Off the top of my head....Several in Michigan....Luce, Leelenau, Huron, Tuscola, Sanilac.   In Ohio, Morgan County.

I suspect there are more, both in these and other states.
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: kphoger on October 23, 2018, 04:13:18 PM
Quote from: Brandon on October 23, 2018, 03:38:29 PM

Quote from: kphoger on October 23, 2018, 02:51:49 PM
US-45 crosses into Gallatin County (https://goo.gl/maps/23D1QMymMUn) along that pretty stretch through the river bottoms between Eldorado and Norris.

Yep, just nicks it. 

1.35 miles, according to the reference marker at the north end.
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: wriddle082 on October 23, 2018, 04:29:30 PM
Every county in South Carolina is served by, at a minimum, two US highways.  Though the average square mileage of a SC county is probably twice that of a GA county, and I would venture to guess that nearly a quarter of GA's counties aren't served by I- or US- routes.
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: Brandon on October 23, 2018, 04:35:47 PM
Quote from: ilpt4u on October 23, 2018, 04:07:34 PM
Quote from: Brandon on October 23, 2018, 03:38:29 PM
Quote from: kphoger on October 23, 2018, 02:51:49 PM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on October 23, 2018, 02:38:00 PM
Illinois has a bunch in rather remote areas--state highways only.  Calhoun, Hardin, and Gallatin counties spring to mind immediately. 

US-45 crosses into Gallatin County (https://goo.gl/maps/23D1QMymMUn) along that pretty stretch through the river bottoms between Eldorado and Norris.

Yep, just nicks it.  However, for Illinois, there are:
Hardin, Pope, Edwards, Wabash, Crawford, Randolph, Calhoun, Stark, and Menard Counties.

Moutrie County gets the eastbound lane of US-36.  Putnam County gets the tail end of I-180.  Jasper County gets nicked by US-40 (but not I-70).
I'll have to look, but do decommissioned US Routes in IL make any changes?

I doubt US 66 would make a change, as I-55 is pretty much a direct replacement. Do former US 54 and US 460 make any dents on that list? They had interstate replacements, but not quite as 1:1 as 66:55

Only US-460 for Hamilton County (which I should've included on the list of no US or I routes currently).
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: US 89 on October 23, 2018, 04:52:10 PM
Wayne County, UT is the only one in Utah without any sort of interstate or US highway. Colorado appears to have 7: Crowley, Custer, Gilpin, Hinsdale, Pitkin, Rio Blanco, and San Miguel.

Every county in Nevada has an interstate or US highway. Storey comes closest to not having one, but I-80 just nicks the northeast corner of it.

This got me curious, how many of these counties had I actually visited? Turns out, of the 305 counties I've been to, only 3 meet this criteria: Santa Cruz CA, Grimes TX, and Wayne UT.
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: ce929wax on October 23, 2018, 05:02:30 PM
I'm thinking Newaygo County in Michigan doesn't have any US or Interstate Highways in it.  US 131 comes within a mile or so of Newaygo County.  Oscoda and Montmorency counties also fit the bill.
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: jp the roadgeek on October 23, 2018, 05:13:49 PM
Quote from: froggie on October 23, 2018, 03:20:07 PM
^^ Even east of the Appalachians, you'll find several.  Besides the OP's mention of Mathews County, there's also Charles City, Craig, Dickenson, and Westmoreland Counties in VA as well as the City of Poquoson.

Lamoille County, VT

Piscataquis County, ME

Dukes and Nantucket Counties, MA

Newport County, RI

Bristol County, RI too. 
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: sparker on October 23, 2018, 05:21:36 PM
In CA:  Trinity, Alpine, Butte, Sutter, Lake, Amador, Calaveras, Mariposa, and Tulare counties contain no Interstate or U.S. highways.  I-80 barely "nicks" into far-flung corners of both Napa and Sierra counties.

For an exercise examining the opposite concept, there's a handful of CA counties that have all three types of highways:  Riverside (US 95), San Bernardino (US 95 & 395), Los Angeles (US 101), Santa Clara, San Mateo, San Francisco, and Marin (all containing US 101 and at least one Interstate), Sacramento, Yolo (both US 50), and Siskiyou (US 97).  Of course in post '64 CA, US routes are a bit hard to come by!   
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: TheHighwayMan3561 on October 23, 2018, 05:50:33 PM
MN has Lake and Cook which were historically served by US 61 but no longer.
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: GaryV on October 23, 2018, 06:11:20 PM
Add Missaukee to the Michigan list
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: ilpt4u on October 23, 2018, 06:18:19 PM
Until veryrecently, Monroe County IN, would have qualified. But now with I-69, no more

In spite of IN 37 between Indy and Paoli being part of the old Dixie Highway, that segment did not get a US Highway Designation
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: Thing 342 on October 23, 2018, 06:28:43 PM
You can add Craig, Dickenson, and Westmoreland to the VA list.
Stretching the definition a bit, you could also add the cities of Poquoson, Manassas, Manassas Park and (I think) Falls Church, as they're independent cities.
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: cl94 on October 23, 2018, 06:28:55 PM
New York has several. Hamilton, Lewis, Orleans, Schuyler, Tompkins, Wayne, and Yates (7/62) have no US routes or Interstates. Chenango and Delaware are clipped by I-88, Sullivan is clipped by US 209, Tioga has less than 1/2 mile of I-86. Wyoming County only has an alternate (US 20A). Chemung and Tioga got their only federally-designated route (I-86) within the past decade or so.
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: pdx-wanderer on October 23, 2018, 06:29:38 PM
Wallowa, Polk and Yamhill, OR.

Skamania and Wahkiakum WA.
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: kphoger on October 23, 2018, 06:53:33 PM
Kansas
Greeley (K-96, K-27)
Wichita (K-96, K-25)
Lane (K-96, K-23, K-4)

Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: Duke87 on October 23, 2018, 08:10:14 PM
Quote from: cl94 on October 23, 2018, 06:28:55 PM
New York has several. Hamilton, Lewis, Orleans, Schuyler, Tompkins, Wayne, and Yates (7/62) have no US routes or Interstates.

+Fulton. 8/62.


Connecticut and Delaware both have none.
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: webny99 on October 23, 2018, 08:50:16 PM
Quote from: cl94 on October 23, 2018, 06:28:55 PM
New York has several. Hamilton, Lewis, Orleans, Schuyler, Tompkins, Wayne, and Yates (7/62) have no US routes or Interstates.

Yep, I was going to mention Orleans and Wayne. Neither of those are too surprising given there are no US Routes between the Thruway and Lake Ontario.

Wouldn't be surprised at all if Tompkins is the most populous county on the list nationwide - a population of 105,000 and no US Routes is quite impressive. Now I'm curious. I don't think any other county mentioned yet is more populous.

Oh, and I have been to seven of those eight (including Fulton as mentioned by Duke87). I have not been to Lewis County.
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: Flint1979 on October 23, 2018, 08:59:31 PM
Heck there would be several counties in Michigan:

Huron, Sanilac, Tuscola, Oscoda, Montmorency, Leelanau.

I believe that every county in the U.P. has at least one U.S. highway in it and the only two counties up there with an Interstate is Chippewa and Mackinac.
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: webny99 on October 23, 2018, 09:02:01 PM
I don't think PA has any counties that qualify. Like SC and some of the other Southern states, PA is loaded with US Routes, especially compared to NY. For example, both US 15 and US 220 run the vertical length of PA, hitting close to 20 PA counties combined, only to end at/near the NY border.
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: Flint1979 on October 23, 2018, 09:06:55 PM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on October 23, 2018, 02:38:00 PM
Illinois has a bunch in rather remote areas--state highways only.  Calhoun, Hardin, and Gallatin counties spring to mind immediately.  There are a lot of counties in the Great Plains states that have one or two north-south state routes and one or two east-west state routes, but no US or Interstate.

This is a very common occurrence west of the Appalachians, I think you'll find.
Calhoun might be the strangest county in Illinois to me. Totally landlocked between the Mississippi and Illinois Rivers with only one  bridge going across the Illinois River and a ferry route going across the Illinois River as well. Does anyone really ever visit that county? At least the other two counties you mentioned are easier to get to.
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: Flint1979 on October 23, 2018, 09:12:32 PM
Quote from: ce929wax on October 23, 2018, 05:02:30 PM
I'm thinking Newaygo County in Michigan doesn't have any US or Interstate Highways in it.  US 131 comes within a mile or so of Newaygo County.  Oscoda and Montmorency counties also fit the bill.
I never thought about Newaygo when I was making my list. With the size of the counties in the U.P. I didn't even waste my time they have at least a U.S. highway in every county. I thought Alger would be the county without a U.S. highway but US-41 clips it on the southwest corner.

Adding onto this I forgot one county in the U.P. doesn't have a U.S. or Interstate highway in it and that's Luce County.
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: Flint1979 on October 23, 2018, 09:14:45 PM
Quote from: webny99 on October 23, 2018, 08:50:16 PM
Quote from: cl94 on October 23, 2018, 06:28:55 PM
New York has several. Hamilton, Lewis, Orleans, Schuyler, Tompkins, Wayne, and Yates (7/62) have no US routes or Interstates.

Yep, I was going to mention Orleans and Wayne. Neither of those are too surprising given there are no US Routes between the Thruway and Lake Ontario.

Wouldn't be surprised at all if Tompkins is the most populous county on the list nationwide - a population of 105,000 and no US Routes is quite impressive. Now I'm curious. I don't think any other county mentioned yet is more populous.

Oh, and I have been to seven of those eight (including Fulton as mentioned by Duke87). I have not been to Lewis County.
That would be interesting to know.
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: formulanone on October 23, 2018, 09:45:34 PM
Florida has 3: Union, Calhoun, and Liberty.

The last two appear to have FL 20 running though them, an NHS Route (https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/national_highway_system/nhs_maps/florida/fl_florida.pdf). (It's erroneously denoted by "FL 12", another NHS route, which is nearby and runs though Liberty County.)

Alabama has 2: Geneva and Clay, neither of which have an NHS Route.
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: MNHighwayMan on October 23, 2018, 10:04:58 PM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on October 23, 2018, 05:50:33 PM
MN has Lake and Cook which were historically served by US 61 but no longer.

I'll add that Isanti and Kanabec Counties briefly had US-65 back in the 1930s, but have only state routes now.

Lake of the Woods and Roseau Counties are two more that don't, from a brief glance at a map. Sibley County is close, if it weren't for the small piece of US-169 that cuts through the southeast corner.
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: ibagli on October 23, 2018, 10:39:41 PM
I think the only ones in Ohio are Monroe and Morgan.
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: csw on October 23, 2018, 10:47:47 PM
Indiana has Brown, Fayette, Ohio, Switzerland, and Blackford. Before the new I-69 Monroe and Pike would've also qualified.
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: jp the roadgeek on October 23, 2018, 10:54:39 PM
No counties in CT.  Litchfield County is the only county without an interstate, but has US 6, 7, 44, and  202.
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: Duke87 on October 23, 2018, 11:39:22 PM
Quote from: webny99 on October 23, 2018, 08:50:16 PM
Wouldn't be surprised at all if Tompkins is the most populous county on the list nationwide - a population of 105,000 and no US Routes is quite impressive. Now I'm curious. I don't think any other county mentioned yet is more populous.

Hawaii County, Hawaii is home to 198,449 people.
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: oscar on October 24, 2018, 12:13:50 AM
Quote from: Duke87 on October 23, 2018, 11:39:22 PM
Quote from: webny99 on October 23, 2018, 08:50:16 PM
Wouldn't be surprised at all if Tompkins is the most populous county on the list nationwide - a population of 105,000 and no US Routes is quite impressive. Now I'm curious. I don't think any other county mentioned yet is more populous.

Hawaii County, Hawaii is home to 198,449 people.

Which beats Maui County (about 166K).

Anchorage (AK) municipality has a population of almost 300K. But it has two unsigned Interstates, parts of which are freeways. Ditto Fairbanks North Star Borough, with under 32K. Alaska's largest-population qualifying county equivalent is the City and Borough of Juneau, with under 33K.
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: Ga293 on October 24, 2018, 12:35:32 AM
Despite a lot of pokey little counties with tiny little county seats, only Washington, Hancock, Glascock, Jasper, Marion, Baker, Elbert, Macon, and Calhoun counties have no national routes.

Pickens County nearly qualifies, but the northern end of Interstate 575 just crosses the border before ending. It, along with Candler and Cherokee counties, have interstate routes, but no U.S. routes.




Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: wxfree on October 24, 2018, 12:42:26 AM
I scanned through Texas and came up with this list.

Loving and Winkler - adjacent counties in rural west Texas, I-20 is less than 2 miles from the corner of Winkler
Bosque - separated by one county from Tarrant, home of Fort Worth
Llano - separated by one county from Travis, home of Austin
Bandera - adjacent to Bexar, home of San Antonio
Jim Hogg - named for Jim Hogg, who had a daughter named Ima, and according to an untrue urban legend, another named Ura
Cochran - There's are US highways through the lines of counties in west Texas, (I-20, formerly US 80, US 180, US 380, US 82), but US 82 turns southwest and misses Cochran.
Briscoe
Hansford
Grimes - I didn't expect to find any in the east, away from the coast, but this one is roughly rectangular and squeezes between two US highways.
Brazoria, Matagorda, Aransas - coastal counties away from the future I-69 corridor, Calhoun is in that line, but has the end of US 87

I submit Brazoria County as the one with the highest population.  According to Wikipedia it's 362,457.  (It's just south of Houston and within 3 miles of I-45 at the northeast corner.)
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: SteveG1988 on October 24, 2018, 03:58:33 AM
Cumberland County NJ.
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: slorydn1 on October 24, 2018, 04:00:35 AM
Without looking at a map the only county in my half of NC that has no Interstate or US routes is Pamlico County.
I will have to spend some time later looking out west when I have time.


****edit****


I found time, Pamlico is the only county in NC with no "national" route.
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: CNGL-Leudimin on October 24, 2018, 04:23:18 AM
I'll end Alaska earlier if I list the boroughs which have "Interstates": Anchorage, Denali, Fairbanks North Star, Kenai Peninsula, Matanuska-Susitna, and the Unorganized Borough. Everything else doesn't have any national-level routes.

Quote from: Thing 342 on October 23, 2018, 06:28:43 PM
You can add Craig, Dickenson, and Westmoreland to the VA list.

However the other Craig, the one which I used to style as craIG county until a certain sign was replaced, has both an Interstate and US highways (the sign was on Northbound US 69).
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: Max Rockatansky on October 24, 2018, 08:05:34 AM
Tulare County and Mariposa County by me doesn't have any US Routes nor Interstates.  Given US 99 is long gone I'd suspect when I look at a map with county boundaries on them that much more exist to the north in the Sierras. 
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: Eth on October 24, 2018, 10:36:45 AM
Quote from: Ga293 on October 24, 2018, 12:35:32 AM
Despite a lot of pokey little counties with tiny little county seats, only Washington, Hancock, Glascock, Jasper, Marion, Baker, Elbert, Macon, and Calhoun counties have no national routes.

One more: Fayette County has none, somewhat surprising given its proximity to Atlanta.

Still, that's only 10 out of 159, because Georgia has a bunch of US routes running through it.
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on October 24, 2018, 10:46:23 AM
Quote from: ibagli on October 23, 2018, 10:39:41 PM
I think the only ones in Ohio are Monroe and Morgan.
And Carroll (Ottawa gets honorable mention due to the Ohio Turnpike just clipping it twice in its SW corner.)
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: webny99 on October 24, 2018, 10:47:38 AM
Quote from: oscar on October 24, 2018, 12:13:50 AM
Quote from: Duke87 on October 23, 2018, 11:39:22 PM
Quote from: webny99 on October 23, 2018, 08:50:16 PM
Wouldn't be surprised at all if Tompkins is the most populous county on the list nationwide - a population of 105,000 and no US Routes is quite impressive. Now I'm curious. I don't think any other county mentioned yet is more populous.
Hawaii County, Hawaii is home to 198,449 people.
Which beats Maui County (about 166K).
Anchorage (AK) municipality has a population of almost 300K. But it has two unsigned Interstates, parts of which are freeways. Ditto Fairbanks North Star Borough, with under 32K. Alaska's largest-population qualifying county equivalent is the City and Borough of Juneau, with under 33K.

Limiting it to the continental US, Tompkins County might still stand a chance.

Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: kphoger on October 24, 2018, 12:31:16 PM
Quote from: Flint1979 on October 23, 2018, 09:06:55 PM
Calhoun might be the strangest county in Illinois to me. Totally landlocked between the Mississippi and Illinois Rivers with only one  bridge going across the Illinois River and a ferry route going across the Illinois River as well. Does anyone really ever visit that county? At least the other two counties you mentioned are easier to get to.

But isn't it totally reasonable that a county hardly anyone goes to doesn't have a US Route?
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: BrianP on October 24, 2018, 01:28:10 PM
Quote from: webny99 on October 23, 2018, 09:02:01 PM
I don't think PA has any counties that qualify. Like SC and some of the other Southern states, PA is loaded with US Routes, especially compared to NY. For example, both US 15 and US 220 run the vertical length of PA, hitting close to 20 PA counties combined, only to end at/near the NY border.
You haven't read the thread then.
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: BrianP on October 24, 2018, 01:28:44 PM
Quote from: SteveG1988 on October 24, 2018, 03:58:33 AM
Cumberland County NJ.
Is there an echo in here?
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: kphoger on October 24, 2018, 01:35:41 PM
Quote from: SteveG1988 on October 24, 2018, 03:58:33 AM
Cumberland County NJ.

US 40 just misses it.
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: renegade on October 24, 2018, 01:54:51 PM
Gladwin County, Michigan can be added to the list.
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: csw on October 24, 2018, 02:02:42 PM
Wisconsin seems to be Taylor, Green, Green Lake, Kewaunee, Door, Menominee, and Burnett.

edit: and Adams.
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: Roadsguy on October 24, 2018, 03:06:18 PM
Quote from: BrianP on October 24, 2018, 01:28:10 PM
Quote from: webny99 on October 23, 2018, 09:02:01 PM
I don't think PA has any counties that qualify. Like SC and some of the other Southern states, PA is loaded with US Routes, especially compared to NY. For example, both US 15 and US 220 run the vertical length of PA, hitting close to 20 PA counties combined, only to end at/near the NY border.
You haven't read the thread then.

Yup, Cameron County has only state routes. It did at one point have US 120, but today it's just PA 120. I do agree that Pennsylvania has loads of US routes. Cameron County only doesn't because it's so small.
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: webny99 on October 24, 2018, 04:09:01 PM
Quote from: BrianP on October 24, 2018, 01:28:10 PM
Quote from: webny99 on October 23, 2018, 09:02:01 PM
I don't think PA has any counties that qualify. Like SC and some of the other Southern states, PA is loaded with US Routes, especially compared to NY. For example, both US 15 and US 220 run the vertical length of PA, hitting close to 20 PA counties combined, only to end at/near the NY border.
You haven't read the thread then.

I made sure I skimmed pretty thoroughly, but look what I missed:
Quote from: Roadsguy on October 23, 2018, 02:34:18 PM
I think Cameron County is Pennsylvania's only example.
Given that, my post wasn't wildly inaccurate. 1 of 67 is a very small percentage, compared to NY's 8 of 62, among other examples. And, as noted, PA is stacked with US Routes.
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: bassoon1986 on October 24, 2018, 06:29:05 PM
Louisiana has 6 parishes:
-West Carroll in the NE corner. US 165 and US 65 are in parishes on either side
-Cameron in coastal SW LA
-Bordering parishes St. Bernard and Plaquemines south of metro New Orleans. US 90 and I-510 are the closest to those.
-Washington in the "toe of the boot."  I-12 is to the south and I-55 to the west
-St. Helena on the other side of I-55 from Washington Parish

Arkansas has many US routes. Only 2 counties without US or Interstate routes: Perry and Yell Counties, just south of Arkansas River and I-40


iPhone
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: GaryV on October 24, 2018, 06:42:12 PM
Quote from: renegade on October 24, 2018, 01:54:51 PM
Gladwin County, Michigan can be added to the list.

Yup, I-75 misses it by less than 1/4 mile.
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: hbelkins on October 24, 2018, 06:44:55 PM
Gobs in Kentucky. Of the 10 counties in my highway district, only three have a US route (460) and none have an interstate. Of course I think that should change, as I think the four-lane portion of the Mountain Parkway deserves an interstate designation.
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: wxfree on October 24, 2018, 11:19:57 PM
Quote from: webny99 on October 24, 2018, 10:47:38 AM
Quote from: oscar on October 24, 2018, 12:13:50 AM
Quote from: Duke87 on October 23, 2018, 11:39:22 PM
Quote from: webny99 on October 23, 2018, 08:50:16 PM
Wouldn't be surprised at all if Tompkins is the most populous county on the list nationwide - a population of 105,000 and no US Routes is quite impressive. Now I'm curious. I don't think any other county mentioned yet is more populous.
Hawaii County, Hawaii is home to 198,449 people.
Which beats Maui County (about 166K).
Anchorage (AK) municipality has a population of almost 300K. But it has two unsigned Interstates, parts of which are freeways. Ditto Fairbanks North Star Borough, with under 32K. Alaska's largest-population qualifying county equivalent is the City and Borough of Juneau, with under 33K.

Limiting it to the continental US, Tompkins County might still stand a chance.

It would still be behind Brazoria County in Texas with a population of 362,457.
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: Flint1979 on October 25, 2018, 02:26:03 AM
Quote from: GaryV on October 24, 2018, 06:42:12 PM
Quote from: renegade on October 24, 2018, 01:54:51 PM
Gladwin County, Michigan can be added to the list.

Yup, I-75 misses it by less than 1/4 mile.
US-10 sort of barely misses it too by about 2-3 miles.
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: GenExpwy on October 25, 2018, 04:14:31 AM
Quote from: wxfree on October 24, 2018, 11:19:57 PM
Quote from: webny99 on October 24, 2018, 10:47:38 AM
Quote from: oscar on October 24, 2018, 12:13:50 AM
Quote from: Duke87 on October 23, 2018, 11:39:22 PM
Quote from: webny99 on October 23, 2018, 08:50:16 PM
Wouldn't be surprised at all if Tompkins is the most populous county on the list nationwide - a population of 105,000 and no US Routes is quite impressive. Now I'm curious. I don't think any other county mentioned yet is more populous.
Hawaii County, Hawaii is home to 198,449 people.
Which beats Maui County (about 166K).
Anchorage (AK) municipality has a population of almost 300K. But it has two unsigned Interstates, parts of which are freeways. Ditto Fairbanks North Star Borough, with under 32K. Alaska's largest-population qualifying county equivalent is the City and Borough of Juneau, with under 33K.

Limiting it to the continental US, Tompkins County might still stand a chance.

It would still be behind Brazoria County in Texas with a population of 362,457.

And Tulare County CA, population 464,493; since CA 99 is no longer a US route and is not yet an Interstate.
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: Max Rockatansky on October 25, 2018, 12:44:57 PM
Quote from: GenExpwy on October 25, 2018, 04:14:31 AM
Quote from: wxfree on October 24, 2018, 11:19:57 PM
Quote from: webny99 on October 24, 2018, 10:47:38 AM
Quote from: oscar on October 24, 2018, 12:13:50 AM
Quote from: Duke87 on October 23, 2018, 11:39:22 PM
Quote from: webny99 on October 23, 2018, 08:50:16 PM
Wouldn't be surprised at all if Tompkins is the most populous county on the list nationwide - a population of 105,000 and no US Routes is quite impressive. Now I'm curious. I don't think any other county mentioned yet is more populous.
Hawaii County, Hawaii is home to 198,449 people.
Which beats Maui County (about 166K).
Anchorage (AK) municipality has a population of almost 300K. But it has two unsigned Interstates, parts of which are freeways. Ditto Fairbanks North Star Borough, with under 32K. Alaska's largest-population qualifying county equivalent is the City and Borough of Juneau, with under 33K.

Limiting it to the continental US, Tompkins County might still stand a chance.

It would still be behind Brazoria County in Texas with a population of 362,457.

And Tulare County CA, population 464,493; since CA 99 is no longer a US route and is not yet an Interstate.

Mentioned Tulare up thread a little bit.  Kind of makes that decision to boot US 99 from California seem silly with population figures like that popping up.
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: clong on October 25, 2018, 01:50:13 PM
Quote from: formulanone on October 23, 2018, 09:45:34 PM
Florida has 3: Union, Calhoun, and Liberty.

The last two appear to have FL 20 running though them, an NHS Route (https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/national_highway_system/nhs_maps/florida/fl_florida.pdf). (It's erroneously denoted by "FL 12", another NHS route, which is nearby and runs though Liberty County.)

Alabama has 2: Geneva and Clay, neither of which have an NHS Route.

Add Wilcox to your Alabama list.
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: mrcmc888 on October 25, 2018, 05:12:05 PM
Tennessee has Overton, Jackson, Clay, Macon, and Lake
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: doorknob60 on October 25, 2018, 05:31:26 PM
In Idaho: Boise, Gem, Teton, and Valley counties do not have any US or Interstate routes. I don't think I missed any, though my methodology was basically just guess and check.
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: Flint1979 on October 25, 2018, 06:13:06 PM
Quote from: kphoger on October 24, 2018, 12:31:16 PM
Quote from: Flint1979 on October 23, 2018, 09:06:55 PM
Calhoun might be the strangest county in Illinois to me. Totally landlocked between the Mississippi and Illinois Rivers with only one  bridge going across the Illinois River and a ferry route going across the Illinois River as well. Does anyone really ever visit that county? At least the other two counties you mentioned are easier to get to.

But isn't it totally reasonable that a county hardly anyone goes to doesn't have a US Route?
Yeah I think it is. The most remote place in Illinois might be in Calhoun County.
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: thefraze_1020 on October 25, 2018, 07:03:14 PM
In Washington State, both Wahkiakum and Skamania Counties have already been mentioned. However, both counties previously contained US 830 until 1967. Other counties in Washington with no federal-level routes include Kitsap County, Island County, and San Juan County (but this one doesn't have any numbered highways, unless you count the ferry docks, which are technically part of SR 20 Spur).
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: Road Hog on October 25, 2018, 07:20:53 PM
Quote from: bassoon1986 on October 24, 2018, 06:29:05 PM
Louisiana has 6 parishes:
-West Carroll in the NE corner. US 165 and US 65 are in parishes on either side
-Cameron in coastal SW LA
-Bordering parishes St. Bernard and Plaquemines south of metro New Orleans. US 90 and I-510 are the closest to those.
-Washington in the "toe of the boot."  I-12 is to the south and I-55 to the west
-St. Helena on the other side of I-55 from Washington Parish

Arkansas has many US routes. Only 2 counties without US or Interstate routes: Perry and Yell Counties, just south of Arkansas River and I-40


iPhone

Incomplete. Arkansas also has Cleburne, Stone and Izard without a US or interstate, along with Yell and Perry.
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: bassoon1986 on October 25, 2018, 08:47:15 PM
Quote from: Road Hog on October 25, 2018, 07:20:53 PM
Quote from: bassoon1986 on October 24, 2018, 06:29:05 PM
Louisiana has 6 parishes:
-West Carroll in the NE corner. US 165 and US 65 are in parishes on either side
-Cameron in coastal SW LA
-Bordering parishes St. Bernard and Plaquemines south of metro New Orleans. US 90 and I-510 are the closest to those.
-Washington in the "toe of the boot."  I-12 is to the south and I-55 to the west
-St. Helena on the other side of I-55 from Washington Parish

Arkansas has many US routes. Only 2 counties without US or Interstate routes: Perry and Yell Counties, just south of Arkansas River and I-40


iPhone

Incomplete. Arkansas also has Cleburne, Stone and Izard without a US or interstate, along with Yell and Perry.

Rude. Thanks for the correction


iPhone
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: SGwithADD on October 25, 2018, 11:27:34 PM
Quote from: cl94 on October 23, 2018, 06:28:55 PM
New York has several. Hamilton, Lewis, Orleans, Schuyler, Tompkins, Wayne, and Yates (7/62) have no US routes or Interstates. Chenango and Delaware are clipped by I-88, Sullivan is clipped by US 209, Tioga has less than 1/2 mile of I-86. Wyoming County only has an alternate (US 20A). Chemung and Tioga got their only federally-designated route (I-86) within the past decade or so.

Tioga had a very small piece of US 220 in practice until the construction of the Southern Tier Expressway, and legally until last year.  Still, your point stands that it barely has a national-level route.
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: Ian on October 26, 2018, 01:37:40 AM
Piscataquis County is the only county in Maine with no Interstate or US route.
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: BrianP on October 26, 2018, 11:56:14 AM
Quote from: kphoger on October 24, 2018, 01:35:41 PM
Quote from: SteveG1988 on October 24, 2018, 03:58:33 AM
Cumberland County NJ.

US 40 just misses it.
That clinches it. Thanks. LOL
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: DTComposer on October 26, 2018, 02:17:12 PM
Quote from: sparker on October 23, 2018, 05:21:36 PM
In CA:  Trinity, Alpine, Butte, Sutter, Lake, Amador, Calaveras, Mariposa, and Tulare counties contain no Interstate or U.S. highways.  I-80 barely "nicks" into far-flung corners of both Napa and Sierra counties.

For an exercise examining the opposite concept, there's a handful of CA counties that have all three types of highways:  Riverside (US 95), San Bernardino (US 95 & 395), Los Angeles (US 101), Santa Clara, San Mateo, San Francisco, and Marin (all containing US 101 and at least one Interstate), Sacramento, Yolo (both US 50), and Siskiyou (US 97).  Of course in post '64 CA, US routes are a bit hard to come by!   

Santa Cruz County also has no Interstate or US routes.
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: sparker on October 26, 2018, 04:42:12 PM
Quote from: DTComposer on October 26, 2018, 02:17:12 PM
Quote from: sparker on October 23, 2018, 05:21:36 PM
In CA:  Trinity, Alpine, Butte, Sutter, Lake, Amador, Calaveras, Mariposa, and Tulare counties contain no Interstate or U.S. highways.  I-80 barely "nicks" into far-flung corners of both Napa and Sierra counties.

For an exercise examining the opposite concept, there's a handful of CA counties that have all three types of highways:  Riverside (US 95), San Bernardino (US 95 & 395), Los Angeles (US 101), Santa Clara, San Mateo, San Francisco, and Marin (all containing US 101 and at least one Interstate), Sacramento, Yolo (both US 50), and Siskiyou (US 97).  Of course in post '64 CA, US routes are a bit hard to come by!   

Santa Cruz County also has no Interstate or US routes.

Forgot about that one -- also add Madera County to the mix (its western end stops short of I-5). 
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: DandyDan on October 27, 2018, 04:22:52 AM
Iowa has Emmet, Pocahontas and Guthrie Counties, which all have IA 4, Taylor, Appanoose and Van Buren Counties, which all have IA 2, plus Marion, Keokuk and Butler Counties as well. Guthrie County had US 6, until it got moved to I-80. Marion and Keokuk had a previous routing of US 63 (and Marion had US 163 as well). Butler had US 20 in its pre-freeway days.
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: hbelkins on October 27, 2018, 06:56:55 PM
I was going to say Lincoln County, WV, home of my grandfather, but then remembered that the four-lane US 119 clips a corner of it now.
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: rarnold on October 27, 2018, 11:52:22 PM
Nebraska
Arthur, Banner, Grant, Hooker, McPherson, Perkins

North Dakota
Cavalier, Mercer

Montana
Daniels, Garfield, McCone, Sheridan

Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: Bitmapped on October 28, 2018, 04:25:01 PM
West Virginia:
Tyler, Pleasants (formerly had US 50A), Webster, Wirt (formerly had US 21)

Ohio:
Morgan, Monroe, Carroll (barely misses US 30)
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: DandyDan on November 01, 2018, 06:30:17 AM
Quote from: rarnold on October 27, 2018, 11:52:22 PM
Nebraska
Arthur, Banner, Grant, Hooker, McPherson, Perkins
Can also add Pawnee, Wayne, Knox, Nance, Boone, Sherman, Valley, Garfield and Blaine.
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: Flint1979 on November 01, 2018, 10:53:53 AM
Michigan has the following counties:

Barry
Gladwin
Huron
Leelanau
Luce
Missaukee
Montmorency
Newaygo
Oscoda
Sanilac
Tuscola
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: Flint1979 on November 01, 2018, 10:55:03 AM
Quote from: ce929wax on October 23, 2018, 05:02:30 PM
I'm thinking Newaygo County in Michigan doesn't have any US or Interstate Highways in it.  US 131 comes within a mile or so of Newaygo County.  Oscoda and Montmorency counties also fit the bill.
I just had the time to go and look at all Michigan's counties and the list in my post above this one is the complete list.
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: paulthemapguy on November 01, 2018, 11:03:36 AM
If we get a complete list for every state, we can make a map at https://mapchart.net/usa-counties.html
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: kphoger on November 01, 2018, 11:59:12 AM
Quote from: Flint1979 on November 01, 2018, 10:55:03 AM
Quote from: ce929wax on October 23, 2018, 05:02:30 PM
I'm thinking Newaygo County in Michigan doesn't have any US or Interstate Highways in it.  US 131 comes within a mile or so of Newaygo County.  Oscoda and Montmorency counties also fit the bill.
I just had the time to go and look at all Michigan's counties and the list in my post above this one is the complete list.

FYI, it's possible to change your settings such that new posts are at the TOP of the thread, not the bottom.  That's the way I have my settings, not sure who else does things that way.
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: webny99 on November 01, 2018, 01:27:58 PM
Quote from: kphoger on November 01, 2018, 11:59:12 AM
Quote from: Flint1979 on November 01, 2018, 10:55:03 AM
Quote from: ce929wax on October 23, 2018, 05:02:30 PM
I'm thinking Newaygo County in Michigan doesn't have any US or Interstate Highways in it.  US 131 comes within a mile or so of Newaygo County.  Oscoda and Montmorency counties also fit the bill.
I just had the time to go and look at all Michigan's counties and the list in my post above this one is the complete list.
FYI, it's possible to change your settings such that new posts are at the TOP of the thread, not the bottom.  That's the way I have my settings, not sure who else does things that way.

I understand why you do things that way, but for me, having new posts at the top seems chronologically very backwards. I vastly prefer to click the "NEW!" icon; and then I can both scroll in the correct direction and read the posts in the order they occurred.

Interestingly, the way you have it (new posts at the top) is the way the thread appears while I have the post window open, but once I hit post, the order reverses.
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: kphoger on November 01, 2018, 01:57:21 PM
I made the switch about a year ago, I think.  I really like looking at Page 1 of every thread in order to get the latest posts.  This way, I only have to click on the thread title, rather than the little number identifying the last page number of the thread.  It look a little getting used to, but it's totally normal to me by now.

Also, in threads full of pictures, I often want to browse them in reverse order (that is, to see the most recent pictures right away), and this allows me to do so simply by scrolling down from the top.
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: webny99 on November 01, 2018, 02:04:14 PM
Quote from: kphoger on November 01, 2018, 01:57:21 PM
I made the switch about a year ago, I think.  I really like looking at Page 1 of every thread in order to get the latest posts.  This way, I only have to click on the thread title, rather than the little number identifying the last page number of the thread.  It look a little getting used to, but it's totally normal to me by now.

You do know about the new posts icon I was referring to, right? I know we discussed it recently somewhere on the forum  but it may have been while you were offline. Next to every thread is a little yellow flashing "NEW!" button, which, incredibly, is actually clickable and takes you to your first unread post in the thread!!

(Before I learned about this, I, too, got annoyed with having to click the last page number. But, mercifully, clicking the last page number is no longer a feature of my forum experience, thanks to the "NEW!" icon).

EDIT: Aha! I found it!
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=22190.0
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: kphoger on November 01, 2018, 02:36:27 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 01, 2018, 02:04:14 PM
Quote from: kphoger on November 01, 2018, 01:57:21 PM
I made the switch about a year ago, I think.  I really like looking at Page 1 of every thread in order to get the latest posts.  This way, I only have to click on the thread title, rather than the little number identifying the last page number of the thread.  It look a little getting used to, but it's totally normal to me by now.

You do know about the new posts icon I was referring to, right? I know we discussed it recently somewhere on the forum  but it may have been while you were offline. Next to every thread is a little yellow flashing "NEW!" button, which, incredibly, is actually clickable and takes you to your first unread post in the thread!!

(Before I learned about this, I, too, got annoyed with having to click the last page number. But, mercifully, clicking the last page number is no longer a feature of my forum experience, thanks to the "NEW!" icon).

EDIT: Aha! I found it!
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=22190.0

Yeah, I missed out on that thread.  Thank you.
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: cpzilliacus on November 01, 2018, 11:16:27 PM
Quote from: Thing 342 on October 23, 2018, 06:28:43 PM
You can add Craig, Dickenson, and Westmoreland to the VA list.
Stretching the definition a bit, you could also add the cities of Poquoson, Manassas, Manassas Park and (I think) Falls Church, as they're independent cities.

Falls Church has U.S. 29 (called Washington Street in the city).
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: dvferyance on November 11, 2018, 10:17:00 PM
In Wisconsin Adams, Burnett, Door, Florence, Green, Green Lake, Kewaunee, Menomonie and Sawyer counties all have no US or interstate routes
Title: Re: Counties that contain no national-level routes
Post by: triplemultiplex on November 15, 2018, 10:35:38 AM
Quote from: dvferyance on November 11, 2018, 10:17:00 PM
In Wisconsin Adams, Burnett, Door, Florence, Green, Green Lake, Kewaunee, Menomonie and Sawyer counties all have no US or interstate routes

US 2/141
US 63

Quote from: csw on October 24, 2018, 02:02:42 PM
Wisconsin seems to be Taylor, Green, Green Lake, Kewaunee, Door, Menominee, and Burnett.

edit: and Adams.